Boris Throws His Hat In The Ring......

[marshy]

Russia had massive famines under the Tsar too. The reasons are more complex than just saying "it was a command economy".

Cuba has been blockaded for 53 years, by its biggest market - the regional super-power. They were angry that Castro closed the Mafia-owned casinos.

I've visited both when the Russians were buying sugar and more recently. As I've said, there are many poorer (capitalist) states in the Caribbean, and none with as good health and education provision as Cuba.

 

Well as far as I'm aware the 'command economy' of Mao caused the greatest famine in history when between 1958-62 estimates range from 30m to 45m deaths.

[Mr Mosquito]

I merely point out that capitalism is a flawed system from many people's perception.

Hard to dispute that,I'd have thought, and hard, when you look through things like the Sunday Times rich list to argue that many there actually deserve (still less need) the capital they've accumulated.

 

The free market economy is far from perfect but I'd rather live under that economic system - and take my chances - rather than being in what can be an economic prison under socialism or communism and be dictated to by state employed bullies. As for the Sunday Times rich list - good for them as they've made it to the top of the money pile but on the downside they have attracted the attention of people that will try to shoot them down.

[Mike Litoris]

Well a man far more intelligent than me an a one time organiser of the boiler makers union at Charlie Hill's shipyard in Bristol and devout marxist once told me, 'marxism is a great dream that will never work because by it's very nature it invites corruption and eventually that corruption will end in violence. Socialism is another failed dream because it needs the support of big business to succeed and that will never happen, there is only one place on earth where socialism is alive, well and working and that is in Israel in it's Kibbutz communities".

 

As for your new labour defence, i'm sorry re-writing history won't change anybody's perception of labour new or old, because too many of them still hold positions of power in Ed's labour party including Ed himself, he and his cronies attempting to show that they have suddenly re-found their socialist mojo won't wash because most people don't believe them and know that Ed is only the leader because of the unions and if he doesn't win the next election will be replaced by somebody Blair like who might, sadly too many still have blood on their hands.

 

 

Well, I'm more than willing to politely disagree about the merits of socialism. Democratic socialism will work fine because, frankly, the majority of the british public support socialist policies (according to recent polling). Unfortunately there has not been a true opposition for the majority of this coalition for the public to get behind. Ed is an enigma. He can at times engage the debates people want to have well... at the same time he can also flounder. Will he make a good PM? I couldn't really say. Is he an infinitely better option than any one of Boris, Call me Dave, Facist Nige, Osbourne or Clegg? Hell-*******-yes. 

 

Surely the Unions choosing Ed is about as democratic as it comes? The unions represent many millions of workers, and Ed was more likely to defend us than his blairite brother. 

 

I also haven't defended New Labour. I called it Thatcherism... and there can be no greater insult than to call something Thatcherism.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

I think we might have something we agree upon there, my friend.

 

Here is a thought a friend shared with me at lunch today. How about making manifesto's legally binding, if a political party makes a promise in it's manifesto and fails to deliver, prosecute them, increasingly there has been far too many broken promises in the past 20 years and it's getting worse, parties will make up any old shit to make them electable and then give us a bullshit reasons why they cannot deliver, there's a start.

[Mike Litoris]

The free market economy is far from perfect but I'd rather live under that economic system - and take my chances - rather than being in what can be an economic prison under socialism or communism and be dictated to by state employed bullies. As for the Sunday Times rich list - good for them as they've made it to the top of the money pile but on the downside they have attracted the attention of people that will try to shoot them down.

 

You sound very much like a Toff. 

[Mr Mosquito]

Here is a thought a friend shared with me at lunch today. How about making manifesto's legally binding, if a political party makes a promise in it's manifesto and fails to deliver, prosecute them, increasingly there has been far too many broken promises in the past 20 years and it's getting worse, parties will make up any old shit to make them electable and then give us a bullshit reasons why they cannot deliver, there's a start.

 

David Cameron did promise a referendum on Britain's EU membership in this Parliament and Nick Clegg did promise the students that he wouldn't increase student tuition fees if elected to government. Yes, they should be prosecuted. Bring back hanging for liar politicians.

