The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Should Partrick O'Flynn change his name to Peter Flynn ?
Would protect him from anti Irish leaflets in Cambridge no ?
Tim Aker hasn't changed his name by the way, so your unfunny meme is also incorrect
Has Louise Vanden Plas changed hers back ?
Is this sanctimonious shrieking Monday ?
Not at all, I just know that if UKIP were referencing a politician by his full name, that he never uses, to highlight the fact he was of foreign descent, whilst talking about him not being a local next to pictures of Abu Hamza, on the same day that the local UKIP politician was saluting at a Jim Davidson show, this site would crash through faux outrage from the likes of you
I posted the articles as I wanted to test if you, & the other usual suspects, would criticise the Tories or if you really were just point scoring partisan fools
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
Nothing I imagine, but like Timür Aker she knew she would be fighting an election against the party of Jim Davidson.
Oh - I assumed it was to appeal to her target voters.
The Kippers turning cybernatty trend continues. Most amusing.
Tories insulting people they want to switch back and vote for them next year is always good for a laugh as well.
Tories racially insulting people they want to switch back and vote for them next year is always good for a laugh as well.
Fixed it for you, though I don't find such 'humour' mirth inducing.
Double standards from LibLabCon. Again.
Can I make a special plea to UKIP supporters not to use the term LibLabCon. As well as being an adsurdity to lump together parties who have not agreed on anything since 1939, it's lazy, naff, and it accelerates the site's ongoing transformation into the Telegraph comments' section (for the avoidance of doubt, that would not be a good thing).
It's one step from EUSSR. And I think we'd have a solid consensus on how crap that is.
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
It's one step from EUSSR. And I think we'd have a solid consensus on how crap that is.
Sadly not...
TBF I think LibLabCon is legit when talking about something they genuinely all agree on, as opposed to times like this when one of them has done something and somebody wants to implicate the ones that aren't involved in it.
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
I find the concept of a student vote quite suspect. Even in this day when further education can frequently seem a life style choice I do not think that the number who were students in 2010 and will be in May 2015 is statistically significant.
The student population has generations that are far faster than the population as a whole. This generation have never known anything other than £9K fees. It was like that when they were completing their exams at school and planning for university and has been like that throughout their studies.
They may not like the debt they are being forced to take on, they may not approve of those who put the increase through but it is ancient history to them. Like the fact that Thatcher can still motivate some more than 20 years after she lost power there will be some whose vote is influenced by all this but they will be a small percentage of the student body.
You are perhaps forgetting the somewhat different situation in Scotland?
Though you have a point about short cycles, which suggests that it might actually be Labour, rather than the LDs, who suffer, if anyone does, in Scotland. Ms Lamont, of late memory, was very vocally in favour of them in Holyrood debates before her resignation, and Mr Murphy is noted for having helped implement them in the first place, while he and Mr Findlay seem to be rather noncommittal on their current views. On the other hand, those are devolved matters and so more for the May 2016 Holyrood elections.
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
Anyone know the story behind
"On the eve of the vote, one pro-Russian party was banned from Sunday's poll"
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Why does it always seem to be the Tories around here who delight in words like 'fuzzy wuzzy' and 'ting tong'?
Because they're racist and delight in using racist slurs.
I've been saying for a while, Clegg's vote on Uni fees would be a vote winner amongst the uni staff living in Sheffield Hallam
Do you have evidence of that? My impression from canvassing big swathes of university-linked people is that most students, as DavidL says, are no longer much engaged for any party or cause and often not registered at all, but the staff are still extremely hostile to the LibDem university fees record, except when you get to the very top - vice-chancellors and their immediate associates.
There are of course exceptions - both Labour and Tories have very dedicated teams of students touring the marginals. But they're the exception rather than the rule. (I've not seen a LibDem student team in action for years, or ever met a student Kipper, though presumably they exist.)
Just anecdotal based evidence on our road wherein live quite a few senior university staff.
Remember prior to the election Labour promised to do whatever the Browne review suggested, post election they reneged partly to shaft Clegg.
Which annoyed a lot of the Uni staff, most of whom are Labour inclined.
I was talking to a returning officer for Lib Dem parliamentary candidate selections recently . We were discussing the rules that say the shortlisting committee must be diverse ( ie in terms of gender,ethnicity, occupation). He mentioned a case where the committee included 4 university professors out of 6 members. He challenged the local party to explain this clear breach of the rules. The response was that this was entirely representative of the local party membership! I leave you to guess which local party this was.
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Descended from German nobility if I remember 'Who do You Think You Are' correctly.
Wikipedia:
Johnson is the eldest of the four children of Stanley Johnson, a former Conservative Member of the European Parliament and employee of the European Commission and World Bank, and the painter Charlotte Johnson Wahl (née Fawcett), the daughter of Sir James Fawcett, a barrister and president of the European Commission of Human Rights.
