Kier not messing about

Archibald Knox said:
You don’t think Keir Starmer is a socialist? It’s a shame we all have to wait nearly five years to find out. But patiently wait, we will. Then again, a week is a long time in politics and I’ve got a feeling Boris will not be still around then to take KS on. Whether he gets shafted by the 1922 or Priti Piranha or simply bottles it...
Click to expand...
He's as much a socialist as Tony Blair. In other words no he isn't a socialist
 
Wizaard said:
I see Professor Ian Boyd of SAGE has come out and criticised the Government, saying early intervention would have saved lives.

Surrender monkey, having a go at those doing their best. Not the time. He should be nothing but supportive.
Click to expand...
Yep you're spot on. Now isn't the time for criticism from snowflakes and surrender monkeys.
 
Ok done that. I’ll assume it’s your opinion then (along with those on the left of the Labour Party). If the guy says he’s a Socialist I’m happy to take his word for it until his actions prove otherwise.
 
L’étranger said:
Ok done that. I’ll assume it’s your opinion then (along with those on the left of the Labour Party). If the guy says he’s a Socialist I’m happy to take his word for it until his actions prove otherwise.
Click to expand...
His actions will prove otherwise. Wait until you see his policies. Then if you do understand what socialism really means, you'll then realise he isn't a socialist. And if his actions and policies do prove he's a socialist, then the Labour Party will remain in opposition for the foreseeable future. As the last election proved.
 
Wizaard said:
I see Professor Ian Boyd of SAGE has come out and criticised the Government, saying early intervention would have saved lives.

Surrender monkey, having a go at those doing their best. Not the time. He should be nothing but supportive.
Click to expand...
Well of course it would!

But you didn't respond to the comment: -

"So... You're critisisng the government for responding to critisism and working with the opposition during a National emergency?

Would you prefer the Government to ignore any critism and to stick to their original policies whether it's working or not?"
 
THE Real facts about Kier Starmer


Starmer was awkward with girls when he was 14

Forensic and confident? Not in June 1977, when Starmer found himself talking to a girl he fancied but found himself unable to think of anything funny or to ask her out without blushing. So much for being a highly successful barrister.

Starmer once got drunk at university

In a shameful incident in 1982, Starmer drank seven pints of Carling Black Label at a freshers’ disco and became excessively talkative. The next day he was completely incapacitated until almost 11am, when he took two Anadin. Is he still an alcoholic drug addict? Undoubtedly.

Starmer has never had a pub fight

Could Starmer batter a pissed bloke hassling him in a kebab shop at 1am? The Labour leader remains tight-lipped about this important issue, suggesting he can land only the lightest of punches.

Starmer has given up on several TV box sets

Unbelievably, Starmer has still not finished Mad Men, despite being initially enthusiastic about the series. He has since failed to complete The Walking Dead, Ozark and Tales from the Loop. There is only one way to describe such a person – a quitter.

Starmer is too nice

Starmer remembers his wife’s birthday, is polite to people and cares about human rights. You wouldn’t find him having the courage to walk out on his family to shack up with a PR girl half his age. The spineless wanker.
 
Wizaard said:
I see Professor Ian Boyd of SAGE has come out and criticised the Government, saying early intervention would have saved lives.

Surrender monkey, having a go at those doing their best. Not the time. He should be nothing but supportive.
Click to expand...

A bit harsh that, imo. I watched the interview and he came across very well. The quotes in the news reports are snippets of an interview, pieced together to give a totally different impression of how the interview went.
He constantly pointed out he was a scientist, and other factors HAD to be considered when turning science into policy, and never once gave the impression he was throwing the government under a bus.
 
tangerinenotorange said:
THE Real facts about Kier Starmer


Starmer was awkward with girls when he was 14

Forensic and confident? Not in June 1977, when Starmer found himself talking to a girl he fancied but found himself unable to think of anything funny or to ask her out without blushing. So much for being a highly successful barrister.

Starmer once got drunk at university

In a shameful incident in 1982, Starmer drank seven pints of Carling Black Label at a freshers’ disco and became excessively talkative. The next day he was completely incapacitated until almost 11am, when he took two Anadin. Is he still an alcoholic drug addict? Undoubtedly.

Starmer has never had a pub fight

Could Starmer batter a pissed bloke hassling him in a kebab shop at 1am? The Labour leader remains tight-lipped about this important issue, suggesting he can land only the lightest of punches.