[Mr Mosquito]

You sound very much like a Toff. 

 

....and yes I do like your current signature. I bet you thought I'd throw my toys out of the pram - like certain others - by moaning to the moderators and getting this forum shut down.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Well, I'm more than willing to politely disagree about the merits of socialism. Democratic socialism will work fine because, frankly, the majority of the british public support socialist policies (according to recent polling). Unfortunately there has not been a true opposition for the majority of this coalition for the public to get behind. Ed is an enigma. He can at times engage the debates people want to have well... at the same time he can also flounder. Will he make a good PM? I couldn't really say. Is he an infinitely better option than any one of Boris, Call me Dave, Facist Nige, Osbourne or Clegg? Hell-*******-yes. 

 

Surely the Unions choosing Ed is about as democratic as it comes? The unions represent many millions of workers, and Ed was more likely to defend us than his blairite brother. 

 

I also haven't defended New Labour. I called it Thatcherism... and there can be no greater insult than to call something Thatcherism.

 

So how does Ed, Ed(2), Harman and the rest of them finally remove the blood from their hands my friend, they wash their hands today and wake up in the morning with more blood to wash off, pretending it didn't happen hasn't worked, saying "I was only following orders" hasn't worked, blaming Blair as an individual hasn't worked, how about saying "we would have done anything to remain in power, anything at all" at least it would be closer to the truth, FFS even firebrand Dawn who in 1991 voted against an Iraq war voted for it in 2003, I know she had an excuse 'new labour were in power in 2003', but with Blair's and new labour's 'Iraq is now a safer place' still being in the public eye everyday, it will not go away.

[Red-Robbo]

Well as far as I'm aware the 'command economy' of Mao caused the greatest famine in history when between 1958-62 estimates range from 30m to 45m deaths.

Won't defend Mao at all, but I believe larger - in terms of percentage dead - famines occurred in many places in the past.

[Red-Robbo]

Here is a thought a friend shared with me at lunch today. How about making manifesto's legally binding, if a political party makes a promise in it's manifesto and fails to deliver, prosecute them, increasingly there has been far too many broken promises in the past 20 years and it's getting worse, parties will make up any old shit to make them electable and then give us a bullshit reasons why they cannot deliver, there's a start.

Trouble is, there may be occasions when circumstances really do mean you can't impose manifest pledges. Global financial crashes for example!

Clegg gets (rightly) slagged a lot, but one of the things incorrectly thrown at him is he reneged on the student loan promise. The Conservatives wouldn't accept that as part of coalition policy, although they were reluctantly prepared to concede to another Lib Dems pledge, the raising of income tax thresholds, to secure the party's support.

Coalitions are not going to be able to deliver on parties pre-election pledges.

[Mr Mosquito]

So how does Ed, Ed(2), Harman and the rest of them finally remove the blood from their hands my friend, they wash their hands today and wake up in the morning with more blood to wash off, pretending it didn't happen hasn't worked, saying "I was only following orders" hasn't worked, blaming Blair as an individual hasn't worked, how about saying "we would have done anything to remain in power, anything at all" at least it would be closer to the truth, FFS even firebrand Dawn who in 1991 voted against an Iraq war voted for it in 2003, I know she had an excuse 'new labour were in power in 2003', but with Blair's and new labour's 'Iraq is now a safer place' still being in the public eye everyday, it will not go away.

 

Mike Litoris and New Labour need to understand that I'm well pissed off with Labour's and Tony Blair's false promise that we'd now be safe drinking cocktails in a 5* hotel in Iraq with the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime. Anyway, where were Saddam Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction?

[Mr Mosquito]

Well, I'm more than willing to politely disagree about the merits of socialism. Democratic socialism will work fine because, frankly, the majority of the british public support socialist policies (according to recent polling). Unfortunately there has not been a true opposition for the majority of this coalition for the public to get behind. Ed is an enigma. He can at times engage the debates people want to have well... at the same time he can also flounder. Will he make a good PM? I couldn't really say. Is he an infinitely better option than any one of Boris, Call me Dave, Facist Nige, Osbourne or Clegg? Hell-*******-yes. 