Johnson's maternal great-grandparents were palaeographer Elias Avery Lowe and translator H. T. Lowe-Porter. On his father's side, Johnson is a great-grandson of Ali Kemal Bey, a liberal Turkish journalist and the Interior Minister in the government of Damat Ferid Pasha, Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire, who was killed during the Turkish War of Independence in 1922.
Johnson is a descendant of King George II and, through George's great-great-great grandfather James I/VI, a descendant of all of the previous British royal houses. Johnson is an 8th cousin of David Cameron.
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
Anyone know the story behind
"On the eve of the vote, one pro-Russian party was banned from Sunday's poll"
If would be fun if one of the bookmakers would do odds on the name the CIA are going to pick for the Moldovan revolution. At this point they must be running short of primary colours.
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
Anyone know the story behind
"On the eve of the vote, one pro-Russian party was banned from Sunday's poll"
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
My family name sort of hints at norman roots I think...
Apparently he has the highest public satisfaction in his performance (47%) of any Tory chancellor since Geoff Howe in 1980, not sure it can last forever at this rate... Having said that the most popular chancellor in modern times is Dennis Healey (67%), so maybe popularity isn't the be-all and end-all!
"Denis Healey cut total real-terms spending by 3.9pc in just one year in 1977-78, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Compared with Healey, Osborne is a softie. The OBR expects him to have cut spending by just 2.2pc by 2014-15, an astonishingly slow four-year reduction in total spending only made possible by anaesthetised bond markets. Healey, not Osborne, was the real axeman."
Healey wielded the axe, but as a result Labour lost the next election and Healey himself failed to win the leadership against Foot.
Doing the right thing is not very popular.
Which explains how we in Western Europe got ourselves into such a mess.
I was just thinking on the train this morning that the public gets the politicians they deserve - and our politicians for reasons of electability put off all those nasty decisions knowing the medicine will be even more painful in the future in the hope that someone else will be carrying the can at that time.
Mr. Floater, indeed. It's simply buying oneself expensive goods one cannot afford, then including the bill in our collective will for our children to pay.
If we don't pay it, there'll be a collapse, sooner or later.
I doubt that the students are going to play a role this time around. 1. They do not have the LD pledge to motivate them to vote. 2. Their propensity to vote is always lower typically half that of the pensioners.
We are likely to notice them because of their absence.
On the voter registration matter that will play a role in reducing Labour's vote share. Maybe reducing it by 1% to 2%. Whether a voter is registered, is not something tested by the polling companies. It is younger voters who move around more that suffer the most from a gap/delay in registering at the new residence.
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
Anyone know the story behind
"On the eve of the vote, one pro-Russian party was banned from Sunday's poll"
Milliband's £116bn stuff really is delusional. He could have made a statement that simply stated there was an effect - and he'd have been right. Instead he goes for a number that is completely meaningless and he finishes up demonstrating his complete economic innumeracy.
I thought that this week would probably be dominated by Osborne making deluded statements about how things were going swimmingly even though we are still borrowing like there's no tomorrow, and how it was completely natural that he can find the odd £2bn down the back of the sofa. But oh no! Ed has to outdo him in daftness.
Not backing this myself (as I think Mercedes will dominate) but if you think other teams will be closer next year, consider backing Ricciardo or Bottas each way (15 and 21 respectively) at Ladbrokes for the 2015 title. Each way is a third the odds for top 2.
I do not think Vettel stands much of a chance of being winner or runner up because of his car. Alonso *might*, but the McLaren's been poor recently. The last time they had a car that was fast *and* reliable was some time ago.
Given the Labour chancellor was out in his deficit prediction by double within 6 months in 2008 a pinch of salt is required for listening to their frothings.
At the 2010 election Osborne was promising to eliminate the deficit, Darling was in favour of halving it only. As it happens we are not even going to halve it, so we have not even been as austere as the Labour party's Darling planned, and we're an awful lot closer to the situation labour wanted than the one the tories wanted.
So criticism of how it's turned out means either that he thinks we shouldn't have bothered with deficit reduction at all, or that the Labour position was wrong.
There is nothing of any substance whatsoever about how he would have done it differently and how this would have made things better.
The tories have failed on the deficit, but the election will be about whether the electorate thinks an alternative could realistically have done any better with it and with the economy in general. Decent growth and sharp falls in unemployment despite prolonged and severe Eurozone weakness surely mean that Osborne deserves some credit to go along with some deserved criticism.
But non-specific "it didn't all turn out as rosy as planned so Osborne is crap" criticism is fatuous nonsense.
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Descended from German nobility if I remember 'Who do You Think You Are' correctly.
Wikipedia:
Johnson is the eldest of the four children of Stanley Johnson, a former Conservative Member of the European Parliament and employee of the European Commission and World Bank, and the painter Charlotte Johnson Wahl (née Fawcett), the daughter of Sir James Fawcett, a barrister and president of the European Commission of Human Rights.
