Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Milibands go to war against the Daily Mail – this could

24

Comments

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974
    Financier said:

    Neil said:

    Polruan said:

    Neil said:

    Financier said:

    When he has nationalised that, what next is on his agenda for nationalisation? Is he wanting to turn the clock back to the late 1940s? These are all valid questions.

    I bet you a million pounds the answer is no.
    Not a bad bet... if you lost, presumably the million pounds would be confiscated in any case.
    The only risk is that the stakes are too low for Financier to bother with.
    Neil, presume you have not played poker with people who may get a bit upset when you are "called" and having a losing hand are unable to support your bets due to insufficient resources - cash. Best to stick with Tim's £50 at evens.

    Actually I agree with your thought, but am not sure how far along the Nationalisation route EdM would go, having got one under his belt - so-to-speak. If something works once it is very tempting to follow the same path and McLuskey would be right behind him.


    LOL, what bollocks, you sound more like Billy Liar every day. Presume you have a few down the back of the couch.
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Alanbrooke

    'Damian McBride's mate complains about dirty tricks in the press, ho hum he was happy enough to support them when it suited'

    Just like wee Timmy who has spent the last three years smearing Cameron,his wife & family.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2013
    Annette Hardy @Annette1Hardy
    My 88 year old mum-in-law adores Boris. This morning she said she thinks he cuts his own hair. #cpc13

    LOL

    Ian Flynn @IFFlynn
    Bojo "cut that yellow Liberal Democrat albatross from around our necks and plop it into the sea" #cpc13
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    "and it has the biggest online presence. "

    The Mail's not behind a paywall. Yet.

    Rothermere is definitely looking at it though and he'll start with a 'freemium' trial period before going full paywall.

    The Mail is profitable. Their online model is working. The Guardian is more likely to try a paywall.

    Rothermere has already indicated the freemium model is on the way.

    Believe what you wish but there is no 'magic money tree' for papers online which is why so many have run behind the paywall already and not all of them were by any means making a huge loss or not hitting huge pageview numbers.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Stace @stackee
    Feel sorry for all my Labour comrades who are now hurriedly throwing away their breadmakers in a bid to look more in-touch & on message.
  • Options

    I wonder if Daily Mail journalists and editors have an annual meeting on April 20th in a secret cellar to remember and celebrate the one they gave so much support to .

    Brown?


    Nearly right, WelshBertie.

    Brownshirts.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    What we're seeing in relation to Ed Miliband is reminiscent of the Leonard Cohen lyric:

    "Ah you loved me as a loser, but now you're worried that I just might win."

    I'll leave it to others to decide whether the next line is applicable to the Conservatives.
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    edited October 2013
    another great tweet from Rik Young One:

    Owen Jones‏@OwenJones846m
    Big shout out of solidarity to @NUTonline and @NASUWT teachers on strike, fighting for our education and our kids' futures #teacherROAR

    BBC headline - Teachers strike over pay and pensions

    I'm sure our kids are very worried about their teachers' pay and pensions.....
  • Options
    tim said:

    Financier said:

    Neil said:

    Polruan said:

    Neil said:

    Financier said:

    When he has nationalised that, what next is on his agenda for nationalisation? Is he wanting to turn the clock back to the late 1940s? These are all valid questions.

    I bet you a million pounds the answer is no.
    Not a bad bet... if you lost, presumably the million pounds would be confiscated in any case.
    The only risk is that the stakes are too low for Financier to bother with.
    Neil, presume you have not played poker with people who may get a bit upset when you are "called" and having a losing hand are unable to support your bets due to insufficient resources - cash.


    You really are unaware of how ridiculous you are, it's wonderful.


    Snap!
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2013
    Rothermere has already indicated the freemium model is on the way.

    I love the Sun's 'need help joining' idea.

    Unwitting says a good deal about what they think of their readers!
  • Options
    PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    Looking at the wider picture, Mike is right that the Mail is not going to give up on these sorts of attacks. Lots of other papers will also now start attacking him much more than they have done up to now, from City AM to the Telegraph, the Sun and the Times, albeit more on policy grounds than the Mail's attacks.

    And so they should: Ed Miliband has, deliberately or accidentally, said some very worrying things. He can't have his cake and eat it. If he wants to portray himself as a moderate, why is he positioning himself on the far left? He quite clearly said a few days ago that he was 'bringing back socialism'. Fair enough, and certainly his speech at the Labour conference confirms that, so why on earth should he complain if the media believe him and accuse him of wanting to bring back socialism?

    A genuine question of terminology: if extending price controls from some privatised "monopolies" (water, rail, say) to another one (power) for a limited period only, plus raising the possibility of some forms of compulsory purchase in the case of market failure is "far left" then what would be the terms for the 1983 manifesto? Or the 1948 government? Or actual communism. The accusation of "socialism" is fair enough but "socialism" would normally have denoted any left-of-centre shade. In this language, can you be left wing without being "far left"?
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited October 2013
    Bojo's speech: trying to horn himself back into the mainstream Tory Shoe? It won't work and the speech was one of the worst delivered that I have heard from him. Shall we be kind and call this mornings effort halfhearted?
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    tim said:

    Financier said:

    Neil said:

    Polruan said:

    Neil said:

    Financier said:

    When he has nationalised that, what next is on his agenda for nationalisation? Is he wanting to turn the clock back to the late 1940s? These are all valid questions.

    I bet you a million pounds the answer is no.
    Not a bad bet... if you lost, presumably the million pounds would be confiscated in any case.
    The only risk is that the stakes are too low for Financier to bother with.
    Neil, presume you have not played poker with people who may get a bit upset when you are "called" and having a losing hand are unable to support your bets due to insufficient resources - cash.


    You really are unaware of how ridiculous you are, it's wonderful.