 

Surely the Unions choosing Ed is about as democratic as it comes? The unions represent many millions of workers, and Ed was more likely to defend us than his blairite brother. 

 

I also haven't defended New Labour. I called it Thatcherism... and there can be no greater insult than to call something Thatcherism.

 

....the Labour Party shut down more coal pits than Mrs Thatcher prior to Mrs Thatcher's regime. The Labour Party regime 1997-2010 did very little to help the economically shattered mining communities. The British people have seen old and new socialist policies and they didn't like much of what they saw and that's the real reason why we no longer live under a Labour government. In fact, many voted Labour as a reaction to the Tories not because they liked Labour.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Trouble is, there may be occasions when circumstances really do mean you can't impose manifest pledges. Global financial crashes for example!

Clegg gets (rightly) slagged a lot, but one of the things incorrectly thrown at him is he reneged on the student loan promise. The Conservatives wouldn't accept that as part of coalition policy, although they were reluctantly prepared to concede to another Lib Dems pledge, the raising of income tax thresholds, to secure the party's support.

Coalitions are not going to be able to deliver on parties pre-election pledges.

 

Let the courts decide and then perhaps we won't end up with such a one sided coalition again, only coalitions where there is genuine partnership and not a coalition with a failed tory toff desperate for his 15 minutes of power, who has now wrecked the whole party for many a year, maybe forever.

[Mike Litoris]

So how does Ed, Ed(2), Harman and the rest of them finally remove the blood from their hands my friend, they wash their hands today and wake up in the morning with more blood to wash off, pretending it didn't happen hasn't worked, saying "I was only following orders" hasn't worked, blaming Blair as an individual hasn't worked, how about saying "we would have done anything to remain in power, anything at all" at least it would be closer to the truth, FFS even firebrand Dawn who in 1991 voted against an Iraq war voted for it in 2003, I know she had an excuse 'new labour were in power in 2003', but with Blair's and new labour's 'Iraq is now a safer place' still being in the public eye everyday, it will not go away.

 

The thing is, if it was designed to 'stay in power' then it must have been what the public wanted at that point?! To win an election in a democracy you must be offering something people want.

In 2010, Cameron got in because people were bored of New Labour failing and were hoodwinked by anti-immigrant propaganda. They offered something to a large proportion (though not majority) of the electorate.

 

We could spend time picking apart every government since Gladstone if we wanted, subjectively approaching any historical subject it is possible to find enough evidence to support your own view if you ignore the rest. In reality it's somewhere in between.

[Red-Robbo]

Let the courts decide and then perhaps we won't end up with such a one sided coalition again, only coalitions where there is genuine partnership and not a coalition with a failed tory toff desperate for his 15 minutes of power, who has now wrecked the whole party for many a year, maybe forever.

Blimey. I understand all about checks and balances, but I sometimes think judges are even worse than politicians.

Did you know that all over the country there are elegant town houses provided for judges who can't be arsed travelling home after 4:30 when they finish hearing cases? These houses are provisioned handsomely and provided with a butler. The last is a lovely touch, I think...

[Mr Mosquito]

The thing is, if it was designed to 'stay in power' then it must have been what the public wanted at that point?! To win an election in a democracy you must be offering something people want.

In 2010, Cameron got in because people were bored of New Labour failing and were hoodwinked by anti-immigrant propaganda. They offered something to a large proportion (though not majority) of the electorate.

 

We could spend time picking apart every government since Gladstone if we wanted, subjectively approaching any historical subject it is possible to find enough evidence to support your own view if you ignore the rest. In reality it's somewhere in between.

 

You make me laugh. Maybe the British people got bored of all the Labour Party Toff pseudo-socialists slurping champagne at taxpayers' expense and wanted the real Tory Toffs back who would slurp their champagne at their own expense.

[chipdawg]

....the Labour Party shut down more coal pits than Mrs Thatcher prior to Mrs Thatcher's regime. The Labour Party regime 1997-2010 did very little to help the economically shattered mining communities. The British people have seen old and new socialist policies and they didn't like much of what they saw and that's the real reason why we no longer live under a Labour government. In fact, many voted Labour as a reaction to the Tories not because they liked Labour.