Johnson's maternal great-grandparents were palaeographer Elias Avery Lowe and translator H. T. Lowe-Porter. On his father's side, Johnson is a great-grandson of Ali Kemal Bey, a liberal Turkish journalist and the Interior Minister in the government of Damat Ferid Pasha, Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire, who was killed during the Turkish War of Independence in 1922.
Johnson is a descendant of King George II and, through George's great-great-great grandfather James I/VI, a descendant of all of the previous British royal houses. Johnson is an 8th cousin of David Cameron.
"But the death notice also revealed that Charles had died in Germany and at some point had been Chamberlain to the King of Bavaria. So, realising that the 'French aristocrats' of Boris' grandmother’s stories were actually German, we headed to Germany to find out more." http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/new-stories/boris-johnson/how-we-did-it_2.shtml
Mr. Omnium, are you suggesting Miliband's claim we're fivescore and eleventy billion worse off is not, in fact, necessarily accurate?
Simply childish nonsense. 'Tories are a million percent worse' stuff.There's an effect certainly, and clearly the decision to cut spending has implications, and this is one of them. The idea though that you can come up with some figure like this and state it as though it was anything other than fantasy is insane.
We really shouldn't allow politicians to spout complete drivel like this.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to be going to Hong Kong.
I'm sure the tequila will still be flowing in the Lan Kwai Fong area - check it out.
I will certainly be visiting, that's for sure; but our office is in Wanchai, so I'll probably be there mostly. It's only a brief stopover on the way to Shanghai though.
When talking about "credibility" let's look at who got closest to predicting where the deficit would be in 2015.
Was it Labour or the Tories?
Clue: it isn't the Tories.
The Tory claim on economic credibility is lunacy - it attempts to invert reality.
Wellll sort of. see my post below
Your post implies that the deficit is not completely or even largely not something the government an be held accountable for due to external forces. Yet i am pretty sure that if i searched the pb archives I could find a post where you have derided Osborne and the tories using the Eurozone weakness as a (valid) excuse for deficit non-reduction.
if we had only been aiming at Darling-esque levels of deficit reduction, with a Labour government, and with the Eurozone and wider prolonged economic woes, would the deficit have shrunk at all since 2010? quite likely not IMHO
I thought "halving the deficit" when they took charge in 5 yrs or w/e was 'optimistic'.
Why say it, its like the immigration promise. Why ?!
Politically, and with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight, yes these were unwise claims.
However, given the inertia of large organizations (like the public sector), the post-election (perhaps unexpected) need to negotiate with the LDs and the degree of resistance to any cuts at all, can you imagine how big the deficit would have been if they hadn't set such an ambitious initial target?
It's of course impossible to prove a counterfactual, but my feeling is that if they'd set out to reach the current situation instead, we's actually be running much higher deficits instead.
Still, you can't blame the opposition for making hay with this sort of thing. But I do believe they'd have done worse, given their prevailing stance and general tendencies when in office. Shrug. In the end it'll come down to who can best persuade the electorate they can be trusted and all 3 traditional parties have skeletons in the cupboard from their recent times in office.
"I'm sure that Ukip will respond that while this is all very well, it comes down to a question of numbers. One well-spoken and polite bear turning up is fine. What if 260,000 turn up every year? It is a fair question. Within a decade we would have to build a city two and a half times the size of Birmingham simply to house all the Peruvian Bears. Could Britain's marmalade industry cope with the demand? Probably not.
I presume that in such circumstances Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell envisage the introduction of some variety of points system for foreign-born bears. Incidentally, as Ukip grows in power it does seem to struggle with jokes about itself. Despite calling their opponents all manner of names they are affronted when it is dished out in return, even in jest. "
The government's "failure" to boost wages has cost the Treasury £116.5bn since 2010, Labour has claimed.
At an event in Nottingham later, party leader Ed Miliband will talk of a "cost of living crisis" created by low wages and soaring housing costs.
The reality for millions is a "joyless and payless recovery", he will add.
Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
Mr. Omnium, reminds me of what Balls said on the news yesterday in response to Osborne's extra couple of billion for the NHS. Spheroids said that whatever the Coalition/Conservatives spent, Labour would spend more (on the NHS). It really was "Whatever you say +1!"
Mr. M, how was the figure derived? And doesn't it assume the Government pays everyone or at least determines their wages? Is Labour promising to always give an above inflation pay rise to the entire public sector? Is Ed Miliband a plank?
The government's "failure" to boost wages has cost the Treasury £116.5bn since 2010, Labour has claimed.
At an event in Nottingham later, party leader Ed Miliband will talk of a "cost of living crisis" created by low wages and soaring housing costs.
The reality for millions is a "joyless and payless recovery", he will add.
Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
Pity the BBC cut out the part where Ed specifies what he would have done to remedy this.