    Tim, you should not judge other people by yourself. This is great fun.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    Mr. Eagles, I didn't see the speech. Was it a positive or negative reference?
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Neil said:

    Polruan said:

    Neil said:

    Financier said:

    When he has nationalised that, what next is on his agenda for nationalisation? Is he wanting to turn the clock back to the late 1940s? These are all valid questions.

    I bet you a million pounds the answer is no.
    Not a bad bet... if you lost, presumably the million pounds would be confiscated in any case.
    The only risk is that the stakes are too low for Financier to bother with.
    Neil, presume you have not played poker with people who may get a bit upset when you are "called" and having a losing hand are unable to support your bets due to insufficient resources - cash. Best to stick with Tim's £50 at evens.

    Actually I agree with your thought, but am not sure how far along the Nationalisation route EdM would go, having got one under his belt - so-to-speak. If something works once it is very tempting to follow the same path and McLuskey would be right behind him.


    LOL, what bollocks, you sound more like Billy Liar every day. Presume you have a few down the back of the couch.
    No, only losers would think of looking down the back of the couch, chair, settee or whatever. Is that what the SNP does when it is a bit short of funds?

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    And here's the Guardian - the Guardian - sucking up to the "pleasant" Mister Lenin in 1919:

    "a man absolutely master of himself and of his subject, expressing himself with a lucidity that was as startling as it was refreshing."

    http://century.guardian.co.uk/1910-1919/Story/0,,98448,00.html

    One can play this game all day - if one doesn't have a purpose in life, as is the case with most pb lefties.

    We all remember your research in Cambodia where you found Bob Ainsworth and Alistair Darling guilty of "giving succour" to the Khmer Rouge but curiously overlooking the fact that Margaret Thatcher armed them.
    Margaret Thatcher was a devotee of Pol Pot?

    Well, I suppose it's a theory.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Very surprised as Richard N's response below. Usually an honourable sort. Mind you, he has had a chip short circuit in his brain since the Energygasm. I would expect nothing more of SeanT however.
    Credit to Clegg, Cam, TSE and other sensible Tories for their gentlemanly responses. Some things transcend politics.
  • Options
    Polruan said:

    Looking at the wider picture, Mike is right that the Mail is not going to give up on these sorts of attacks. Lots of other papers will also now start attacking him much more than they have done up to now, from City AM to the Telegraph, the Sun and the Times, albeit more on policy grounds than the Mail's attacks.

    And so they should: Ed Miliband has, deliberately or accidentally, said some very worrying things. He can't have his cake and eat it. If he wants to portray himself as a moderate, why is he positioning himself on the far left? He quite clearly said a few days ago that he was 'bringing back socialism'. Fair enough, and certainly his speech at the Labour conference confirms that, so why on earth should he complain if the media believe him and accuse him of wanting to bring back socialism?

    A genuine question of terminology: if extending price controls from some privatised "monopolies" (water, rail, say) to another one (power) for a limited period only, plus raising the possibility of some forms of compulsory purchase in the case of market failure is "far left" then what would be the terms for the 1983 manifesto? Or the 1948 government? Or actual communism. The accusation of "socialism" is fair enough but "socialism" would normally have denoted any left-of-centre shade. In this language, can you be left wing without being "far left"?

    The problem seems to be that Ed has wrong-footed some Tories by not doing what they expected. The idea that a 20 month price freeze is akin to Marxism, when energy prices are controlled across Europe already is pretty peculiar.

  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I wonder if Daily Mail journalists and editors have an annual meeting on April 20th in a secret cellar to remember and celebrate the one they gave so much support to .

    Brown?


    Nearly right, WelshBertie.

    Brownshirts.
    Blackshirts were facists, Brownshirts National Socialists.

    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    And here's the Guardian - the Guardian - sucking up to the "pleasant" Mister Lenin in 1919:

    "a man absolutely master of himself and of his subject, expressing himself with a lucidity that was as startling as it was refreshing."

    http://century.guardian.co.uk/1910-1919/Story/0,,98448,00.html

    One can play this game all day - if one doesn't have a purpose in life, as is the case with most pb lefties.

    We all remember your research in Cambodia where you found Bob Ainsworth and Alistair Darling guilty of "giving succour" to the Khmer Rouge but curiously overlooking the fact that Margaret Thatcher armed them.
    Margaret Thatcher was a devotee of Pol Pot?

    Well, I suppose it's a theory.

    She so disapproved of him that she armed him.

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''Credit to Clegg, Cam, TSE and other sensible Tories for their gentlemanly responses. Some things transcend politics.''

    Does this mean you're going to stop talking about buffonish etonians, chinless fops, out of touch trust fundies, upper class twits etc?
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Richard Nabavi - Was Blair on the far left?

    There's very little difference between Miliband's speech and Blair's 1997 manifesto.
  • Options
    Charles said:

    I wonder if Daily Mail journalists and editors have an annual meeting on April 20th in a secret cellar to remember and celebrate the one they gave so much support to .

    Brown?


    Nearly right, WelshBertie.

    Brownshirts.
    Blackshirts were facists, Brownshirts National Socialists.

    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over
    Nice one, Charles.

    Yes, the quip fails the historical accuracy test. PB keeps us on our toes.

    Ty.

  • Options

    Has Ed ever said he agreed with his father's views. Hasn't he, on numerous occasions, said he disagreed with them? Didn't his father say that he despaired of both his sons and their rejection of his beliefs? I think you'll find the answers to these questions are, in order, No, Yes, Yes. But people will believe what they want to believe.

    I'm sure there were many interesting evenings where fine nuances of disagreement about dialectical materialism caused vigorous debate in the Miliband household, and the 'young and enthusiastic' Ed was indeed not totally convinced when his father took him to the annual Marxism events of the Socialist Workers Party*.