I beg to differ my Culicadae friend. In 1994, at the zenith of the Major government, Grimethorpe (made famous by its brass band and the film 'Brassed Off') in South Yorkshire was rated the 3rd most impoverished settlement in the EU. Under succesive Labour governments, the decaying housing was ripped down and money was provided to stimulate redevelopment of the old pit site. Employment was up, crime was down until 2010, when both started to rise again (I wonder why that was?!), though it's still a damn sight better than it was. I'm no fan of Labour, but they've done a hell of a lot more for those towns and villages that Thatcher shat on then any Tory or coalition government ever has

But we digress...

[Mr Mosquito]

Blimey. I understand all about checks and balances, but I sometimes think judges are even worse than politicians.

Did you know that all over the country there are elegant town houses provided for judges who can't be arsed travelling home after 4:30 when they finish hearing cases? These houses are provisioned handsomely and provided with a butler. The last is a lovely touch, I think...

 

.....the good people of Bristol - in a righteous mob - did once chase one such judge down the street - the bastard ran for his life. However, the Dragoons were called in from Gloucester and many Bristolians paid with their own lives. That became known as the Bristol 1831 Reform riots.

[Red-Robbo]

.....the good people of Bristol - in a righteous mob - did once chase one such judge down the street - the bastard ran for his life. However, the Dragoons were called in from Gloucester and many Bristolians paid with their own lives. That became known as the Bristol 1831 Reform riots.

Could do with chasing a few down the streets now, Mr M. And if the dragoons were called in, we'd have to rely on the horse punchers.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Blimey. I understand all about checks and balances, but I sometimes think judges are even worse than politicians.

Did you know that all over the country there are elegant town houses provided for judges who can't be arsed travelling home after 4:30 when they finish hearing cases? These houses are provisioned handsomely and provided with a butler. The last is a lovely touch, I think...

 

You've convinced me, just leave the lying bastards to it then, I just look at Salmond's yes vote manifesto, I can hardly see a thing in it that he can actually guarantee, I cannot wait to see Farage's comic pages, I just hope he actually reads it this time.

[Mr Mosquito]

I beg to differ my Culicadae friend. In 1994, at the zenith of the Major government, Grimethorpe (made famous by its brass band and the film 'Brassed Off') in South Yorkshire was rated the 3rd most impoverished settlement in the EU. Under succesive Labour governments, the decaying housing was ripped down and money was provided to stimulate redevelopment of the old pit site. Employment was up, crime was down until 2010, when both started to rise again (I wonder why that was?!), though it's still a damn sight better than it was. I'm no fan of Labour, but they've done a hell of a lot more for those towns and villages that Thatcher shat on then any Tory or coalition government ever has

But we digress...

 

......excellent shout, I stand corrected. However, to me, the many English football 3rd tier cities and towns of Yorkshite only exist to provide 3 points for our upcoming promotion campaign.

[Mike Litoris]

Esmond, Would you be so kind as to explain what a good manifesto would look like to you? I'm really struggling to gauge your political persuasion!

[Mr Mosquito]

Could do with chasing a few down the streets now, Mr M. And if the dragoons were called in, we'd have to rely on the horse punchers.

 

If the Gas had done a 'proper job' with those Dragoons' horses back in October 1831 - when they were galloping down the Gloucester Road toward Bristol's Queen's Square - then many of our fellow intrepid Bristolians would have been saved and lived on. Never ever rely on the Gas.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

The thing is, if it was designed to 'stay in power' then it must have been what the public wanted at that point?! To win an election in a democracy you must be offering something people want.

In 2010, Cameron got in because people were bored of New Labour failing and were hoodwinked by anti-immigrant propaganda. They offered something to a large proportion (though not majority) of the electorate.

 

We could spend time picking apart every government since Gladstone if we wanted, subjectively approaching any historical subject it is possible to find enough evidence to support your own view if you ignore the rest. In reality it's somewhere in between.

 

What utter nonsense, in 2005 Blair still harboured hopes of finding the mythical WMD and nobody had yet realised the problems he had unleashed in Iraq, however it did become an issue in 2010 and will be an issue in 2015.