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
Anyone know the story behind
"On the eve of the vote, one pro-Russian party was banned from Sunday's poll"
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
"I'm sure that Ukip will respond that while this is all very well, it comes down to a question of numbers. One well-spoken and polite bear turning up is fine. What if 260,000 turn up every year? It is a fair question. Within a decade we would have to build a city two and a half times the size of Birmingham simply to house all the Peruvian Bears. Could Britain's marmalade industry cope with the demand? Probably not.
I presume that in such circumstances Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell envisage the introduction of some variety of points system for foreign-born bears. Incidentally, as Ukip grows in power it does seem to struggle with jokes about itself. Despite calling their opponents all manner of names they are affronted when it is dished out in return, even in jest. "
Doubt that Tories would accept him calling himself "Paddington"
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
The government's "failure" to boost wages has cost the Treasury £116.5bn since 2010, Labour has claimed.
At an event in Nottingham later, party leader Ed Miliband will talk of a "cost of living crisis" created by low wages and soaring housing costs.
The reality for millions is a "joyless and payless recovery", he will add.
Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
One point to EdM for pointing out that housing is expensive. Nul points for the fact that precisely zero of his much vaunted mansion tax will be going on building more houses so that housing costs stop soaring.
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
Lots of people changed their surnames after emigrating. Helen Mirren's Dad (or maybe Grandad) changed his surname from the original Russian.
Nothing wrong with it at all - unless you're trying to defraud people.
Tim Aker hasn't changed his name... the Tories are just using his full name, which is Turkish, next to pictures of Muslim terrorists, while saying that he is not a local, to try and win votes
... and the Tories on here who pretend to be against that sort of thing on principle are revealed to be only interested in partisan point scoring.
Does anyone believe for one minute that if this were a UKIP tactic, and the UKIP MP attended a JIm Davidson gig on the same night, the howling wouldn't be endless? But, nothing...
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
Helpful, but also worth remembering this year's car is the worst of the lot. However, it's easy to buy into F1 than start from scratch, so there may be hope.
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
I was somewhat bemused by Nick Clegg (not a unique experience to be sure) repeatedly banging on about the tories wanting to eliminate the deficit "on the backs of the working poor" this morning. Presumably, translated into English, this means that the tories have decided that they need to cut in work benefits as a way of reducing the Social Security bill and the Lib Dems disagree.
Nick also said that taxes would have to increase (I agree) and that we really had to look at the money spent on pensioners (I agree again).
What we have found over the last 4 years is that the situation was even worse than we thought. It was not just the fantastically high deficit created by the last government that was the problem but the fact that the revenue base was being massively inflated by the obscene money being earned in the City and 1m apparently unnecessary but well paid public sector workers.
Osborne has in fact spent less over the Parliament than he forecast in 2010, a truly remarkable, almost unprecedented, demonstration of fiscal discipline but he has been undermined by the tax revenue side being massively less than the models indicated. The problem, as I have been saying since at least 2008, is that we simply cannot afford our current State on our current income. Or, to put it another way, a mu larger percentage of the deficit proved to be structural (in that growth is not fixing it) than was hoped.
Nick also sought to claim that the worst of deficit reduction was in fact behind us. On that we fundamentally disagree.
Lots of people changed their surnames after emigrating. Helen Mirren's Dad (or maybe Grandad) changed his surname from the original Russian.
Nothing wrong with it at all - unless you're trying to defraud people.
Tim Aker hasn't changed his name... the Tories are just using his full name, which is Turkish, next to pictures of Muslim terrorists, while saying that he is not a local, to try and win votes
... and the Tories on here who pretend to be against that sort of thing on principle are revealed to be only interested in partisan point scoring.
Does anyone believe for one minute that if this were a UKIP tactic, and the UKIP MP attended a JIm Davidson gig on the same night, the howling wouldn't be endless? But, nothing...
Born in Orsett, lives in Grays. Looks local enough to me...
Actually I think you make a very good point. All those things that applied when he became leader are still there. He is exactly what it says on the Bullindon registration form. Some clever positioning-like gay marriage- has deflected attention from his personal frailties. Occasionally the mask slips like his ill judged speech the other night
Tim Montgomerie ن (@montie) 30/11/2014 14:42 Well said @JGForsyth. Tory leaflet attack on @Tim_Aker indefensible dailymail.co.uk/debate/article… pic.twitter.com/SseW6xDq87
Why did Kipper Louise van de Bours change her name ?
To make it sound less fuzzy wuzzy of courses.
Maybe she thought it would make her less of a target for Tory election leaflets ?
What was she ashamed of ?
I am glad to see that children of Dutch and Turkish parentage can integrate so well.
Indeed. There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one.
People who change their name have something to hide in my experience. It also stops people from determining when there is an ulterior motive, for instance in foreign policy, or indeed a lack of understanding of this country and its traditions.
Like the ulterior motive of Victoria Nuland, who was so audacious in her deception, she got her father to change her last name before she was born?