    But, as I said, it was Ed Miliband, not the Daily Mail, who brought up the subject of his father. What on earth did he expect - that journalists would murmur, "Ah, yes, Miliband Snr, a very wise man?"

    * See here, if you can stand the turgidity of the prose:

    http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=700

    All politicians talk about their families. A balanced report - such as the ones you profess to be so keen on when criticising coverage of Tories - would have noted Ed's explicit rejection of his father's beliefs, as well as his father's sadness at that rejection. It would also have noted Ralph's rejection of Stalinism and of violent revolution. But as we both know, the Mail was not interested in providing a balanced overview. It wanted to get Ed. That was always going to happen. At least Ed has stood up for himself. Good on him.

    I wish we had the 'like' buttons back for this comment.
  • Options

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.

    If Ed had ever said that his father had shaped his thoughts as a potential PM - instead of saying on frequent occasions that he actually rejected his father's beliefs (something which his father acknowledged) - then you might have a point.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2013

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.

    I never paid a huge amount of attention to his references until last week = until then I thought it was just PR sympathy 'my dad was a Jew escaping the Nazis' stuff - now I find myself looking at his father's influence in a different light.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    Mr. Charles, not my period (far too modern) but isn't the poking of Edward II at least possibly true?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_II#Death
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.
    And while the world keeps on spinning it's 19 months to a GE and not a policy in sight.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.
    And while the world keeps on spinning it's 19 months to a GE and not a policy in sight.
    We have compulsory land grabbing if Labour don't approve of what the owner does with it, price controls... that's quite enough for me.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,109
    edited October 2013
    Charles said:


    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over

    Nope.
    While the manner of Edward II's death is debatable, dying at the wrong end of a poker was never alleged about Richard II.
    And Longshanks was Edward I.

    History lesson over

  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.
    And while the world keeps on spinning it's 19 months to a GE and not a policy in sight.
    Who has been posting for you while you've been asleep for the past week or so?

    One can't move for policies in British politics these days.
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    As a little meandering opinion, I would advise against looking to the Mail for any wisdom or logical insights. It is formulaic, and that seems to work for a coupla million readers. I wouldn't hazzard a sociological analysis, but I guess it's a tribal identity sort of thing. I recall that some time back the Mail on Sunday even printed on perfumed paper---I could smell it from ten feet in the corner shop. Apart from (attempts at) character assassination it also plays upon cancer fears and hopes:

    http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.

    I never paid a huge amount of attention to his references until last week = until then I thought it was just PR sympathy 'my dad was a Jew escaping the Nazis' stuff - now I find myself looking at his father's influence in a different light.
    The usual passive-aggressive drivel from you.
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    I saw the play Edward II at the National a few nights ago. I think the bloke sitting next to me with his wife was hoping they would hurry up and just get on with it.

    Mr. Charles, not my period (far too modern) but isn't the poking of Edward II at least possibly true?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_II#Death

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    another great tweet from Rik Young One:

    Owen Jones‏@OwenJones846m
    Big shout out of solidarity to @NUTonline and @NASUWT teachers on strike, fighting for our education and our kids' futures #teacherROAR

    BBC headline - Teachers strike over pay and pensions

    I'm sure our kids are very worried about their teachers' pay and pensions.....

    Note that fighting for pay and pensions is not inconsistent with teachers fight for their own (personal) kids' futures...
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Toms said:

    As a little meandering opinion, I would advise against looking to the Mail for any wisdom or logical insights. It is formulaic, and that seems to work for a coupla million readers. I wouldn't hazzard a sociological analysis, but I guess it's a tribal identity sort of thing. I recall that some time back the Mail on Sunday even printed on perfumed paper---I could smell it from ten feet in the corner shop. Apart from (attempts at) character assassination it also plays upon cancer fears and hopes:

    http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/

    More Labour voters read the Mail than buy the Guardian.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    taffys said:

    ''Credit to Clegg, Cam, TSE and other sensible Tories for their gentlemanly responses. Some things transcend politics.''

    Does this mean you're going to stop talking about buffonish etonians, chinless fops, out of touch trust fundies, upper class twits etc?

    As I said to Comrade Plato the other day - to a wall of silence - show me where I have done so or STFU.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,974
    Financier said:

    malcolmg said:

    Financier said:

    Neil said:

    Polruan said:

    Neil said:

    Financier said:

    When he has nationalised that, what next is on his agenda for nationalisation? Is he wanting to turn the clock back to the late 1940s? These are all valid questions.

    I bet you a million pounds the answer is no.
    Not a bad bet... if you lost, presumably the million pounds would be confiscated in any case.
    The only risk is that the stakes are too low for Financier to bother with.
    Neil, presume you have not played poker with people who may get a bit upset when you are "called" and having a losing hand are unable to support your bets due to insufficient resources - cash. Best to stick with Tim's £50 at evens.

    Actually I agree with your thought, but am not sure how far along the Nationalisation route EdM would go, having got one under his belt - so-to-speak. If something works once it is very tempting to follow the same path and McLuskey would be right behind him.


    LOL, what bollocks, you sound more like Billy Liar every day. Presume you have a few down the back of the couch.
    No, only losers would think of looking down the back of the couch, chair, settee or whatever. Is that what the SNP does when it is a bit short of funds?

    Unlike you they live in the real world and actually have money in the bank
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Perhaps it's something to do with the other formulas? Cancer etc? Just thinking about it makes my brain hurt a little, and I am very tenacious.
    Plato said:

    Toms said:

    As a little meandering opinion, I would advise against looking to the Mail for any wisdom or logical insights. It is formulaic, and that seems to work for a coupla million readers. I wouldn't hazzard a sociological analysis, but I guess it's a tribal identity sort of thing. I recall that some time back the Mail on Sunday even printed on perfumed paper---I could smell it from ten feet in the corner shop. Apart from (attempts at) character assassination it also plays upon cancer fears and hopes:

    http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/

    More Labour voters read the Mail than buy the Guardian.
  • Options
    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.

