LuckyGuy1983 As John Lennon said 'Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too...Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man' The Leftwing Gospel in one
And remind me, how big was Lennon's estate when he died?
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
The lesson to be learned from the news is that followers of the PC religion are completely dishonest whenever any subject contradicts PC.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
Well depends on what Dave can get in his renegotiations.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
You're still so far from what I actually said, I'm still not going to bother. I didn't even mention race!
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
You're still so far from what I actually said, I'm still not going to bother. I didn't even mention race!
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
the host nation based upon their own cg that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
Just as Cameron certainly wasn't what many Conservatives were expecting. But until UKIP supporters actually start leaving the party in the numbers that natural Conservatives have deserted Cameron I don't think Carswell will be worrying too much.
Not quite, the same applies to Boris as it does to Carswell.
Boris as Tory leader brings back Kippers, but his views, on immigration, would be anathema to most Kippers.
Which kind of goes to show that your claims about Kippers and immigration is rather ill founded doesn't it? After all, if immigration was the be all and end all og Kipper voting then they wouldn't touch Boris with a barge pole
Like I said logical thinking does not appear to be your strong point this evening.
No, the point is, the general public at large, aren't always knowledgeable about a politician's policies.
But the public in clacton know all about him and are backing him again just under another party banner aren't they?
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
Well depends on what Dave can get in his renegotiations.
Well Doug's already heard what he's going for... And he fucked off!!
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
You're still so far from what I actually said, I'm still not going to bother. I didn't even mention race!
"imply people were racist"
How is that not about race?
I haven't the words. Someone help the guy out here!
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
Well depends on what Dave can get in his renegotiations.
Nothing. At least nothing binding that won't be struck down by the ECJ at the earliest opportunity.
@Stereotomy You are missing the important point, all these low skilled immigrants have taken over the jobs of our hard working pedophiles and pimps. Can't you read?
The Americans stereotype people much more strongly than we do. Indian women are burnt to death in parafin fires - the BBC runs a program on "what is there about English society and race discrimination that make Indian women commit suicide in such a tragic way?" - the Onion runs an advice column to Indian men suggesting they make sure the house insurance is up to date before setting their wives on fire in case she runs indoors.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
Discomfort is a feeling. Are you trying to legislate what people may or may not feel?
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Really?
Like French working in Geneva, Germans working in Zurich and Italians working in Brig?
A bit like Scots, Irish and Welsh working in England.
Free movement of people between states with similar populations may be desirable (yes, I've read Heidi), but between complete dissimilar countries? I don't think so.
Ignoring all the other non pemanent immigrants - why then does Switzerland have 224,000 permanent Portugese immigrants, only just behind Italians and Germans. 109,000 Serbians? 70,000 Albanians. Looking at the population as a whole 37% of the Swiss popn. was non Swiss. The popn, of geneva ia 62% non Swiss.
The Swiss economy could not function without foreign workers - 'Mainly manual workers and helpers are needed, for example in the building trade and the hotel business. '
They don't come from 'similar countries' to wait on table and shovel cement.
Oh and ... ''In 2002 a new law came into force allowing the free movement of workers between Switzerland and the old members of the European Union and European Free Trade Area. An initial report on the consequences of this law, issued in 2005, showed that - contrary to some initial fears - it had had little impact on either employment figures or on wages.'' http://www.swissworld.org/en/economy/workers_and_jobs/foreign_workers/
This is the sort of thing Carswell approves of. I imagine he is not so bigoted like Farage about people on the tube.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
Discomfort is a feeling. Are you trying to legislate what people may or may not feel?
No, of course not! Why are we bringing legislation into it? I certainly wouldn't suggest legislating what you feel... but I reserve the right to judge you on it
explains all you need to know to understand about the origin of the grooming gangs although the subsequent scale of the problem is the responsibility of the PC religion - especially the high priests of the BBC
That's for sure - Pandora's box has been well and truly opened and the supporters of Independence, should they be defeated this time will continue to demand future referenda until they ultimately achieve their objective. In many respects therefore it might be better for all concerned if the Yes vote prevails in a couple of weeks' time.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
An opinion poll after Farage made his comments showed supporters of all parties would rather live next door to Germans than Romanians... So is the whole country racist?
That's for sure - Pandora's box has been well and truly opened and the supporters of Independence, should they be defeated this time will continue to demand future referenda until they ultimately achieve their objective. In many respects therefore it might be better for all concerned if the Yes vote prevails in a couple of weeks' time.
