Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
He has not opposed. That's exactly why he hasn't done his job. Standing up and discrediting May is not same as offering "opposing" policies.
Its the only thing I agree with OG over, the entire spectrum of mps have let country down, so much to the point May is the only credible option, and it must be bad to be able to say that.
Before you knock The Economist I suggest you read it, had you done so I doubt you, d take stance you have.
If anything it is biased towards remaining and probably pro EU.. Which is more than can be said of Corbyn.
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/09/02/is-the-economist-left-or-right-wing
Last edited:
The problem is the people like you in the media, phobically opposed to Corbyn whatever he does and calling him a communist or extremist when he's merely a socialist. He has policies but there's no point in enunciating them when they'll just be used with bigotry and distortion as weapons against him.
So he just attacks the Tories on what he disagrees with and keeps his own plans largely to himself, a sensible ploy since it doesn't lose supporters on any particular point of policy.
.
This is another blatant lie. I will not let you get away with lie after lie. Pretty much every one of your posts contain lies, insults or off topic nonsense. Sometimes all 3 in one post.
Often actually.
Stop lying. Laura is not propaganda editor. She is the BBC political editor. Her analysis is just that. Analysis. You may not like it or agree with it but it is not spin. Another lie.
Your lies are desperate pleas for attention. Its a sad act in a man half your age.
I find myself in total agreement, not for the first time, with today's web blog, AAV, which provides an intelligent and honest perspective on political goings-on:
Theresa May's insidious pact with her Tory MPs is another extraordinary example of the prioritisation of narrow party political advantage over the national interest from the Tories.
The Tories know that it's against the national interest to allow Theresa May to continue making her despicable threats to launch a ruinous "no deal" meltdown to fear-monger people into supporting the shambolic last minute deal that's so lamentable that she's demonstrably terrified of putting it before a parliamentary vote.
They also know that her outrageous combination of selfishness, callousness, dishonesty, incompetence, and tyrannical instincts makes her a woefully inept political leader and explains her terrible track record of failure (that stretches way back before the Brexit farce she's overseen to stuff like the "hostile environment" abuse of Windrush Brits during her time as Home Secretary).
The promise they've extracted that she quits before the next election is a crystal clear demonstration that they know that she's such a bad leader that she'd ruin their chances of retaining their grip on political power if they let her lead them into an election.
But they've just voted to allow this leader that they clearly recognise as incompetent to stay on during the most complex and risky diplomatic process the UK has faced in the post-war era (despite the appalling mess she's been making of it for the last 30 months)!
The explanation for this behaviour is obvious. They know that she'll continue making an outrageous mess of Brexit, but they're hoping that she'll absorb most of the public fury at the Brexit chaos they've created (by their unbelievably reckless gamble with the nations future in 2016 and the subsequent 30 months of incompetence and mayhem).
The confidence vote was their golden opportunity to scrap her disgraceful threat to 'back my rubbish deal or I'll deliberately inflict a no deal meltdown' into the dustbin of history where it belongs.
But they voted to allow her to plough incompetently on with Brexit until meltdown, because when they cast her off (as she's agreed to let them do) they're hoping that she takes most of the Brexit stink with her, so they have a shot at maintaining their grip on power.
The insidious pact between Theresa May and the Tory MPs is an overt demonstration that they'll wilfully sacrifice the national interest because the primary over-riding objective behind everything they do is keeping themselves in political power, no matter what the cost to the rest of us.
Tom
Theresa May's insidious pact with her Tory MPs is another extraordinary example of the prioritisation of narrow party political advantage over the national interest from the Tories.
The Tories know that it's against the national interest to allow Theresa May to continue making her despicable threats to launch a ruinous "no deal" meltdown to fear-monger people into supporting the shambolic last minute deal that's so lamentable that she's demonstrably terrified of putting it before a parliamentary vote.