    I never paid a huge amount of attention to his references until last week = until then I thought it was just PR sympathy 'my dad was a Jew escaping the Nazis' stuff - now I find myself looking at his father's influence in a different light.

    Cripes. You now think Ed may be a revolutionary socialist because he has promised a 20-month price freeze on energy bills. Such an idea, of course, is to be found in the opening chapter of Das Kapital. But what does that make the current government, given it also controls prices in areas such as water supply, while also exercising control over land ownership? It seems that we live in a far-left communist state and do not even realise it! I blame the BBC.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.
    And while the world keeps on spinning it's 19 months to a GE and not a policy in sight.
    Who has been posting for you while you've been asleep for the past week or so?

    One can't move for policies in British politics these days.
    you confuse gimmicks with policies. There hasn't been anything significant said in the conferences which will affect real money; a hundred odd quid to voters ( energy freeze, marriage break ) is simply mood music. The whole political debate at present is around offering sweeties to voters rather than tackling any substantive issues.

  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited October 2013
    Toms said:

    As a little meandering opinion, I would advise against looking to the Mail for any wisdom or logical insights. It is formulaic, and that seems to work for a coupla million readers. I wouldn't hazzard a sociological analysis, but I guess it's a tribal identity sort of thing. I recall that some time back the Mail on Sunday even printed on perfumed paper---I could smell it from ten feet in the corner shop. Apart from (attempts at) character assassination it also plays upon cancer fears and hopes:

    http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/

    A tactic common the world over in tabloids to be fair but the Mail and Dacre do take it to hilarious new 'heights' very frequently. It's like Desmond's Diana OCD.



  • Options

    Mr. Eagles, I didn't see the speech. Was it a positive or negative reference?

    Negative, talking about Ed's economic policies.

    He has form on this, from February

    “This is possibly the most deluded measure to come from Europe since Diocletian tried to fix the price of groceries across the Roman Empire,” Mr Johnson said.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9901336/Classic-Boris-Johnson-as-he-condemns-EU-limit-on-bank-bonuses.html
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''As I said to Comrade Plato the other day - to a wall of silence - show me where I have done so or STFU/''

    Fair enough, I can;t find any. But then again I can't find any posts of you remonstrating with tim for making derogatory references to Cameron's background on countless occasions.

  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    A balanced report - such as the ones you profess to be so keen on when criticising coverage of Tories - would have noted Ed's explicit rejection of his father's beliefs, as well as his father's sadness at that rejection. It would also have noted Ralph's rejection of Stalinism and of violent revolution.

    Have you actually read the article?

    Though they were friends, he never agreed with his fellow Marxist Eric Hobsbawm over the latter's refusal to condemn Stalinism's 30 million dead, or the brutal Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956,

    Of course it's not intended to be a 'balanced' account, any more than an article by George Monbiot or Polly Toynbee is. It's a polemic - this is the Mail, after all, the alter ego of the Guardian.
    Well put - - And what baffles me is why a paper regularly derided as dross by some is now being taken so seriously.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2013


    Osborne said he'd try to run a surplus post GE2015 - that sounds like a policy to me.
  • Options
    Plato said:

    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If you repeatedly use your father as an identifier, then you're bringing him into the game.

    That Ralph Miliband happened to be a very prominent Marxist buried a few feet from Karl Marx himself does tend to beg questions when his own son talks about him a lot.
    And while the world keeps on spinning it's 19 months to a GE and not a policy in sight.
    We have compulsory land grabbing if Labour don't approve of what the owner does with it, price controls... that's quite enough for me.

    Land can already be grabbed in this country and often is. Google compulsory purchase orders.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:


    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over

    Nope.
    While the manner of Edward II's death is debatable, dying at the wrong end of a poker was never alleged about Richard II.
    And Longshanks was Edward I.

    History lesson over

    How did Richard II die - believe it was in Pontefract or nearby (maybe Doncaster ;-) ) for many of the same reasons as Edward II.

    I know Longshanks was Edward I - TSE referred to Longshank's son (ie E2)
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Funny that

    Eric Pickles: By publishing every transaction online my department has cut spending on departmental credit card by 75%. #Transparency #cpc13
  • Options
    Charles said:

    Charles said:


    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over

    Nope.
    While the manner of Edward II's death is debatable, dying at the wrong end of a poker was never alleged about Richard II.
    And Longshanks was Edward I.

    History lesson over

    How did Richard II die - believe it was in Pontefract or nearby (maybe Doncaster ;-) ) for many of the same reasons as Edward II.

    I know Longshanks was Edward I - TSE referred to Longshank's son (ie E2)
    It's likely they both died of starvation.
    Amazing how we prefer stories of unnatural torment to the banality of neglect and aimless brutality.
  • Options
    @Charles, I got my Longshanks mixed up, I was thinking about Malleus Scotorum Longshanks, and Mr Divvie pointed out my error.

    If only I were doing nighthawks tonight, I'd have combined it with a history lesson on the Longshanks.

    On topic, one of my colleagues has pointed out, will the Mail be doing a piece on The Queen's Uncle who had erm sympathetic views on Herr Hitler and would have been installed as King if the Nazis had invaded the UK?
  • Options
    Perhaps it was because Ed Miliband himself said "Yes I am bringing back socialism", just last week.

    Or is he a liar?