I've heard this quite a lot, but I'm not sure I buy it. What's the precedent for a country trying the same referendum over and over until they get a particular answer? From what I've seen, usually whichever way the vote goes, it does seem to do a good job of putting the issue to bed for quite a while.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
I think it's a country mile off the mark, more importantly. "I would like Britain to be the way it used to be". Agree 53%, Disagree 33%. "The world is changing too fast". Agree 61%, Disagree 31%. Mori, December 2013.
There's a huge gap in the market for a real 'nostalgia party' - UKIP have a lot of those voters at the moment, but not all. I think Nigel has recognised that, with noises about renationalising some services from the bug outsourcers, and so on, as a nod to the 'nostalgic left' who need something more than they've had from UKIP so far.
Well good luck with that. I suppose the front bench would be made up with the Minister for the Victorian era, Minister for the Edwardian Era, Minister for the Forties, Minister For The Fifties, The Swinging Sixties Minister, The Seventies Minster etc etc although how you would put together a cohesive manifesto and policy portfolio (Nationalised Steam trains on Mondays, rationing on Wednesdays, dustbin strikes on Saturdays, horse drawn carriages only on Sundays perhaps?) would be something to behold I imagine
explains all you need to know to understand about the origin of the grooming gangs although the subsequent scale of the problem is the responsibility of the PC religion - especially the high priests of the BBC
ta ra
Thanks mr jones, your clues have revealed some very interesting findings
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
An opinion poll after Farage made his comments showed supporters of all parties would rather live next door to Germans than Romanians... So is the whole country racist?
Did they also say they'd feel concerned living next to Romanians? Because there's a world of difference
Carswell also believes in direct democracy... And the Swiss don't want all that immigration
"People's rebellion
But on 9 February this year, amid growing concern that the rate of immigration from EU countries was far higher than anyone had predicted, the Swiss voted in a nationwide referendum to reintroduce quotas, effectively abandoning its free movement agreement with the EU."
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
An opinion poll after Farage made his comments showed supporters of all parties would rather live next door to Germans than Romanians... So is the whole country racist?
Did they also say they'd feel concerned living next to Romanians? Because there's a world of difference
No but they made a distinction between Germans and Romanians, which was all Farage did
In the radio interview he was pilloried for saying there was a difference... Well everyone seems to think there is a difference or the polls would gave been the same for both countries
That's for sure - Pandora's box has been well and truly opened and the supporters of Independence, should they be defeated this time will continue to demand future referenda until they ultimately achieve their objective. In many respects therefore it might be better for all concerned if the Yes vote prevails in a couple of weeks' time.
I've heard this quite a lot, but I'm not sure I buy it. What's the precedent for a country trying the same referendum over and over until they get a particular answer? From what I've seen, usually whichever way the vote goes, it does seem to do a good job of putting the issue to bed for quite a while.
Denmark and Ireland spring to mind. Keep on voting until the "right" result is reached.
@Stereotomy If you look behind the comments from the Nats on here, you will notice a wide spectrum of red and blue. Both sides have a vision for an independent Scotland, unfortunately they are not the same.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
I think it's a country mile off the mark, more importantly. "I would like Britain to be the way it used to be". Agree 53%, Disagree 33%. "The world is changing too fast". Agree 61%, Disagree 31%. Mori, December 2013.
There's a huge gap in the market for a real 'nostalgia party' - UKIP have a lot of those voters at the moment, but not all. I think Nigel has recognised that, with noises about renationalising some services from the bug outsourcers, and so on, as a nod to the 'nostalgic left' who need something more than they've had from UKIP so far.
Well good luck with that. I suppose the front bench would be made up with the Minister for the Victorian era, Minister for the Edwardian Era, Minister for the Forties, Minister For The Fifties, The Swinging Sixties Minister, The Seventies Minster etc etc although how you would put together a cohesive manifesto and policy portfolio (Nationalised Steam trains on Mondays, rationing on Wednesdays, dustbin strikes on Saturdays, horse drawn carriages only on Sundays perhaps?) would be something to behold I imagine
Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
That's for sure - Pandora's box has been well and truly opened and the supporters of Independence, should they be defeated this time will continue to demand future referenda until they ultimately achieve their objective. In many respects therefore it might be better for all concerned if the Yes vote prevails in a couple of weeks' time.
I've heard this quite a lot, but I'm not sure I buy it. What's the precedent for a country trying the same referendum over and over until they get a particular answer? From what I've seen, usually whichever way the vote goes, it does seem to do a good job of putting the issue to bed for quite a while.
De Valera tried to get the Irish to change the voting system to FPTP twice in a decade...
Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
English is the best language in the world! Even the EU has English as one of its official languages!