Starmer has given up on several TV box sets

Unbelievably, Starmer has still not finished Mad Men, despite being initially enthusiastic about the series. He has since failed to complete The Walking Dead, Ozark and Tales from the Loop. There is only one way to describe such a person – a quitter.

Starmer is too nice

Starmer remembers his wife’s birthday, is polite to people and cares about human rights. You wouldn’t find him having the courage to walk out on his family to shack up with a PR girl half his age. The spineless wanker.
Click to expand...
So he's not only a champagne socialist, he's also a bit of a wimp. 😉
 
Woolly Mammoth said:
There’s only one apostrophe there.

Here to help😉
Click to expand...
Your apostrophe correction is gladly accepted...being a keen apostrophile myself. However, your correction then goes on to give the verb, 'to labour' a capital L, thereby confusing my play on words for the name of the political party.
Also here to help.
 
Cmon fess up, how many of you hardline socialists are taking the free money whilst slagging them off on here. Haha hypocrites the lot of ya.
 
Scaramanga said:
Cmon fess up, how many of you hardline socialists are taking the free money whilst slagging them off on here. Haha hypocrites the lot of ya.
Click to expand...
I do love a good pub bore. Ask a question that you've already made your mind up about, then answer it yourself so that you can luxuriate in the cold comfort of knowing you've answered yourself correctly.
 
Poor form (and politics) for any politician to lay historic blame at the Govt. or individuals. By all means have a go at what they are doing so, but you'd never say 'Boris a lot of this is your fault you buffoon'. No yet.
 
20togo said:
Let's sum up.

The first PM I remember is Harold Wilson. He was Labour but I don't know if he was extremely left wing or not. Since then up to present date we've had a mixture of Conservative and Labour govt's. Two points here. Politics and govt is cyclical. No govt usually lasts more than two terms and no Labour govt has ever had an extreme left wing leader. Michael Foot was unelectable because of it,, John Smith might have got in but sadly he died. Blair realised this and he moved his party and I think people have to say he was initially a big success. But in gov't there are usually defining moments. Blair and the Iraq war cost him. Thatcher survived on the back of the Falklands War and the patriotism that brought out in the British people. Brown lost out because of the banking crisis. Corbyn was unelectable because he had no clear policy on Brexit, he associated himself with terrorists and cared little for the important issue of defence. Starmer has come in and hopefully he realises the mistakes of Corbyn and Corbynites [those on here know who they are] and that to follow that path has little chance of success. He needs to get Labour back on track fighting for that so called centre ground and I bet that once this current crisis is over he and the party will go from strength to strength as a credible opposition and come the next election will have every chance of success. If he fails to learn the lessons of history then they will suffer again.

The NHS even though a massive topic wasn't the subject of discussion that it currently is. My view on the NHS is that it's unfixable. You can throw as many billions as you want at it you will never solve all the problems it has. Why? Because the NHS is a totally different animal to what it first was and what it was even only forty years ago. Technology has advanced greatly regarding all the studies of various diseases illnesses etc. I'd guess the pharmaceutical companies are making massive and obscene profits out of the NHS. There's so much more around now that we think we know about and how to treat it sand that all costs.

Now, all that said, we still need the NHS. We still need it to do the things it does. It's one of the things that being British should make you proud. I just think that we need to accept that the NHS is and always will be like throwing money down a black hole but it's something we need to do.

There you go, I think that's a very reasonable minded post.
Click to expand...

20togo said:
Let's sum up.

The first PM I remember is Harold Wilson. He was Labour but I don't know if he was extremely left wing or not. Since then up to present date we've had a mixture of Conservative and Labour govt's. Two points here. Politics and govt is cyclical. No govt usually lasts more than two terms and no Labour govt has ever had an extreme left wing leader. Michael Foot was unelectable because of it,, John Smith might have got in but sadly he died. Blair realised this and he moved his party and I think people have to say he was initially a big success. But in gov't there are usually defining moments. Blair and the Iraq war cost him. Thatcher survived on the back of the Falklands War and the patriotism that brought out in the British people. Brown lost out because of the banking crisis. Corbyn was unelectable because he had no clear policy on Brexit, he associated himself with terrorists and cared little for the important issue of defence. Starmer has come in and hopefully he realises the mistakes of Corbyn and Corbynites [those on here know who they are] and that to follow that path has little chance of success. He needs to get Labour back on track fighting for that so called centre ground and I bet that once this current crisis is over he and the party will go from strength to strength as a credible opposition and come the next election will have every chance of success. If he fails to learn the lessons of history then they will suffer again.