    Ed did not propose bringing back anything last week, as far as I can tell. We already have price controls in many areas in this country - see water, see transport, for example - and we already have compulsory purchase orders. If Ed thinks that a slight extension of both existing regimes is "bringing back socialism" then I would strongly argue that he is wrong, not lying.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2013
    Rod Liddle adds his 2p

    "It doesn’t matter how much Ed Miliband’s lip quivers, his dad was, as The Daily Mail suggested, a far left wing intellectual whose gratitude to the country which took him in extended only to wishing it might be dismantled, root and branch. That Ralph Miliband was also an urbane north London émigré does not alter, either, the fact that he was, like so many academics, seduced by Marxism. Our universities are virtually the only places in the civilised world where this absurd and discredited creed continues to prosper; much of it today is simply attitudinalising nonsense; when Miliband began his work, under the tutelage of the horrible Harold Laski, it was a potent threat to our way of life.

    Some of Geoffrey Levy’s hatchet job on Ed’s dad was thin gruel: I do not blame the bloke for moaning about how nationalistic the Brits were when he first arrived. We probably were. And it is true that while he was a Marxist, he resisted the siren call of the vile CPGB, which is to his credit. I’m sure he was also a lovely dad and held dinner parties every bit as agreeable as those now hosted by his son. But his political beliefs, and springing from those his dislike of Great Britain, suggests to me that Levy’s piece was largely justified and it will be interesting to see if Ed disowns the revolutionary element of his dad’s socialism with as much vehemence as he has defended his reputation. www.blogs.spectator.co.uk/rod-liddle/2013/10/ralph-miliband-hatred-of-britain-sprung-from-his-marxist-beliefs/
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Plato said:

    Plato said:

    If EdMs policies are shaped by his father, then we need to know about them. After all, we will be voting for a new government in two years, and he could conceivably be PM after that?

    Indeed.

    Cameron's parents, and the choices they made for their children have always been seen as 'fair game' by many.

    Why should it be any different for Miliband?

    Well quite.

    - As for focusing on Miliband senior, perhaps if Ed had not prattled on about how strong an influence he was and how he shaped the thoughts of a potential PM, then none of this would have kicked off. Ed should have seen this coming.
    As has been pointed out elsewhere - this is entirely self-inflicted. If
    Who has been posting for you while you've been asleep for the past week or so?

    One can't move for policies in British politics these days.
    you confuse gimmicks with policies. There hasn't been anything significant said in the conferences which will affect real money; a hundred odd quid to voters ( energy freeze, marriage break ) is simply mood music. The whole political debate at present is around offering sweeties to voters rather than tackling any substantive issues.

    Osborne said he'd try to run a surplus post GE2015 - that sounds like a policy to me.
    I'll believe it when I see it, Osborne has said lots of things, the reality is quite different.

    So far the only thing edging towards a policy is Eds Housing statement which is unfunded, has no clarity on where they are going to be built and an appalling track record from 1997 and the Tories pushing HS2 which is potentially funded but pushed into a back date which means they don't have to worry too much. At the risk of starting a kipper fest I'll give a half credit to the Tory EU referendum pledge, but in truth until you know what's in it it could mean anything.
  • Options
    "That Ralph Miliband was also an urbane north London émigré"

    Great stuff from Rod!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,984
    Mr. Eagles, fair enough.

    Boris (and other blues) may wish to consider that, even worse than inflation, was the addiction to regicide that gripped Rome's soldiers.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    SeanT said:

    ON topic, I doubt this spat will either hurt or harm Labour or Miliband - or the Daily Mail.

    Each has behaved exactly as we expect: the Mail has vehemently put the boot in, as per, the Left has responded with shrill cries of horror, as per.

    What it does reveal is that Miliband's Let's Go Back to Seventies Socialism speech has focussed the minds of those on the Right, on who is the real enemy. I therefore predict we will see fewer rightwing press attacks on Cameron and Co.

    The Brogan article is spot on - since EdM's speech there's been a noticeable small shift on the Right in the DT and elsewhere that they need to stick together to prevent EdM getting in - he's now the common enemy not some joke Wallace figure. When Cameron talked about *grown-up* politics I thought of this.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,150
    On topic, I thought that was an excellent piece by Ed Miliband, but will he be doing a regular column? I want to know what he thinks about Kim Kardshian.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Perhaps it was because Ed Miliband himself said "Yes I am bringing back socialism", just last week.

    Or is he a liar?

    Ed did not propose bringing back anything last week, as far as I can tell. We already have price controls in many areas in this country - see water, see transport, for example - and we already have compulsory purchase orders. If Ed thinks that a slight extension of both existing regimes is "bringing back socialism" then I would strongly argue that he is wrong, not lying.

    So Ed's either lying or an idiot. Either way he's your leader. Well done.



    As I have posted on here many times, he does not impress me as a leader. Declaring a slight extension of price controls and compulsory orders to be "bringing back socialism" - if that is what he did (I was away so don't know) - merely serves to reinforce my views.

  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    According to a little research I've done, Ralph Miliband served on the HMS Royal Arthur and the HMS Valorous during his time in the Royal Navy.

    The HMS Royal Arthur was scrapped in 1921. I presume therefore that he served AT HMS Royal Arthur, a naval training centre near Skegness.

    The HMS Valorous was mainly used for convoy defense in the North Sea, and did not take part in the Normandy landings.

    I believe Ed was being rather economical with the truth...

  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    SeanT said:

    ON topic, I doubt this spat will either hurt or harm Labour or Miliband - or the Daily Mail.

    Each has behaved exactly as we expect: the Mail has vehemently put the boot in, as per, the Left has responded with shrill cries of horror, as per.

    What it does reveal is that Miliband's Let's Go Back to Seventies Socialism speech has focussed the minds of those on the Right, on who is the real enemy. I therefore predict we will see fewer rightwing press attacks on Cameron and Co.