So - could the whole EU join the Commonwealth, by virtue of it using English in an official capacity? Over the centuries only Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Lithuania haven't had some kind of British or English administration or presence on their present territory.
It would square the "should the UK be more attached to Commonwealth v. EU" circle wouldn't it?
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
An opinion poll after Farage made his comments showed supporters of all parties would rather live next door to Germans than Romanians... So is the whole country racist?
Did they also say they'd feel concerned living next to Romanians? Because there's a world of difference
No but they made a distinction between Germans and Romanians, which was all Farage did
In the radio interview he was pilloried for saying there was a difference... Well everyone seems to think there is a difference or the polls would gave been the same for both countries
This entire discussion shows how addicted the PC brigade are to playing the race card and assuming that it in some way earns argument won points. And, as a result, how their fascism of thought will ensure one thing only; the wholesale movement to the right of everyone who isn't a pathetic apologist for atrocity.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
...
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
Well depends on what Dave can get in his renegotiations.
Well Doug's already heard what he's going for... And he fucked off!!
No, he hasn't heard anything. Don't try to fool anyine with that line - crude and pathetically ignorant as it is. If you are anybody does not like the renegotiations then you can vote no. You might think with a poor set of negotiations you would get a better chance of a No. Interestingly we get the idea from Carswell that he wants to see success - not like you or Farage. But not being in the tory party any more he gets no influence. Wierd - so maybe he is in the right party.
Anyway why do we all bother. If Carswell and Farage have their way we will see a Europhile Labour govt.
Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
And parachuting in bye election candidates. Leaving the tories to do an open primary.
Oh - we have such things as local governemnt. We also have such devolved issues as elections for police commissioners. And we have 'free' schools. 'Talk' about decentralisation is easy of course. But who gives out the money and needs to see it is spent wisely. Who ultimately gets the rap and needs to ensure control?
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
...
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
Well depends on what Dave can get in his renegotiations.
Well Doug's already heard what he's going for... And he fucked off!!
No, he hasn't heard anything. Don't try to fool anyine with that line - crude and pathetically ignorant as it is. If you are anybody does not like the renegotiations then you can vote no. You might think with a poor set of negotiations you would get a better chance of a No. Interestingly we get the idea from Carswell that he wants to see success - not like you or Farage. But not being in the tory party any more he gets no influence. Wierd - so maybe he is in the right party.
Anyway why do we all bother. If Carswell and Farage have their way we will see a Europhile Labour govt.
You never mentioned Pakistanis there, you're slipping
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
Discomfort is a feeling. Are you trying to legislate what people may or may not feel?
No, of course not! Why are we bringing legislation into it? I certainly wouldn't suggest legislating what you feel... but I reserve the right to judge you on it
I tend to think people should be judged on how their feelings translate into behaviour. We can't help the way we feel.
Well Doug's already heard what he's going for... And he fucked off!!
No, he hasn't heard anything. Don't try to fool anyine with that line - crude and pathetically ignorant as it is. If you are anybody does not like the renegotiations then you can vote no. You might think with a poor set of negotiations you would get a better chance of a No. Interestingly we get the idea from Carswell that he wants to see success - not like you or Farage. But not being in the tory party any more he gets no influence. Wierd - so maybe he is in the right party.
Anyway why do we all bother. If Carswell and Farage have their way we will see a Europhile Labour govt.
From the BBC report on Carswell's defection
On Mr Cameron's pledge of an in/out EU referendum in 2017, after renegotiating powers back from Brussels, he said the prime minister's advisers had "made it clear that they're looking to cut a deal that gives them just enough to persuade enough voters to vote to stay in".
He added: "Once I realised that, my position in the Conservative Party became untenable."
After Denmark and Sweden rejected the euro they are still outside it. Quebec had a second referendum on independence from Canada after the first was rejected in 1980
Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
And parachuting in bye election candidates. Leaving the tories to do an open primary.
Oh - we have such things as local governemnt. We also have such devolved issues as elections for police commissioners. And we have 'free' schools. 'Talk' about decentralisation is easy of course. But who gives out the money and needs to see it is spent wisely. Who ultimately gets the rap and needs to ensure control?
Well given the UKIP candidate is the sitting MP there is no need for a parachute and I believe the local Tory party have dismissed the idea of an open primary because they cannot afford it.
And its one thing to waste all that money on the paraphenalia of localism when all the power is held by the Minister of Communities, the Home Secretary & the Education Secretary and all of it just about can all be changed at a whim by Brussels in order to fit their one size fits all vision for the New Dark Ages.
