Page 36 of 48

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Thu May 28, 2020 2:02 pm
by Lemon Seal
MistressRani wrote:
Thu May 28, 2020 11:51 am
Lemon Seal wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 2:06 pm
Thicko provincial Northerners have let this country down twice in the space of a few years.
Not true but if so they were misled by crooked London tossers.
But if you tell them that they call you patronising and insulting.

And it is a bit. The idea that some kind of magic mind control was being used is ridiculous. Leave appealed to prejudices and fears that were already present in the 'native' population. You can argue some of that was whipped up by hegemonic forces, sure, but a lot of it is base nationalism and racism.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:59 pm
by Rawkus
Keir Starmer is getting short shrift from some Labour supporters for not unequivocally backing the tearing Down of that the Coulson statue in Bristol. While I agree that it should have gone, it would not be the most astute move for him to back an action that is prosecutable, especially as a former barrister. He seems to take more shit from his own side than the Tories!?

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:14 pm
by Rob Filth
Rawkus wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:59 pm
Keir Starmer is getting short shrift from some Labour supporters for not unequivocally backing the tearing Down of that the Coulson statue in Bristol. While I agree that it should have gone, it would not be the most astute move for him to back an action that is prosecutable, especially as a former barrister. He seems to take more shit from his own side than the Tories!?
The thing is Starmer is basically an establishment goon and another Murdoch sockpuppet like Blair.

Many in the Labour Party membership are sick to the back teeth of these kind of media robber baron apologists for leaders.

The people in Bristol were performing a public civic duty when democracy had failed them, Starmer undermining that with his apologist bullshit just takes away any form of self-empowerment and initiative available to the public.

Starmer might as well join Priti Patel on the Uncle Tom brigade.

To be honest, I'm surprised Starmer missed a trick and didn't quickly fly to Yankland to offer his services to the cop who murdered George Floyd to get him off the hook like he did with PC Harwood who killed Ian Tomlinson here.

He could've cleaned up and made a right packet on lawyers pay over there!

Too busy wriggling his backside to Murdoch to think about it, I guess.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:27 pm
by Rawkus
Rob Filth wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:14 pm
Rawkus wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:59 pm
Keir Starmer is getting short shrift from some Labour supporters for not unequivocally backing the tearing Down of that the Coulson statue in Bristol. While I agree that it should have gone, it would not be the most astute move for him to back an action that is prosecutable, especially as a former barrister. He seems to take more shit from his own side than the Tories!?
The thing is Starmer is basically an establishment goon and another Murdoch sockpuppet like Blair.

Many in the Labour Party membership are sick to the back teeth of these kind of media robber baron apologists for leaders.

The people in Bristol were performing a public civic duty when democracy had failed them, Starmer undermining that with his apologist bullshit just takes away any form of self-empowerment and initiative available to the public.

Starmer might as well join Priti Patel on the Uncle Tom brigade.

To be honest, I'm surprised Starmer missed a trick and didn't quickly fly to Yankland to offer his services to the cop who murdered George Floyd to get him off the hook like he did with PC Harwood who killed Ian Tomlinson here.

He could've cleaned up and made a right packet on lawyers pay over there!

Too busy wriggling his backside to Murdoch to think about it, I guess.
I think the demonstrators were right to tear it down, and I can say that straight cos I am not the leader of a political party who hopes to become PM and topple Johnson. We don't get to choose which laws are applicable to us.

I also agree that there's a huge problem when taxpayer money is used to put up a statue of Nancy fucking Astor of all people, should we put one of Ayn Rand next to it?

What is Starmer's connection to Murdoch? I would have thought RM would be more approving of Johnson/Cummings.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:51 am
by Rob Filth
Rawkus wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:27 pm
I think the demonstrators were right to tear it down, and I can say that straight cos I am not the leader of a political party who hopes to become PM and topple Johnson. We don't get to choose which laws are applicable to us.

I also agree that there's a huge problem when taxpayer money is used to put up a statue of Nancy fucking Astor of all people, should we put one of Ayn Rand next to it?

What is Starmer's connection to Murdoch? I would have thought RM would be more approving of Johnson/Cummings.
Normally, Murdoch WOULD be far more approving of Johnson/Cummings, after all they ARE intent on carrying out Murdoch's precious Brexit agenda which he's been hankering and seeding for the last two decades.

Something's happened behind the scenes in the last month or so which is apparent from the obvious sudden media scrutiny and focus on Cummings indiscretion of the lockdown rules, normally the media would completely ignore such indiscretions as indeed the have done often enough in the past. So, WHY are they suddenly interested now?