They also know that her outrageous combination of selfishness, callousness, dishonesty, incompetence, and tyrannical instincts makes her a woefully inept political leader and explains her terrible track record of failure (that stretches way back before the Brexit farce she's overseen to stuff like the "hostile environment" abuse of Windrush Brits during her time as Home Secretary).
The promise they've extracted that she quits before the next election is a crystal clear demonstration that they know that she's such a bad leader that she'd ruin their chances of retaining their grip on political power if they let her lead them into an election.
But they've just voted to allow this leader that they clearly recognise as incompetent to stay on during the most complex and risky diplomatic process the UK has faced in the post-war era (despite the appalling mess she's been making of it for the last 30 months)!
The explanation for this behaviour is obvious. They know that she'll continue making an outrageous mess of Brexit, but they're hoping that she'll absorb most of the public fury at the Brexit chaos they've created (by their unbelievably reckless gamble with the nations future in 2016 and the subsequent 30 months of incompetence and mayhem).
The confidence vote was their golden opportunity to scrap her disgraceful threat to 'back my rubbish deal or I'll deliberately inflict a no deal meltdown' into the dustbin of history where it belongs.
But they voted to allow her to plough incompetently on with Brexit until meltdown, because when they cast her off (as she's agreed to let them do) they're hoping that she takes most of the Brexit stink with her, so they have a shot at maintaining their grip on power.
The insidious pact between Theresa May and the Tory MPs is an overt demonstration that they'll wilfully sacrifice the national interest because the primary over-riding objective behind everything they do is keeping themselves in political power, no matter what the cost to the rest of us.
Tom
I, d agree with all that flecc if my assessment of Corbyn was linked to all the media hype surrounding him. (The anti semitism, the nepotism, communist links, supporting terrorists etc etc which are all slurs designed to do what you claim in me)
That is not the case. I keep telling you but you ignore it. I believe JC to be neither racist or anti semitic. I see him as one of a few sincere politicians with high ideals and taking worthy stands. His policies on the other hand are terrible. His last manifesto appalling and his failure to support remain a catastrophic mistake. No matter how you judge it he has not opposed May during Brexit. He cant. He wants to leave. Academically, I just don't think he is up to job. He knew little of financial situation when asked and his defence policy is disastrous. So don't tell me my objection to JC is either dogma or prppoganda. It's neither. He has taken labour to a place that is unelectable and as such helped create the conundrum we now face.
That is not the case. I keep telling you but you ignore it. I believe JC to be neither racist or anti semitic. I see him as one of a few sincere politicians with high ideals and taking worthy stands. His policies on the other hand are terrible. His last manifesto appalling and his failure to support remain a catastrophic mistake. No matter how you judge it he has not opposed May during Brexit. He cant. He wants to leave. Academically, I just don't think he is up to job. He knew little of financial situation when asked and his defence policy is disastrous. So don't tell me my objection to JC is either dogma or prppoganda. It's neither. He has taken labour to a place that is unelectable and as such helped create the conundrum we now face.
Off Topic bull sh! T.I find myself in total agreement, not for the first time, with today's web blog, AAV, which provides an intelligent and honest perspective on political goings-on:
Theresa May's insidious pact with her Tory MPs is another extraordinary example of the prioritisation of narrow party political advantage over the national interest from the Tories.
The Tories know that it's against the national interest to allow Theresa May to continue making her despicable threats to launch a ruinous "no deal" meltdown to fear-monger people into supporting the shambolic last minute deal that's so lamentable that she's demonstrably terrified of putting it before a parliamentary vote.
They also know that her outrageous combination of selfishness, callousness, dishonesty, incompetence, and tyrannical instincts makes her a woefully inept political leader and explains her terrible track record of failure (that stretches way back before the Brexit farce she's overseen to stuff like the "hostile environment" abuse of Windrush Brits during her time as Home Secretary).
The promise they've extracted that she quits before the next election is a crystal clear demonstration that they know that she's such a bad leader that she'd ruin their chances of retaining their grip on political power if they let her lead them into an election.