[Mike Litoris]

What utter nonsense, in 2005 Blair still harboured hopes of finding the mythical WMD and nobody had yet realised the problems he had unleashed in Iraq, however it did become an issue in 2010 and will be an issue in 2015.

 

So you can win an election without offering something to the public? As I remember it, there was a rather large set of demonstrations against the Iraq war, and Labour still managed to win the election? So, whilst it was an issue, it wasn't as big as you are implying.

 

It should have been. We should never have gone there. I was against the war and remain so. All I am saying is, to have won an election means they must surely have offered something to the electorate at that point in time. 

[chipdawg]

......excellent shout, I stand corrected. However, to me, the many English football 3rd tier cities and towns of Yorkshite only exist to provide 3 points for our upcoming promotion campaign.

You are undoubtedly a true capitalist Gobbers- the means matter not, as long as there's a healthy profit at the end!

[Mr Mosquito]

You are undoubtedly a true capitalist Gobbers- the means matter not, as long as there's a healthy profit at the end!

 

Indeed, 3 points for Bristol's Redzz being the healthy profit from each of the many Yorkshite cities and towns we are yet to face. Every time I've been to Yorkshite - even in summer - it's either been wet, cold, windy, snowing or even all 4 on the same day. Bloody dreary locality is Yorkshite far removed from the various Caribbean beachfront locations where I'd rather be.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

So you can win an election without offering something to the public? As I remember it, there was a rather large set of demonstrations against the Iraq war, and Labour still managed to win the election? So, whilst it was an issue, it wasn't as big as you are implying.

 

It should have been. We should never have gone there. I was against the war and remain so. All I am saying is, to have won an election means they must surely have offered something to the electorate at that point in time. 

 

The march was before the war happened, nobody gave a shit in 2005 because by then it looked as though we had come out of it ok, the tories were still fighting with each other and were unelectable, that's why Blair won.

 

My point is at some stage Ed and the rest of his merry band of war mongers have to answer to the public why they voted for that war, not throw away lines like 'not me gov', actually explain what their thought processes were to vote for the war and certainly not like Harridan in this embarrassing footage, which proves exactly how low she is prepared to stoop in the pursuit of power.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/uk-politics-video/8031854/Labour-Party-Conference-David-Miliband-angry-at-Harriet-Harman-over-Iraq-reaction.html

[Mike Litoris]

The march was before the war happened, nobody gave a shit in 2005 because by then it looked as though we had come out of it ok, the tories were still fighting with each other and were unelectable, that's why Blair won.

 

My point is at some stage Ed and the rest of his merry band of war mongers have to answer to the public why they voted for that war, not throw away lines like 'not me gov', actually explain what their thought processes were to vote for the war and certainly not like Harridan in this embarrassing footage, which proves exactly how low she is prepared to stoop in the pursuit of power.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/uk-politics-video/8031854/Labour-Party-Conference-David-Miliband-angry-at-Harriet-Harman-over-Iraq-reaction.html

 

 

Sorry, but I cannot help but laugh at the fact you're on the one hand chastising people for not defending their voting history vigorously enough whilst on the other dismissing the culpability of the electorate in voting for Blair. Surely you cannot have it both ways my friend?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Sorry, but I cannot help but laugh at the fact you're on the one hand chastising people for not defending their voting history vigorously enough whilst on the other dismissing the culpability of the electorate in voting for Blair. Surely you cannot have it both ways my friend?

 

i'll put it in capitals to make it easier for you THE TORIES WERE UNELECTABLE, like labour now they had no visible viable policies and they were fighting with each other.

 

But you are good at side stepping the question, so perhaps you believe Ed and his merry band of war mongers who still hold most of the power in labour have no case to answer, that's fine, I suppose we will see when it comes to the next election when I think Iraq will this time and at long last be an issue, an election which of course can now be run along the lines of labour criticising the tories immigration policy because unlike in 2010 labour claimed it to be racist to debate their immigration failures but now it won't be.

 

As for my political persuasion, I hate them all if they have MP or politician after their then IMO 95% as Frank Zappa said "we're only in it for the money", I just happen to hate socialists more because in the main they are easily the biggest political hypocrites on the planet