Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Alastair Campbell expelled.



There's no room for pragmatism in the modern form of the Labour party. As we have seen, when centrist moderates are hounded out, their reasoning isn't the rights and wrongs of their crimes for which they are marginalised or even excluded, it always falls back to why they weren't liked a decade or 2 ago.

Campbell is expelled for voting on a single issue to highlight the absolute mess that is current Labour Brexit policy. The hypocrisy beggars belief when you consider the 600 times Corbyn voted against Labour policy when they were in government. Campbell's crime is clearly nothing more than being a moderate. He's no more of a bully than anyone leading Labour right now.

And just to highlight Labour's complete hypocrisy, let's not forget Derek Hatton was allowed back into Labour under this appalling party leadership. Derek Hatton. Remember him? Here is a speech from one of the finest politicians we've ever had not to be part of a government - Kinnock absolutely slaughtering Hatton and his ilk for their appalling mismanagement of Liverpool. He took back the Labour party from the sort of utter twàts that people like Corbyn represent...

[yt]v9d7ahKWcsM[/yt]

...people like Hatton, who play politics with people's lives. He was expelled for belonging to Militant, a group found to be in breach of the Labour Party's constitution, much as Campbell has just been. But Hatton has been allowed back in, despite an absolutely appalling Marxist track record of nearly bankrupting one of our cities. Campbell made mistakes - Iraq obviously - but his political record stands up. Three terms in office will tell you that.

Oh and when Kinnock got tough with Hatton, the Labour membership LOVED it, and they'll love it again when the current useless, hypocritical leadership who only play to their own gallery finally fck off.
FFS Hatton was barred from LP membership only recently. Do you do any fact checking

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 




Expelling Campbell is yet another nail in Corbyn's coffin. Labour need the Campbells of this world onside, and in a post-Brexit political world his home is in the Remain centre ground without which no party has a hope in hell of winning a GE parliamentary majority.

When the Lib Dems and Change UK get their shit together they need Campbell onboard.
And **** everyone who voted Leave right? Big election winner that

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 


GT49er

Well-known member
Feb 1, 2009
46,755
Gloucester
Well first of all, 52% of the country didn't vote leave, not even 52% of the electorate voted leave. Secondly, there was no clear mandate at the time as to what Brexit actually meant and what the various options were. There was never mention, as far as I can recall of Brexit on default WTO terms. The whole rigmarole was (a). a botched campaign by remain and 9b). plenty of untruths from quite a few on the leave side. Chuck in some dodgy funding and the use of Cambridge Analytica and the whole thing was an affront to democracy.
(a). Absolutely;
(b). ....plenty of untruths.......from both sides. But hey, don't let truth get in the way of your prejudice!

Lay out two options to leave and then have a two tiered referendum. Question 1, leave or remain. Question 2. if we leave do we leave on deal 1 (whatever parliament eventually agrees) or default WTO. However, any campaign should fully explain how the EU operates, ie how laws are passed, how commissioners are appointed by the elected governments of each country etc. It should also explain the pros and cons of the default WTO position and the same for whatever the deal is.
Yeh right, every remainers' dream - three options on the ballot paper:
1). Leave with no deal;
2). Leave with a deal (whatever that my be);
3). Cancel Article 50 and start widespread discontent the length and breadth of the land.

Nice plan by the shysters in Westminster - option 3 to win by splitting the leave vote. Then, fake surprise when there's trouble at t'mill, and blame someone else.
 


drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,070
Burgess Hill
(a). Absolutely;
(b). ....plenty of untruths.......from both sides. But hey, don't let truth get in the way of your prejudice!


Yeh right, every remainers' dream - three options on the ballot paper:
1). Leave with no deal;
2). Leave with a deal (whatever that my be);
3). Cancel Article 50 and start widespread discontent the length and breadth of the land.

Nice plan by the shysters in Westminster - option 3 to win by splitting the leave vote. Then, fake surprise when there's trouble at t'mill, and blame someone else.

Hello Mr Dumb!!!

Read my post, there are not three options, there are two questions. You answer the first and then you answer the second. How hard is that to understand :facepalm:
 






Neville's Breakfast

Well-known member
May 1, 2016
13,423
Oxton, Birkenhead
(a). Absolutely;
(b). ....plenty of untruths.......from both sides. But hey, don't let truth get in the way of your prejudice!

.

Indeed, in the light of the private prosecution of Boris I was wondering why George Osborne is not facing similar questions about the ‘emergency budget.’ After all he was actually Chancellor of the Exchequer. Just idle speculation but maybe the crowd funders are not quite so motivated by political integrity as they claim.
 


wellquickwoody

Many More Voting Years
NSC Patron
Aug 10, 2007
13,624
Melbourne
I`d already left for the Greens by then. After being a labour party member and trade union activist in the late seventies and in the early eighties I gave up on Labour with the lurch rightwards under Kinnock. Yes they won elections but to continue Tory policies. Pointless! Always thought Blair was a slimey career politician who piggy-backed onto labour, and suspect he might be a CIA asset recruited at Oxford. Like many, I recently rejoined Labour when Corbyn was elected.