But they've just voted to allow this leader that they clearly recognise as incompetent to stay on during the most complex and risky diplomatic process the UK has faced in the post-war era (despite the appalling mess she's been making of it for the last 30 months)!
The explanation for this behaviour is obvious. They know that she'll continue making an outrageous mess of Brexit, but they're hoping that she'll absorb most of the public fury at the Brexit chaos they've created (by their unbelievably reckless gamble with the nations future in 2016 and the subsequent 30 months of incompetence and mayhem).
The confidence vote was their golden opportunity to scrap her disgraceful threat to 'back my rubbish deal or I'll deliberately inflict a no deal meltdown' into the dustbin of history where it belongs.
But they voted to allow her to plough incompetently on with Brexit until meltdown, because when they cast her off (as she's agreed to let them do) they're hoping that she takes most of the Brexit stink with her, so they have a shot at maintaining their grip on power.
The insidious pact between Theresa May and the Tory MPs is an overt demonstration that they'll wilfully sacrifice the national interest because the primary over-riding objective behind everything they do is keeping themselves in political power, no matter what the cost to the rest of us.
Tom
Not a single word for an alternative. Typical Tom, typical AAV. Shout and scream, insult and name call... but not a shred of advice about what to do.
Its just like the idiots on terraces screaming at refs, at players, at coaches, at anybody.. But no idea themselves with not a single thought of a way forward.
Can we just stop the knocking of May and talk about what to do... Not what NOT to do...
Last edited:
This is how one correspondent sees the present situation in regard to the tory rats fighting among themselves:
'For the first time in ages the tories and their backers know they face a counter-hegemonic threat from the left. They fear corbyn and rightly so, he spells the end of their victorian neoliberal wet dream.'
Only a complete change of government to one based on humanitarian principles can bring about the improvement this country desperately needs. A Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour government will make the UK a better place for all its subjects.
Tom
'For the first time in ages the tories and their backers know they face a counter-hegemonic threat from the left. They fear corbyn and rightly so, he spells the end of their victorian neoliberal wet dream.'
Only a complete change of government to one based on humanitarian principles can bring about the improvement this country desperately needs. A Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour government will make the UK a better place for all its subjects.
Tom
May is an open goal every week at PMQs and every week he misses.
He's an ideologue. Everyone says he's a nice man but you don't necessarily need or even want a nice person as PM. Its quite far down the list of requisite attributes required.
Who gets the money?
The EU?
I suggest we charge £14 and use the money to subsidise our people when they are charged for this tax.
As a Remainer I don't agree with JC not supporting Remain, but isn't he entitled to his opinion and his right to stand on that opinion? He was after all elected to his position and huge numbers agree with him.
If he supported what he disagreed with, like Remainer Theresa May for example, that wouldn't be honest and honourable would it?
.
Last edited:
He was elected, so it seems they are largely happy with him.
.
I'll pay that happily as I have family to visit in three countries of mainland Europe.
Tom
And who are you going to charge?. Visitors from the EU wanting to see the sights of London.. your tourism office won't like that. Lorry drivers bring in the food you need.?. Your airports have already a headage payment on people using them. People passing over the 300 miles of common border between NI and RoI? ( it's not 300 miles were two straight lines drawn, but with all the boreens and cattle paths it is.)
No, not necessarily. An opposition should only oppose on what it disagrees with. Opposition for the sake of it whether believed in or not would be childishly foolish.
We have an opposition party representing Remainers, but that is not Labour, it's the LibDems. But unfortunately their period in coalition lost them their credibility with the electorate so they are small in number.
Yet another symptom of how broken UK politics is, and has been for decades, but we are stuck with it unless and until we get proportional representation.
.
Yeah all that. Although I wouldn't have a charge from Ireland to Northern Ireland. To difficult to collect. Although maybe lorries and vehicles could be charged. Maybe sell a pass or something if they are doing it regularly. I wouldn't charge for cattle.