The only destabilising Russia is Putin's aggressive imperialism into sovereign nations and an economy based on the web of corruption from Moscow.
A peculiar obsession you have.
LOL. "Obssession" is the term of abuse used on this board to say "I've run out of actual arguments against your points, so I'm just going to accuse you of making the case too much."
You were the one that linked the article about Russia in the first place, you muppet. Please, go back to linking blog posts about how the Jews are behind every crisis in the world.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
Booth's criticism of Cameron is that he projects a false public image rather than of his hobby of killing and injuring animals. I think we can all agree that Cameron is something of a phony.
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
Just not true, Cameron has never tried to hide the fact that he shoots. And pigeon flighting is actually very white van man, toffs are shooting pheasants at this time of year.
You should lighten up. I popped over to Ireland last week for a bit of foxhunting. Had forgotten what fun it is.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
You a vegetarian ?
Nope and neither would I look down on people who worked in abbatoirs, but like a lot of voters I'm uncomfortable with people who actually ENJOY killing animals.
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
You a vegetarian ?
Nope and neither would I look down on people who worked in abbatoirs, but like a lot of voters I'm uncomfortable with people who actually ENJOY killing animals.
No, you just ENJOY consuming their dead flesh.
Are you equally appalled by people that enjoy fishing?
Nice to see in Alan Cochrane's diary he mentions how much Cameron enjoys shooting/killing things. Why can't Labour get this image of Cameron out there to the public? It would be too crude for Miliband to do it himself, but Cameron sells a fake image of himself to the public. He should be called out on it. He portrays himself as the sensitive modern man whereas in reality he's a boorish, snide animal killer. Eton's answer to Jeremy Clarkson you might say. Nothing wrong with that you could argue, but he's not being authentic. Either you keep your private life private or you tell people who you REALLY are. Cameron is fake.
You a vegetarian ?
Nope and neither would I look down on people who worked in abbatoirs, but like a lot of voters I'm uncomfortable with people who actually ENJOY killing animals.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Give me a break. People that enjoy hunting are enjoying the tracking of an animal and making difficult shots. It's not like they savour the death itself and string it out.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Give me a break. People that enjoy hunting are enjoying the tracking of an animal and making difficult shots. It's not like they savour the death itself and string it out.
Yea, there's not a lot of difference, morally, between enjoying eating meat, enjoying hunting, enjoying shooting, and enjoying fishing.
The sadist would be someone who, having caught an animal, then spent hours torturing it to death.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Give me a break. People that enjoy hunting are enjoying the tracking of an animal and making difficult shots. It's not like they savour the death itself and string it out.
Yea, there's not a lot of difference, morally, between enjoying eating meat, enjoying hunting, enjoying shooting, and enjoying fishing.
The sadist would be someone who, having caught an animal, then spent hours torturing it to death.
Torturing animals is a very common childhood trait in future serial killers. If only we'd recognised the signs, etc, etc...
" There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one."
Indeed Socrates. I remember when you were just plain Alfie Higginbottom
The government's "failure" to boost wages has cost the Treasury £116.5bn since 2010, Labour has claimed.
At an event in Nottingham later, party leader Ed Miliband will talk of a "cost of living crisis" created by low wages and soaring housing costs.
The reality for millions is a "joyless and payless recovery", he will add.
Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
Presumably Miliband is preparing the ground for an inflation-busting increase in the minimum wage, to go along with this year's, er, inflation-busting increase in the minimum wage. Would be a useful improvement on their current plan which is a below-inflation increase by the end of the next parliament.....
When it comes to economics, I'm a beginner like many others but reading Ed's speech, I feel a little patronised. Correct me if I'm wrong but ..
Because wages are lower, tax receipts are lower, as are NI contributions - check
In work benefits are also higher - OK, but some of that is paid out to low-waged immigrants brought in by Labour, and the in-work benefits were increased by Labour.
And the solution is to increase wages, presumably from the Government coffers, so that 20% of so can be dragged back in tax and a little more in NI.
Do you not see my conundrum? And it's one that will be shared by most people.
And increases in GDP reflect spending power, so we'd import more tat.
So all that will decrease the deficit? I may not be able to do economics but I can do add-ups and subtracts.
Have I missed anything? And has Ed? Apart from common sense.
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Give me a break. People that enjoy hunting are enjoying the tracking of an animal and making difficult shots. It's not like they savour the death itself and string it out.
Yea, there's not a lot of difference, morally, between enjoying eating meat, enjoying hunting, enjoying shooting, and enjoying fishing.
The sadist would be someone who, having caught an animal, then spent hours torturing it to death.
Torturing animals is a very common childhood trait in future serial killers. If only we'd recognised the signs, etc, etc...
What has that got to do with an adult shooting pigeons?
Am I the only one to keep getting False Flag and Flightpath mixed up? Which one is the anti-jewish conspiracy nut and which one is the anti-ukip troll again?