You are happy in eternal opposition yeah?
 


Blue Valkyrie

Not seen such Bravery!
Sep 1, 2012
32,165
Valhalla
Indeed, in the light of the private prosecution of Boris I was wondering why George Osborne is not facing similar questions about the ‘emergency budget.’ After all he was actually Chancellor of the Exchequer. Just idle speculation but maybe the crowd funders are not quite so motivated by political integrity as they claim.

You can lie about the present or the past.

Anything about the future is actually an opinion - or a changeable intention - as the facts don't exist yet.
 






Neville's Breakfast

Well-known member
May 1, 2016
13,423
Oxton, Birkenhead
You can lie about the present or the past.

Anything about the future is actually an opinion as the facts don't exist yet.

We are talking about misconduct in a public office. It would be reasonable for voters to make the assumption that when the Chancellor of the Exchequor makes such a warning just prior to a referendum he actually has facts to hand to support. After all he was in public office and not a private citizen. It was done to scare people into voting Remain and may well have worked on many. If Boris is convicted then George may well be more than a little concerned.
 






Blue Valkyrie

Not seen such Bravery!
Sep 1, 2012
32,165
Valhalla
We are talking about misconduct in a public office. It would be reasonable for voters to make the assumption that when the Chancellor of the Exchequor makes such a warning just prior to a referendum he actually has facts to hand to support. After all he was in public office and not a private citizen. It was done to scare people into voting Remain and may well have worked on many. If Boris is convicted then George may well be more than a little concerned.

His defence would be that he fully intended to have an extra budget - but was forced out of office before it could be implemented.

The future is always subject to change, the present and past are not.
 


Waveknight

Banned
Apr 30, 2019
41
So you don't believe the nature of a government has any effect on a society? That's a bit extreme, isn't it?

My comments were a rebuke to people who think TB did change society - but making it horribly non-socialist, poorer, shittier and worse than any other PM ever. As part of my narrative I referred to how life was for far too many of us in preceding decades. I presume you didn't notice, either because you're too young, or because you were sitting too prettily in your Lord Fauntleroy trousers :shrug:

You implied that Blair and Co dragged us out of the dark ages , its there in your post , you implied that blair and co DID change society, whereas all the things you mentioned were distant memories by the time blair and co took power , so , your post was indeed 'arsedribble', for the record i come from the same once a week bath , working class background as yourself , though how you can blame that on politicians is a source of mystery to me .
 


Neville's Breakfast

Well-known member
May 1, 2016
13,423
Oxton, Birkenhead
His defence would be that he fully intended to have an extra budget - but was forced out of office before it could be implemented.

The future is always subject to change, the present and past are not.

What you say is true but the waters become murky when a leading figure on one side of the debate uses his public office to make a claim clearly prejudicial to the other side and which turns out not to actually happen. What changed in the days following the vote for the emergency budget not to be necessary? I have no idea of his actual motivation but it could well be worthwhile testing in court.
 




Biscuit

Native Creative
Jul 8, 2003
22,220
Brighton
I`d already left for the Greens by then. After being a labour party member and trade union activist in the late seventies and in the early eighties I gave up on Labour with the lurch rightwards under Kinnock. Yes they won elections but to continue Tory policies. Pointless! Always thought Blair was a slimey career politician who piggy-backed onto labour, and suspect he might be a CIA asset recruited at Oxford. Like many, I recently rejoined Labour when Corbyn was elected.

Yes. That's an entirely sensible conclusion to have reached.

Looney left indeed!
 






Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,159
Faversham
You are happy in eternal opposition yeah?

My journey was pretty much in the opposite direction.

uninmpressed by 1960s and 70s trade unions poking their nose into the running of the country and spending members' money to be 'in solidarity' of a load of sexist racist gauchos in some faraway place like Chile or El Salvador;

not too bothered about the early 70s tories who, while epitomising the snobby class ridden mess the UK had always been were still signed up to the post war concensus on widespread nationalisation and a universal franchise;

increasingly concerned by the maverick Thatcher and her plan to turn the UK into a shit version of he US, with a 'you want it, you pay' philosophy yet with retention of all the very un-american old tory snobbery and classism;

exasperation with the well meaning but naive attempt by Foot to galvanise the nation (incidentally Foot was a consistent, conscientious and considered man with no leadership qualities, a far cry from the capricious and almost cataleptic Corbyn who also has no leadership qualities)

interested and impressed by Kinnock, especially when he threw that narcissistic prick Hatton out of the party;

disappointed yet relieved when Kinnock failed to beat Major. 'All Right. ALL RIGHT!'. No....all wrong. Sorry Neil.