    Yup the effect will be to make the ideologues on left and right go off to their comfort zones and dig their trenches deeper. The fun will be how people in the middle will react. Populist Ed wants to bribe them with someone else's money and Captain sensible Dave wants to tell them it'll only come and bite them on the arse.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I wish he'd stop digging

    PoliticsHome @politicshome
    .@Ed_Miliband: "This is not about regulation, this about right and wrong, and the way we conduct political debate in this country."
  • Options

    On topic, I thought that was an excellent piece by Ed Miliband, but will he be doing a regular column? I want to know what he thinks about Kim Kardshian.

    This is NSFW, but Kim Kardshian reminding us of how she became famous

    http://www.lolthis.com/img/kim-kardashian-reminding-us-why-she-is-famous-35681
  • Options
    PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    SeanT said:

    ON topic, I doubt this spat will either hurt or harm Labour or Miliband - or the Daily Mail.

    Each has behaved exactly as we expect: the Mail has vehemently put the boot in, as per, the Left has responded with shrill cries of horror, as per.

    What it does reveal is that Miliband's Let's Go Back to Seventies Socialism speech has focussed the minds of those on the Right, on who is the real enemy. I therefore predict we will see fewer rightwing press attacks on Cameron and Co.

    Yup the effect will be to make the ideologues on left and right go off to their comfort zones and dig their trenches deeper. The fun will be how people in the middle will react. Populist Ed wants to bribe them with someone else's money and Captain sensible Dave wants to tell them it'll only come and bite them on the arse*.
    *whilst bribing them to get married (with someone else's money)
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2013
    "This is not about regulation, this about right and wrong, and the way we conduct political debate in this country."

    Has Ed Miliband never referred to tory toffs? Chinless wonders?
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:


    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over

    Nope.
    While the manner of Edward II's death is debatable, dying at the wrong end of a poker was never alleged about Richard II.
    And Longshanks was Edward I.

    History lesson over

    How did Richard II die - believe it was in Pontefract or nearby (maybe Doncaster ;-) ) for many of the same reasons as Edward II.

    I know Longshanks was Edward I - TSE referred to Longshank's son (ie E2)
    It's likely they both died of starvation.
    Amazing how we prefer stories of unnatural torment to the banality of neglect and aimless brutality.
    Hardly amazing. Speaking as a thriller writer I'd get short shrift from my editors if I wrote nine chapters where someone slowly starved to death. But a red hot poker up the Bakerloo line?! Tescos would pile it high.

    Drama, innit.
    Do you think a book which featured a character dying of ennui following discussions of electoral voting systems would be a best seller?
  • Options
    PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    On topic, I thought that was an excellent piece by Ed Miliband, but will he be doing a regular column? I want to know what he thinks about Kim Kardshian.

    I don't think we could really form any views on Kim Kardashian without details of Robert Kardashian's writings from around the age of 17.
  • Options
    FernandoFernando Posts: 145
    Son defends father's reputation. Shock, horror. That is likely to be the only reaction to this spat.
    That his dad eschewed Parliamentary means to establish socialism in favour f direct action by the workforce is of historical interest, but hardly relevant to his son's views which appear to be the complete opposite. Those of us who were students in the 1960s remember his father as a writer of rather turgid books which proved to have no long-term importance: the fate of most Marxist writers after Marx himself.
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    taffys said:

    "This is not about regulation, this about right and wrong, and the way we conduct political debate in this country."

    Can we find an Ed Miliband reference to tory toffs? Chinless wonders?

    How about "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" or "swivel-eyed loons"?

    ;^ )
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    There's a theory that Edward II was not in fact killed in 1327 but was allowed to live out the rest of his life in exile in Italy. It's not completely ridiculous on the evidence as we have it.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:


    It was Richard II not Longshanks (or Edward II) who became (allegedly) well acquiatined with a poker.

    History lesson over

    Nope.
    While the manner of Edward II's death is debatable, dying at the wrong end of a poker was never alleged about Richard II.
    And Longshanks was Edward I.

    History lesson over

    How did Richard II die - believe it was in Pontefract or nearby (maybe Doncaster ;-) ) for many of the same reasons as Edward II.

    I know Longshanks was Edward I - TSE referred to Longshank's son (ie E2)
    It's likely they both died of starvation.
    Amazing how we prefer stories of unnatural torment to the banality of neglect and aimless brutality.
    Hardly aimless! Bolingbroke had very good reasons for wanting Dicky-two dead; Froissart was just positioning himself. Edward II I know less about, but if he was as bad a king as I understand then a clean succession would have been helpful
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,109
    edited October 2013
    SeanT said:


    Hardly amazing. Speaking as a thriller writer I'd get short shrift from my editors if I wrote nine chapters where someone slowly starved to death. But a red hot poker up the Bakerloo line?! Tescos would pile it high.

    Drama, innit.

    Yeah, I'm sure most of us have a taste for the lurid but this being history and all, fact is usually supposed to trump drama.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    taffys said:

    "This is not about regulation, this about right and wrong, and the way we conduct political debate in this country."

    Has Ed Miliband never referred to tory toffs? Chinless wonders?

    Well indeedee.

    I really do wish EdM would just shut up - he's making it worse for himself. The Mail has needled him to perfection.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Perhaps it was because Ed Miliband himself said "Yes I am bringing back socialism", just last week.

    Or is he a liar?

    Ed did not propose bringing back anything last week, as far as I can tell. We already have price controls in many areas in this country - see water, see transport, for example - and we already have compulsory purchase orders. If Ed thinks that a slight extension of both existing regimes is "bringing back socialism" then I would strongly argue that he is wrong, not lying.

    So Ed's either lying or an idiot. Either way he's your leader. Well done.

    As I have posted on here many times, he does not impress me as a leader. Declaring a slight extension of price controls and compulsory orders to be "bringing back socialism" - if that is what he did (I was away so don't know) - merely serves to reinforce my views.

    Yes, it's what he did.