One of the main reasons I no longer support the Tories is their dishonest attitudes toward the redistribution of power and faux localism
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
The connection is obvious. The PC religion says there are no negative consequences of mass immigration and multi-culturalism and has been attacking anyone who says different for years.
This is what led to the grooming gangs.
So the average person might think that given their responsibility for the horror show in the inner cities PC people would be a bit bashful at the moment.
But why are we on the subject of "PC people" at all? I thought we were talking about whether it's justifiable to be uncomfortable living next to somebody based purely on their nationality. Or has "requiring more than just their country of origin before you suspect your neighbour of pedophilia" been reclassified as Political Correctness Gone Mad and nobody told me?
An opinion poll after Farage made his comments showed supporters of all parties would rather live next door to Germans than Romanians... So is the whole country racist?
Did they also say they'd feel concerned living next to Romanians? Because there's a world of difference
The poll stated 'family'. Farage was asked specifically about a 'group of Romanian men'. Therefore, whilst I would never dream of accusing the polling company of dishonesty, this particular flaw in their methodology means we have no way to compare his real views with those of the nation.
h Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
And parachuting in bye election candidates. Leaving the tories to do an open primary.
Oh - we have such things as local governemnt. We also have such devolved issues as elections for police commissioners. And we have 'free' schools. 'Talk' about decentralisation is easy of course. But who gives out the money and needs to see it is spent wisely. Who ultimately gets the rap and needs to ensure control?
Well given the UKIP candidate is the sitting MP there is no need for a parachute and I believe the local Tory party have dismissed the idea of an open primary because they cannot afford it.
And its one thing to waste all that money on the paraphenalia of localism when all the power is held by the Minister of Communities, the Home Secretary & the Education Secretary and all of it just about can all be changed at a whim by Brussels in order to fit their one size fits all vision for the New Dark Ages.
One of the main reasons I no longer support the Tories is their dishonest attitudes toward the redistribution of power and faux localism
h Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists. What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
And parachuting in bye election candidates. Leaving the tories to do an open primary.
Oh - we have such things as local governemnt. We also have such devolved issues as elections for police commissioners. And we have 'free' schools. 'Talk' about decentralisation is easy of course. But who gives out the money and needs to see it is spent wisely. Who ultimately gets the rap and needs to ensure control?
Well given the UKIP candidate is the sitting MP there is no need for a parachute and I believe the local Tory party have dismissed the idea of an open primary because they cannot afford it.
And its one thing to waste all that money on the paraphenalia of localism when all the power is held by the Minister of Communities, the Home Secretary & the Education Secretary and all of it just about can all be changed at a whim by Brussels in order to fit their one size fits all vision for the New Dark Ages.
One of the main reasons I no longer support the Tories is their dishonest attitudes toward the redistribution of power and faux localism
Indeed subsidiarity is sometimes linked to decentralism although subsidiarity tends to recognise overarching central control even if its hands off whereas decentralists tend to believe that those central controls should be kept to the barest minimum.
As a simple slogan 'Big Is bad' is the decentralists motto
English is the best language in the world! Even the EU has English as one of its official languages!
So - could the whole EU join the Commonwealth, by virtue of it using English in an official capacity? Over the centuries only Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Lithuania haven't had some kind of British or English administration or presence on their present territory.
It would square the "should the UK be more attached to Commonwealth v. EU" circle wouldn't it?
If it were ruled by us, I don't think we'd have that much of a problem with it ;-)
Be interesting to see how that breaks out by SINDY VI - on a whole range of topics "YESSERS" are more "optimistic" (deluded, to the uncharitable)......
There has been a growing backlash against the No campaign’s leaders, with calls for Labour, the SNP’s main opposition, to ‘get a grip’.
Ed Miliband, under fire for his absence, will this week divert a trip to Aberdeen to visit Glasgow, while strategists plan to send ‘big beasts’ Gordon Brown and former home secretary John Reid to party heartlands.
The prospect of an independent Scotland keeping the pound in a so-called “sterlingisation” set-up would scupper its hopes of getting back into Europe, a former European finance chief has warned.
The news came as Edinburgh-based Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, revealed it has finalised contingency plans which could see it quit Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.
It looks increasingly likely that using the pound without agreement from the UK is the SNP’s favoured option if a formal currency union is rejected.
But yesterday Olli Rehn, who stood down two months ago as European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, warned the absence of a central bank would block Scotland’s hopes of joining the European Union.
Why? Cameron enjoys strong support among Conservative voters - whatever the deluded ramblings on here (and on the right of the party).
Oh these aren't overall ratings? I.e. Cam is based on Con votes, Salmond on SNP?