The Timur business is childish and foolish. It might even backfire. Harder to attack a party as racist when you're banging on about how one of them has foreign ancestry.
The leaflet has pictures of Abu hamza etc next to a story saying that aker isn't a local and referencing him as Timur
Mr. Booth, a boorish, snide animal killer? The meat on supermarket shelves doesn't fall from the sky (unless it's been shot, obviously). Nothing wrong with killing animals to eat them.
You just don't get it do you? Perhaps I need to explain myself better. Firstly on the issue of meat in supermarkets, I'd agree there is an element of hypocrisy. However it's an entirely separate issue. Cameron isn't simply killing animals so he can eat them, he enjoys the killing process (according to Cochrane). A lot of people aren't comfortable with that. On the issue of privacy, as I made clear, he has a choice. Either he opens himself up entirely or he keeps it private. Instead he lets people in, but only to see a particular image of himself which might not be very authentic. The public deserves better.
If you enjoy eating meat (as most of us do), you are morally ok with getting pleasure from the death of an animal. If you enjoy hunting, you are also morally ok with getting pleasure form the death of an animal. It's not a separate issue at all: either you think that an animal's right to live a slightly longer life is something that should be prioritised over human enjoyment, or you don't.
I'm not making a point of moral superiority. It's a question of psychology. A lot of people feel that to enjoy killing or causing harm requires a sadistic tendency. This is a side of Cameron's personality that his opponents should be exploiting.
Give me a break. People that enjoy hunting are enjoying the tracking of an animal and making difficult shots. It's not like they savour the death itself and string it out.
Yea, there's not a lot of difference, morally, between enjoying eating meat, enjoying hunting, enjoying shooting, and enjoying fishing.
The sadist would be someone who, having caught an animal, then spent hours torturing it to death.
Torturing animals is a very common childhood trait in future serial killers. If only we'd recognised the signs, etc, etc...
What has that got to do with an adult shooting pigeons?
Silly little man.
Nothing. Just an interesting factoid I thought I'd share. It followed Sean's comment which clearly, and correctly, differentiated hunting from torture.
I'd legalise fox hunting, personnally. Neither that, nor shooting game birds, nor fishing constitutes animal torture in my book. Badger baiting and dog fighting are clearly over the line.
So you've the wrong end of the stick, there, old bean.
The government's "failure" to boost wages has cost the Treasury £116.5bn since 2010, Labour has claimed.
At an event in Nottingham later, party leader Ed Miliband will talk of a "cost of living crisis" created by low wages and soaring housing costs.
The reality for millions is a "joyless and payless recovery", he will add.
Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
One point to EdM for pointing out that housing is expensive. Nul points for the fact that precisely zero of his much vaunted mansion tax will be going on building more houses so that housing costs stop soaring.
It does show a rather London centric world view. Nottingham has the cheapest housing in the East Midlands, with an average price of £90 000 or so in October this year on the Land Registry site, compared with £460 000 in London:
Comments
He didn't change his name from Boris to Brian either.
I posted the articles as I wanted to test if you, & the other usual suspects, would criticise the Tories or if you really were just point scoring partisan fools
It's one step from EUSSR. And I think we'd have a solid consensus on how crap that is.
TBF I think LibLabCon is legit when talking about something they genuinely all agree on, as opposed to times like this when one of them has done something and somebody wants to implicate the ones that aren't involved in it.
You are perhaps forgetting the somewhat different situation in Scotland?
Though you have a point about short cycles, which suggests that it might actually be Labour, rather than the LDs, who suffer, if anyone does, in Scotland. Ms Lamont, of late memory, was very vocally in favour of them in Holyrood debates before her resignation, and Mr Murphy is noted for having helped implement them in the first place, while he and Mr Findlay seem to be rather noncommittal on their current views. On the other hand, those are devolved matters and so more for the May 2016 Holyrood elections.
Angelic, virtuous others on the rise.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30265985
Presumably this is the point where a spontaneous uprising emerges in provinces that have absolutely no history of uprising, and, despite being weak and impoverished, they somehow manage to get large numbers of tanks.
The two are totally different.
Johnson is the eldest of the four children of Stanley Johnson, a former Conservative Member of the European Parliament and employee of the European Commission and World Bank, and the painter Charlotte Johnson Wahl (née Fawcett), the daughter of Sir James Fawcett, a barrister and president of the European Commission of Human Rights.
Johnson's maternal great-grandparents were palaeographer Elias Avery Lowe and translator H. T. Lowe-Porter. On his father's side, Johnson is a great-grandson of Ali Kemal Bey, a liberal Turkish journalist and the Interior Minister in the government of Damat Ferid Pasha, Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire, who was killed during the Turkish War of Independence in 1922.
Johnson is a descendant of King George II and, through George's great-great-great grandfather James I/VI, a descendant of all of the previous British royal houses. Johnson is an 8th cousin of David Cameron.