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/exclusive-the-moment-ed-miliband-said-hell-bring-socialism-back-to-downing-street/

    FWIW I possibly have slightly more respect for Ed than you. He is at least authentic. I believe he is genuinely a socialist, and he genuinely wants a socialist country, and under him we would see an attempt at the most leftwing government in Britain since the 1970s.

    I say "attempt", because I am sure he would fail. But he would try, and it would be bad for Britain. Probably very bad.



    I doubt that we would see a Barber boom under Ed, or a return to trade union mass membership. The days of the Heath government are long gone.

    Ed has some interesting ideas - but they are no more than that. He would be best off behind the scenes writing pamphlets for others to look over and think about. His refusal to kow-tow to a Daily Mail hatchet job has raised him in my estimation, but he will never convince as a leader.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Err

    AndrewSparrow @AndrewSparrow
    Maria Miller announces £10m anniversaries fund - theguardian.com/politics/2013/… - Will fund commemorations inc Agincourt and Beatrix Potter #cpc13
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,109
    edited October 2013
    Charles said:


    Hardly aimless! Bolingbroke had very good reasons for wanting Dicky-two dead; Froissart was just positioning himself. Edward II I know less about, but if he was as bad a king as I understand then a clean succession would have been helpful

    I meant aimless in the sense that I'm sure far, far more prisoners in durance vile were casually beaten to death than suffered exotic invasions of their orifices.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Perhaps it was because Ed Miliband himself said "Yes I am bringing back socialism", just last week.

    Or is he a liar?

    Ed did not propose bringing back anything last week, as far as I can tell. We already have price controls in many areas in this country - see water, see transport, for example - and we already have compulsory purchase orders. If Ed thinks that a slight extension of both existing regimes is "bringing back socialism" then I would strongly argue that he is wrong, not lying.

    So Ed's either lying or an idiot. Either way he's your leader. Well done.

    As I have posted on here many times, he does not impress me as a leader. Declaring a slight extension of price controls and compulsory orders to be "bringing back socialism" - if that is what he did (I was away so don't know) - merely serves to reinforce my views.

    Yes, it's what he did.

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/exclusive-the-moment-ed-miliband-said-hell-bring-socialism-back-to-downing-street/

    FWIW I possibly have slightly more respect for Ed than you. He is at least authentic. I believe he is genuinely a socialist, and he genuinely wants a socialist country, and under him we would see an attempt at the most leftwing government in Britain since the 1970s.

    I say "attempt", because I am sure he would fail. But he would try, and it would be bad for Britain. Probably very bad.

    I doubt that we would see a Barber boom under Ed, or a return to trade union mass membership. The days of the Heath government are long gone.

    Ed has some interesting ideas - but they are no more than that. He would be best off behind the scenes writing pamphlets for others to look over and think about. His refusal to kow-tow to a Daily Mail hatchet job has raised him in my estimation, but he will never convince as a leader.



    Socialism - answering 21st century problems with 19th century ideas.

    should work well then.
  • Options
    Plato said:

    Err

    AndrewSparrow @AndrewSparrow
    Maria Miller announces £10m anniversaries fund - theguardian.com/politics/2013/… - Will fund commemorations inc Agincourt and Beatrix Potter #cpc13

    Well it is the 600th anniversary of The Battle of Agincourt in a couple of years time.

    The most fitting tribute they could do to mark this anniversary is to rename London St Pancras train station as London Agincourt.

    One for PB historians, did the rude v sign originate at the Battle of Agincourt?
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    How about "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" or "swivel-eyed loons"?


    Fair enough Mick but only Mili is wailing.

    Cameron's received an infinity of brickbats for being a product of a background he couldn't have chosen and doesn't seem to complain.

    I've even joined in myself by kicking him for not trusting people from ordinary backgrounds.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Plato said:

    OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".

    just odd, he's escalating something most people would never have read and now will.
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited October 2013

    SeanT said:

    Perhaps it was because Ed Miliband himself said "Yes I am bringing back socialism", just last week.

    Or is he a liar?

    Ed did not propose bringing back anything last week, as far as I can tell. We already have price controls in many areas in this country - see water, see transport, for example - and we already have compulsory purchase orders. If Ed thinks that a slight extension of both existing regimes is "bringing back socialism" then I would strongly argue that he is wrong, not lying.

    So Ed's either lying or an idiot. Either way he's your leader. Well done.



    As I have posted on here many times, he does not impress me as a leader. Declaring a slight extension of price controls and compulsory orders to be "bringing back socialism"
    Next thing you know he'll be subsidising mortgages with taxpayers money and trying to force energy companies not merely to freeze prices but to lower them, like this rabid socialist.
    Millions to see energy bills fall after David Cameron promises tariff reform

    Millions of households will see a fall in their gas and electricity bills after David Cameron said he will force energy companies to give every customer the cheapest possible deal.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/9616124/Millions-to-see-energy-bills-fall-after-David-Cameron-promises-tariff-reform.html
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    ''OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?''

    Are backgrounds suddenly off limits?

    That smoke over Islington...is it from the mass bonfires of Bullingdom club photographs?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    taffys said:

    ''OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?''

    Are backgrounds suddenly off limits?

    That smoke over Islington...is it from the mass bonfires of Bullingdom club photographs?

    Just don't ask David Lammy...
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,336
    Plato said:

    Stace @stackee
    Feel sorry for all my Labour comrades who are now hurriedly throwing away their breadmakers in a bid to look more in-touch & on message.

    OK, I think we're all clear on each other's attitudes to the Mail's article: Richard N thinks it an important indicator of shifting opinion, SeanT is uncharacteristically on the fence, most of the rest of us think it sucks and appreciate Cameron for saying so.

    Moving on, a genuine question - what is a breadmaker? Do you stuff some gadget with sticky dough (euuu) and then put it in the oven and wait two hours, or something? How does anyone find the time?