The NHS even though a massive topic wasn't the subject of discussion that it currently is. My view on the NHS is that it's unfixable. You can throw as many billions as you want at it you will never solve all the problems it has. Why? Because the NHS is a totally different animal to what it first was and what it was even only forty years ago. Technology has advanced greatly regarding all the studies of various diseases illnesses etc. I'd guess the pharmaceutical companies are making massive and obscene profits out of the NHS. There's so much more around now that we think we know about and how to treat it sand that all costs.

Now, all that said, we still need the NHS. We still need it to do the things it does. It's one of the things that being British should make you proud. I just think that we need to accept that the NHS is and always will be like throwing money down a black hole but it's something we need to do.

There you go, I think that's a very reasonable minded post.
Click to expand...
20togo said:
Let's sum up.

The first PM I remember is Harold Wilson. He was Labour but I don't know if he was extremely left wing or not. Since then up to present date we've had a mixture of Conservative and Labour govt's. Two points here. Politics and govt is cyclical. No govt usually lasts more than two terms and no Labour govt has ever had an extreme left wing leader. Michael Foot was unelectable because of it,, John Smith might have got in but sadly he died. Blair realised this and he moved his party and I think people have to say he was initially a big success. But in gov't there are usually defining moments. Blair and the Iraq war cost him. Thatcher survived on the back of the Falklands War and the patriotism that brought out in the British people. Brown lost out because of the banking crisis. Corbyn was unelectable because he had no clear policy on Brexit, he associated himself with terrorists and cared little for the important issue of defence. Starmer has come in and hopefully he realises the mistakes of Corbyn and Corbynites [those on here know who they are] and that to follow that path has little chance of success. He needs to get Labour back on track fighting for that so called centre ground and I bet that once this current crisis is over he and the party will go from strength to strength as a credible opposition and come the next election will have every chance of success. If he fails to learn the lessons of history then they will suffer again.

The NHS even though a massive topic wasn't the subject of discussion that it currently is. My view on the NHS is that it's unfixable. You can throw as many billions as you want at it you will never solve all the problems it has. Why? Because the NHS is a totally different animal to what it first was and what it was even only forty years ago. Technology has advanced greatly regarding all the studies of various diseases illnesses etc. I'd guess the pharmaceutical companies are making massive and obscene profits out of the NHS. There's so much more around now that we think we know about and how to treat it sand that all costs.

Now, all that said, we still need the NHS. We still need it to do the things it does. It's one of the things that being British should make you proud. I just think that we need to accept that the NHS is and always will be like throwing money down a black hole but it's something we need to do.

There you go, I think that's a very reasonable minded post.
Click to expand...

Very good post 20’s. Wouldn’t really disagree with any of that, and covers a lot of ground.
This is not intended as a criticism but there is a missing dimension IMO, which I think helps explain a bit more about where we are today.
You are right to say that Labour failed to get elected under extreme left wing leaders, but since about the mid 70’s the Tories have IMO strayed some distance from their ‘One Nation Conservatism’ despite what all their leaders since then would claim.
They always seem to have some new economic experiment to try out on us. Among others wehave had monetarism, neoliberalism, austerity and next in all likelihood hard brexit.
They have done some very good things and floated many boats for sure, but have neglected huge areas of the country and sectors of society and in doing so have sunk plenty more.
Our winner takes all electoral system does help extremes into office IMO, and most of us probably only want centralist common sense government I think?
We have not seen anything like enough of that in the last forty odd years I would say.
We are left now with a very polarised politics, and a very divided and unequal society. This board is a symptom of all that.

PS sorry did not mean to quote your original post 3 times, and I don’t think Harold Wilson’s government was particularly left wing, but I don’t remember it well, and it did have people like Tony Benn in it.
 
Last edited:
To be honest the major figure 20s missed out was Tony Benn. Bete Noire of the RW for a very long time.

What did he stand for?

Virulently anti Common Market/EU.

Very much in favour of massive state aid and intervention.

Crikey - could you imagine such bonkers socialist policies ever being adopted in this country. It’d just be completely mad!!!!!!

Wibble!!!!!!!
 
Mexboroseasider said:
To be honest the major figure 20s missed out was Tony Benn. Bete Noire of the RW for a very long time.

What did he stand for?

Virulently anti Common Market/EU.

Very much in favour of massive state aid and intervention.

Crikey - could you imagine such bonkers socialist policies ever being adopted in this country. It’d just be completely mad!!!!!!

Wibble!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Yep, but he never got to be leader of the party did he? And my post never mentioned any politician who wasn't the leader of his party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top