It broke campaign finance laws:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/court-bans-pro-russia-party-moldova-elections-27250085
The Burnt Sienna Revolution?
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/court-bans-pro-russia-party-moldova-elections-27250085
Receiving money from abroad. I'm sure none of the pro-western parties are doing that...
I was just thinking on the train this morning that the public gets the politicians they deserve - and our politicians for reasons of electability put off all those nasty decisions knowing the medicine will be even more painful in the future in the hope that someone else will be carrying the can at that time.
Fairly depressing really.
If we don't pay it, there'll be a collapse, sooner or later.
Why say it, its like the immigration promise. Why ?!
1. They do not have the LD pledge to motivate them to vote.
2. Their propensity to vote is always lower typically half that of the pensioners.
We are likely to notice them because of their absence.
On the voter registration matter that will play a role in reducing Labour's vote share. Maybe reducing it by 1% to 2%. Whether a voter is registered, is not something tested by the polling companies. It is younger voters who move around more that suffer the most from a gap/delay in registering at the new residence.
If you have evidence that they're breaking electoral laws, please present it. Otherwise you're just being a conspiracy nut.
I thought that this week would probably be dominated by Osborne making deluded statements about how things were going swimmingly even though we are still borrowing like there's no tomorrow, and how it was completely natural that he can find the odd £2bn down the back of the sofa. But oh no! Ed has to outdo him in daftness.
I do not think Vettel stands much of a chance of being winner or runner up because of his car. Alonso *might*, but the McLaren's been poor recently. The last time they had a car that was fast *and* reliable was some time ago.
At the 2010 election Osborne was promising to eliminate the deficit, Darling was in favour of halving it only. As it happens we are not even going to halve it, so we have not even been as austere as the Labour party's Darling planned, and we're an awful lot closer to the situation labour wanted than the one the tories wanted.
So criticism of how it's turned out means either that he thinks we shouldn't have bothered with deficit reduction at all, or that the Labour position was wrong.
There is nothing of any substance whatsoever about how he would have done it differently and how this would have made things better.
The tories have failed on the deficit, but the election will be about whether the electorate thinks an alternative could realistically have done any better with it and with the economy in general. Decent growth and sharp falls in unemployment despite prolonged and severe Eurozone weakness surely mean that Osborne deserves some credit to go along with some deserved criticism.
But non-specific "it didn't all turn out as rosy as planned so Osborne is crap" criticism is fatuous nonsense.
22 hours
http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/new-stories/boris-johnson/how-we-did-it_2.shtml
We really shouldn't allow politicians to spout complete drivel like this.
Wellll sort of. see my post below
Your post implies that the deficit is not completely or even largely not something the government an be held accountable for due to external forces. Yet i am pretty sure that if i searched the pb archives I could find a post where you have derided Osborne and the tories using the Eurozone weakness as a (valid) excuse for deficit non-reduction.
if we had only been aiming at Darling-esque levels of deficit reduction, with a Labour government, and with the Eurozone and wider prolonged economic woes, would the deficit have shrunk at all since 2010? quite likely not IMHO
However, given the inertia of large organizations (like the public sector), the post-election (perhaps unexpected) need to negotiate with the LDs and the degree of resistance to any cuts at all, can you imagine how big the deficit would have been if they hadn't set such an ambitious initial target?
It's of course impossible to prove a counterfactual, but my feeling is that if they'd set out to reach the current situation instead, we's actually be running much higher deficits instead.
Still, you can't blame the opposition for making hay with this sort of thing. But I do believe they'd have done worse, given their prevailing stance and general tendencies when in office. Shrug. In the end it'll come down to who can best persuade the electorate they can be trusted and all 3 traditional parties have skeletons in the cupboard from their recent times in office.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11264930/Would-Ukip-send-Paddington-Bear-back-to-Darkest-Peru.html
"I'm sure that Ukip will respond that while this is all very well, it comes down to a question of numbers. One well-spoken and polite bear turning up is fine. What if 260,000 turn up every year? It is a fair question. Within a decade we would have to build a city two and a half times the size of Birmingham simply to house all the Peruvian Bears. Could Britain's marmalade industry cope with the demand? Probably not.
I presume that in such circumstances Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell envisage the introduction of some variety of points system for foreign-born bears.
Incidentally, as Ukip grows in power it does seem to struggle with jokes about itself. Despite calling their opponents all manner of names they are affronted when it is dished out in return, even in jest. "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30267675 Stop being frightened of the Tory fantasy. The curtain is long since pulled back on Osborne's economy. It's just a shrivelled man pulling knobs and turning wheels.
Pity the BBC cut out the part where Ed specifies what he would have done to remedy this.
Oh the irony.
National Endowment for Democracy, plausible deniability.
So Ed is pledging a 5% wage increase for everyone or just more of his vacuous drivel?