Either Johnson and Cummings have had a behind closed doors fall out with Murdoch, or Murdoch has decided Cummings has too much power and control over his Johnson puppet, or Murdoch has realised with the public awareness of the disastrous ineptitude of the Government in its responses to COVID19 which has led to one of the very highest death counts in the World that both men's heads will have to roll as a scapegoat. Or perhaps a combination of all three?

Starmer realises this, which is why he has been doing his best arse wriggling act possible in Murdochs direction in the last few months, and although presently futile because Murdoch will be lining up his next Tory usurper replacement for Johnson before the electoral cycle ends (either Gove or Raab I suspect), Murdoch might well go for Starmer if this next Tory usurper also fails.

In fact, I believe a deal has already been cut between Starmer and Murdoch in the possible event of this occurence.

Murdoch will possibly compromise the UK retaining Single Market access in the EU for Starmers complete compliance. That will be the deal cut.

So, if you vote Labour in the next General Election you MAY get that which you wouldn't otherwise get with the Tories, but other than that things will be pretty much "business as usual" set to Murdochs continuing agenda with the odd tiny meaningless bit of socialist tokenism and tinkering around the edges which will comprise to the great sum total of "fuck all" in the grand scheme of things.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:14 pm
by MistressRani
Rawkus wrote:
Mon Jun 08, 2020 10:59 pm
Keir Starmer is getting short shrift from some Labour supporters for not unequivocally backing the tearing Down of that the Coulson statue in Bristol. While I agree that it should have gone, it would not be the most astute move for him to back an action that is prosecutable, especially as a former barrister. He seems to take more shit from his own side than the Tories!?
I think you're right. The media are already highlighting Labour MPs who are supportive of direct action and I think it's important for the leadership team, especially with Starmer coming from a legal background, to emphasise legal, peaceful action and the need for change. Labour have to be more savvy than under Corbyn and not give easy targets, especially as most voters, especially working class don't approve of public disorder.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:51 pm
by Rob Filth
MistressRani wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:14 pm
I think you're right. The media are already highlighting Labour MPs who are supportive of direct action and I think it's important for the leadership team, especially with Starmer coming from a legal background, to emphasise legal, peaceful action and the need for change. Labour have to be more savvy than under Corbyn and not give easy targets, especially as most voters, especially working class don't approve of public disorder.
Yes, I'm expecting a public statement from Starmer on Rosa Parks later where he will probably say, "Of course, buses should have been desegregated years ago. But defying segregation by blatantly breaking the law is not acceptable, and the Labour party cannot condone such behaviour."

Bearing in mind this is the same apologist plank who had more condemnation for Barry Gardiner attending a BLM event than he had for Cummings breaking lockdown rules.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:27 pm
by MistressRani
Rob Filth wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:51 pm
MistressRani wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:14 pm
I think you're right. The media are already highlighting Labour MPs who are supportive of direct action and I think it's important for the leadership team, especially with Starmer coming from a legal background, to emphasise legal, peaceful action and the need for change. Labour have to be more savvy than under Corbyn and not give easy targets, especially as most voters, especially working class don't approve of public disorder.
Yes, I'm expecting a public statement from Starmer on Rosa Parks later where he will probably say, "Of course, buses should have been desegregated years ago. But defying segregation by blatantly breaking the law is not acceptable, and the Labour party cannot condone such behaviour."

Bearing in mind this is the same apologist plank who had more condemnation for Barry Gardiner attending a BLM event than he had for Cummings breaking lockdown rules.
He's right to avoid explicitly condoning acts of violence that many of the voters Labour need to gain find repellent.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:37 pm
by Rob Filth
MistressRani wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:27 pm
He's right to avoid explicitly condoning acts of violence that many of the voters Labour need to gain find repellent.
He wasn't condoning any acts of violence however, he was being a racist apologist and establishmentarian sop.

Completely out of step of all Labour Party values.

Re: The Labour Party

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:58 pm
by Rawkus
Rob Filth wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:37 pm
MistressRani wrote:
Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:27 pm
He's right to avoid explicitly condoning acts of violence that many of the voters Labour need to gain find repellent.
He wasn't condoning any acts of violence however, he was being a racist apologist and establishmentarian sop.

Completely out of step of all Labour Party values.
I would like to hear Keir be more vocal about Cummings and his dislike for racism, but there was a poll recently that suggested that the majority of the public were glad the statue had gone but did not approve of the manner in which it happened.

Personally, I am fine with the protestors pulling it down, but neither they nor me are trying to win an election when the time comes. I think you are mistaking what Starmer says publically for what he thinks privately. Or are you saying he should just totally ignore public opinion?