Intrigued by Smith and by this time appalled with the tories who had lurched from pro-European competance - till the Lawson crash, anyway - to theiving from the taxpayer and ****ing the nearest secretary, colleague or teenager within reach, nose in any available trough, and no interest at all in the nation.

Impressed by Blair and other young labour people. Ditching clause 4 was a massive signal (read and understand clause 4 to see what I mean - 'we are no longer a communist party seeking public ownership of everything from the telly to your house');

So I joined the labour party. Me, a fiercely independent person who would normally never join any organization that would be prepared to accept me.

Then we had three terms of government that swept away a great deal of the shit of the past. When I started working at my place of work, young medics would take research options and storm into our research labs, ordering people about, not clearing up, and behaving like nobs. People regularly pulled rank by class to bully juniors. Women colleagues regularly had their arse slapped. The culture of bullying and casual racism was slowly replaced by the culture of respect. Of course Blair didn't 'do' this all by himself, but his vision, his emoting, his leadership set the stage. That's what good leadership is. Guardiola is the football equivalent.

I have said elsewhere why I backed Blair over the gulf. I have yet to hear from any Blair hater who isn't either a lifelong tory (jealous of Blair's electoral success) or an old left or liberal type who loathed Blair from the beginning for his public school education, ready charm, lack of interest in nationalising and 'saving' all the failing highly polluting industries of the 1950s, and his ability to play head tennis with Kevin Keegan.

However, I flinched when Blair drifted further into flakery - Catholicism, defender of the defender of 'all faiths' (Prince Charles), an increasing tendency to use belief to determine judgement (so it seemed to me)....and when he decided to use state money to subsidise religions other than the C of E (the state religion, as invented by Henry VIII) I sent furious email to the party, was soundly ignored, and so resigned. My view was that facilitating a state education system with a plethora of religious schools, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, without proper control of syllabus, will just facilitate sectarianism, creating mini versions of Belfast all over the UK - the opposite of integration.

One of the nice things about the US is that when you become an American, that defines you. The Brits have imported cheap labour from the colonies since the 1950s to do the jobs the whites won't. While holding our noses. And encouraging them to settle in their own mini ghettos. As initially championed by....yes it was.... Enoch Powell. That is a recipe for disaster, the opposite of integration and one-nationhood, the creation of a brand of second class citizens, alone and separated from their new nation, festering. Frankly it is astonishing that some of the behaviour and attitude we all deplore amone some sections of the immigrant ghettos hasn't become more prevalent, with an increasing amount of second, third and fourth generation immigrants now pleasingly part of our national identity. But....the latter has happened by luck more than judgement. So to see labour planning on contributing to further division was too much for me.

And then Blair left in frustration, tired of fighting the well-meaning but utterly unsuited to being anything other than a wing man, Gordon Brown. That went well. And then we had Blair light, a series of technocrats, with tory new Blair in charge of the conservatives. Dreary. This opened the way for Mr Frog Face opportunist rabble rousing chancer, Farrage. Farrage and Trump. Lying and laughing their way to the next money spinner, free of conscience, doctrine, morals.....the people were excited and appalled in not quite equal measure.....

And labour cock up their own process so badly they are now chained to Corbyn until he dies. A party hegemony by chance, the product of a constitution that gives unchecked power to the sort of people who coined the 'no compromise with the electorate' strategy of the early 80s. Drunk with their own local party power to hire and fire candidates on a whim, based on their ideological purity, yet without the guile, vision or collaborative insight to ever be sufficiently electable to form a government. Lilliputians.

And so the nation may soon burn under the leadership of Boris or even Nigel, while labour fiddle with their constitutional constitutions.

Sad.
 
Last edited:




drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,070
Burgess Hill
Indeed, in the light of the private prosecution of Boris I was wondering why George Osborne is not facing similar questions about the ‘emergency budget.’ After all he was actually Chancellor of the Exchequer. Just idle speculation but maybe the crowd funders are not quite so motivated by political integrity as they claim.

Can't stand the bloke but in his defence, he was pretty impotent once Cameron had jumped ship.
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,159
Faversham
You implied that Blair and Co dragged us out of the dark ages , its there in your post , you implied that blair and co DID change society, whereas all the things you mentioned were distant memories by the time blair and co took power , so , your post was indeed 'arsedribble', for the record i come from the same once a week bath , working class background as yourself , though how you can blame that on politicians is a source of mystery to me .

I stand by my post. I have elaborated on my views above. This is a politics thread. If you baseline position is that politics is irrelevant and society changes all by itself no matter what politicians do, fine, but this really isn't a thread for you, then, is it? You have made your point.

Incidentally, why the spaces before commas and full stops? Are you Bushy in disguise (again)? ???
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here