  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    The best rated comments after the Mail article are supportive of Ed and critical of the paper.
    tim said:

    Plato said:

    OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".

    just odd, he's escalating something most people would never have read and now will.
    Maybe thats the point.
    The Mail were always going to go after Miliband, he's getting his retaliation in early on an issue they've clearly called badly wrong.

    tim said:

    Plato said:

    OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".

    just odd, he's escalating something most people would never have read and now will.
    Maybe thats the point.
    The Mail were always going to go after Miliband, he's getting his retaliation in early on an issue they've clearly called badly wrong.

  • Options
    Plato said:

    OMG - its getting worse, who is advising him?

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".

    Good on him. Many more people will see Ed defending his father, and incidentally explaining his own beliefs, than will read the Mail. And all during the Tory party conference. This will do him no harm at all among those whose votes he has a chance of winning.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited October 2013
    Michael Deacon @MichaelPDeacon
    John Pienaar: "You still haven't said you're not going to come back [as an MP in 2015]. Are you going to fudge that again?" Boris: "Yes"

    Michael Deacon @MichaelPDeacon
    Boris: "My leadership chances are about as good as my chances of being reincarnated as a baked bean. Which are probably quite high actually"
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Plato

    'Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    So @Ed_Miliband is escalating his row with Daily Mail by taking to the TV studios: "I’m speaking out as a son. I was appalled. It’s a lie".

    It's a shame that 'as a son' wasn't appalled when McBride was doing the same stuff.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    tim said:

    taffys said:

    How about "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" or "swivel-eyed loons"?


    Fair enough Mick but only Mili is wailing.

    Cameron's received an infinity of brickbats for being a product of a background he couldn't have chosen and doesn't seem to complain.

    I've even joined in myself by kicking him for not trusting people from ordinary backgrounds.

    Big difference between coming from a background and surrounding yourself with people specifically because they are from the same background.

    Never mind, he's got a breadmaker so can't be expected to know the price of bread.
    Bit odd that one, most people who make their own bread or brew there own beer talk about nothing other than how much a pint is in the pub or a loaf is in the shops.


    chortle.

    Ed and his brother CHOSE to go to Oxford, presumably they though they were going to meet children of bricklayers and roadsweepers ? Or are they just as attracted to the elite institutes they supposedly dislike ?
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    'Are backgrounds suddenly off limits?'

    Clearly, when they make uncomfortable reading for millionaire politicians in their Dartmouth Park bubbles.

    Meanwhile, lets enjoy the spectacle of the various Leftwing mouthpieces alienating anyone who owns a breadmaker.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704

    Plato said:

    Stace @stackee
    Feel sorry for all my Labour comrades who are now hurriedly throwing away their breadmakers in a bid to look more in-touch & on message.

    OK, I think we're all clear on each other's attitudes to the Mail's article: Richard N thinks it an important indicator of shifting opinion, SeanT is uncharacteristically on the fence, most of the rest of us think it sucks and appreciate Cameron for saying so.

    Moving on, a genuine question - what is a breadmaker? Do you stuff some gadget with sticky dough (euuu) and then put it in the oven and wait two hours, or something? How does anyone find the time?

    Really Nick? You don't know how a breadmaker works? You just lump in the flour, yeast and water (with some olive oil) and that's it.

    Takes about a minute, let the machine do the rest, and you have fresh ready made bread.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Plato said:

    Stace @stackee
    Feel sorry for all my Labour comrades who are now hurriedly throwing away their breadmakers in a bid to look more in-touch & on message.

    OK, I think we're all clear on each other's attitudes to the Mail's article: Richard N thinks it an important indicator of shifting opinion, SeanT is uncharacteristically on the fence, most of the rest of us think it sucks and appreciate Cameron for saying so.

    Moving on, a genuine question - what is a breadmaker? Do you stuff some gadget with sticky dough (euuu) and then put it in the oven and wait two hours, or something? How does anyone find the time?

    Breadmakers are fun and easy. You just pour the ingredients in, switch them on and off they go. They do the baking too.

    In the meantime, you can go and do something important, like post on pb.
  • Options
    Whatever Miliband senior's views, we have free speech in this country and he was entitled to express those views. Also there is no compulsion that the views of fathers are inherited by the sons. So it is a storm in a tea cup.

    The Daily Mail was a supporter of Hitler, Mussolini and Mosely in the 1930s since thier proprietor Lord Rothermere was friendly with them and probably anti semitic.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754

    Plato said:

    Stace @stackee
    Feel sorry for all my Labour comrades who are now hurriedly throwing away their breadmakers in a bid to look more in-touch & on message.

    OK, I think we're all clear on each other's attitudes to the Mail's article: Richard N thinks it an important indicator of shifting opinion, SeanT is uncharacteristically on the fence, most of the rest of us think it sucks and appreciate Cameron for saying so.

    Moving on, a genuine question - what is a breadmaker? Do you stuff some gadget with sticky dough (euuu) and then put it in the oven and wait two hours, or something? How does anyone find the time?

    You can buy a basic breadmaker for about £40 -50. You simply plonk in flour, yeast, water and maybe some oil or milk powder and switch it on. Most people will put it on a timer and have hot fresh bread in the morning. You'll get a variety of recipes depending on what you want to make. Lots of people have them.
  • Options

    'Are backgrounds suddenly off limits?'

    Clearly, when they make uncomfortable reading for millionaire politicians in their Dartmouth Park bubbles.

    Meanwhile, lets enjoy the spectacle of the various Leftwing mouthpieces alienating anyone who owns a breadmaker.

    Losing the breadmaker demographic would surely be a disaster.

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Ed just trying to distract attention with the Con Conference with his pathetic whining and playing the victim card.

    The Normandy landing fibs look like a bit of an error though.

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    But ice cream makers are even more fun than breadmakers.
This discussion has been closed.