Sounds like Australians to me.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/11/26/neocons-claim-to-fight-russian-unreality/
One point to EdM for pointing out that housing is expensive. Nul points for the fact that precisely zero of his much vaunted mansion tax will be going on building more houses so that housing costs stop soaring.
Nothing wrong with it at all - unless you're trying to defraud people.
Labour and economic credibility - snigger
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/04/27/why-neocons-seek-to-destabilize-russia/
You appear to both be arguing he should 'come clean' about his private life and that keeping a private life private is ok.
... and the Tories on here who pretend to be against that sort of thing on principle are revealed to be only interested in partisan point scoring.
Does anyone believe for one minute that if this were a UKIP tactic, and the UKIP MP attended a JIm Davidson gig on the same night, the howling wouldn't be endless? But, nothing...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/30272621
Helpful, but also worth remembering this year's car is the worst of the lot. However, it's easy to buy into F1 than start from scratch, so there may be hope.
Nick also said that taxes would have to increase (I agree) and that we really had to look at the money spent on pensioners (I agree again).
What we have found over the last 4 years is that the situation was even worse than we thought. It was not just the fantastically high deficit created by the last government that was the problem but the fact that the revenue base was being massively inflated by the obscene money being earned in the City and 1m apparently unnecessary but well paid public sector workers.
Osborne has in fact spent less over the Parliament than he forecast in 2010, a truly remarkable, almost unprecedented, demonstration of fiscal discipline but he has been undermined by the tax revenue side being massively less than the models indicated. The problem, as I have been saying since at least 2008, is that we simply cannot afford our current State on our current income. Or, to put it another way, a mu larger percentage of the deficit proved to be structural (in that growth is not fixing it) than was hoped.
Nick also sought to claim that the worst of deficit reduction was in fact behind us. On that we fundamentally disagree.
Actually I think you make a very good point. All those things that applied when he became leader are still there. He is exactly what it says on the Bullindon registration form. Some clever positioning-like gay marriage- has deflected attention from his personal frailties. Occasionally the mask slips like his ill judged speech the other night
You were the one that linked the article about Russia in the first place, you muppet. Please, go back to linking blog posts about how the Jews are behind every crisis in the world.
You should lighten up. I popped over to Ireland last week for a bit of foxhunting. Had forgotten what fun it is.
Are you equally appalled by people that enjoy fishing?
MURDERER.
The sadist would be someone who, having caught an animal, then spent hours torturing it to death.
" There's nothing wrong with changing your name to fit into your new nationality better. My ancestors Anglocised my family name and I'm glad they did. The implication that they're some sort of race traitors is a very ugly one."
Indeed Socrates. I remember when you were just plain Alfie Higginbottom
Presumably Miliband is preparing the ground for an inflation-busting increase in the minimum wage, to go along with this year's, er, inflation-busting increase in the minimum wage. Would be a useful improvement on their current plan which is a below-inflation increase by the end of the next parliament.....
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/British/Autumn-Statement-Specials/Politics-N-1z141maZ1z0ydziZ1z141ng/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=sports&utm_campaign=politics&hootPostID=ee577c2dde16978f711bdca4d78283bd
Or stalking as Megan calls it.
When it comes to economics, I'm a beginner like many others but reading Ed's speech, I feel a little patronised. Correct me if I'm wrong but ..
Because wages are lower, tax receipts are lower, as are NI contributions - check
In work benefits are also higher - OK, but some of that is paid out to low-waged immigrants brought in by Labour, and the in-work benefits were increased by Labour.
And the solution is to increase wages, presumably from the Government coffers, so that 20% of so can be dragged back in tax and a little more in NI.
Do you not see my conundrum? And it's one that will be shared by most people.
And increases in GDP reflect spending power, so we'd import more tat.
So all that will decrease the deficit? I may not be able to do economics but I can do add-ups and subtracts.
Have I missed anything? And has Ed? Apart from common sense.
Cameron is a lucky general...
Yeah, probably.
Silly little man.
I'd legalise fox hunting, personnally. Neither that, nor shooting game birds, nor fishing constitutes animal torture in my book. Badger baiting and dog fighting are clearly over the line.
So you've the wrong end of the stick, there, old bean.
It does show a rather London centric world view. Nottingham has the cheapest housing in the East Midlands, with an average price of £90 000 or so in October this year on the Land Registry site, compared with £460 000 in London:
http://landregistry.data.gov.uk/app/hpi/view?compare=1&from_m=11&from_y=2013&loc_0=City+of+Nottingham&loc_1=London&loc_uri_0=http://landregistry.data.gov.uk/id/region/city-of-nottingham&loc_uri_1=http://landregistry.data.gov.uk/id/region/london&m_ap=1&m_chy=1&m_hpi=1&source=preview_form&to_m=11&to_y=2014
Nottingham is even better value than Doncaster at £95 000, perhaps Ed should get out more.