Yes - hence "amongst VI" - shows how much your supporters trust/believe you - the overall scores obviously are better reflections of overall support and how big your opponents are. The key voter group in SINDY are Labour - and they don't trust their own leaders. Cameron and Salmond have done their jobs - their supporters trust them (and their opponents loathe them) - it's down to Labour.
Why? Cameron enjoys strong support among Conservative voters - whatever the deluded ramblings on here (and on the right of the party).
Oh these aren't overall ratings? I.e. Cam is based on Con votes, Salmond on SNP?
Yes - hence "amongst VI" - shows how much your supporters trust/believe you - the overall scores obviously are better reflections of overall support and how big your opponents are. The key voter group in SINDY are Labour - and they don't trust their own leaders. Cameron and Salmond have done their jobs - their supporters trust them (and their opponents loathe them) - it's down to Labour.
Shortly after Mr T of this parish opines on lefties hating Britain, along comes one to prove his point:
Scots voting no to independence would be an astonishing act of self-harm England is dysfunctional, corrupt and vastly unequal. Who on earth would want to be tied to such a country?
Why? Cameron enjoys strong support among Conservative voters - whatever the deluded ramblings on here (and on the right of the party).
Oh these aren't overall ratings? I.e. Cam is based on Con votes, Salmond on SNP?
Yes - hence "amongst VI" - shows how much your supporters trust/believe you - the overall scores obviously are better reflections of overall support and how big your opponents are. The key voter group in SINDY are Labour - and they don't trust their own leaders. Cameron and Salmond have done their jobs - their supporters trust them (and their opponents loathe them) - it's down to Labour.
Ah okay, my apologies!
Some of us have been fretting about the state of Scottish Labour since before the days of the Falkirk farrago - dismissed at the time as a non story of no consequence.......
The media is now focussing on and highlighting the latest YouGov Indy poll showing a closing gap in the No lead, and which has been fuelled by all sides was also entirely predictable. No will win by a wide margin.
Its also worth noting that its not just Ed Miliband who has chosen to totally airbrush himself out of the Independence debate/campaign in recent weeks, the Libdems both at Holyrood and Westminster have also been completely invisible too.
Earlier today on another thread, I highlighted Jim Murphy's ability to not only take charge of a political campaign, but also to re-energise it and grab the media focus in a positive way. He is IMHO one of the most astute political campaigners in Scottish/Westminster politics right now.
Well after obviously missing the positive news coverage Jim Murphy has garnered on the every news channel today, as well as the excellent STV Independence debate tonight which saw the Better Together team mix both facts and passion very effectively. By far the best TV debate so far in this long running campaign. Meet one of the least astute political pundits on the Independence Referendum debate in action on twitter after he caught Jim Murphy's performance on BBC Newsnight.
Fraser Nelson @FraserNelson · 3h AUDIO: Jim Murphy laments the “energy of nationalism” on #Newsnight. Where’s the energy of unionism? | My blog http://specc.ie/1x7PQAg
The state shouldn't control our lives, but to the extent it does, it should be more than mob rule, which is why I am only half in favour of more direct democracy. Unfortunately, UKIP is all about mob rule, a bunch of pitchfork-wielding ignoramuses who neither know nor care what makes the world turn, or why.
The state shouldn't control our lives, but to the extent it does, it should be more than mob rule, which is why I am only half in favour of more direct democracy. Unfortunately, UKIP is all about mob rule, a bunch of pitchfork-wielding ignoramuses who neither know nor care what makes the world turn, or why.
But given UKIP is far more comfortable with the idiot certainties of opposition than in having a genuine platform for government, he may just fit right in.
And
When Quentin Davis defected to Gordon Brown's Labour party in 2007, Matthew Paris remarked "when a Tory crosses the floor to Labour, the Average IQ of both parties goes up..."
Talk to non-Labour figures in the Better Together campaign and they say one of the biggest revelations of their time involved in the campaign has been discovering that the famed Labour machine in Scotland doesn’t actually exist any more. Rubbish, Labour sources say, the party’s made 280,000 contacts with its own voter base.
Shortly after Mr T of this parish opines on lefties hating Britain, along comes one to prove his point:
Scots voting no to independence would be an astonishing act of self-harm England is dysfunctional, corrupt and vastly unequal. Who on earth would want to be tied to such a country?
Shortly after Mr T of this parish opines on lefties hating Britain, along comes one to prove his point:
Scots voting no to independence would be an astonishing act of self-harm England is dysfunctional, corrupt and vastly unequal. Who on earth would want to be tied to such a country?
Comments
How is that not about race?
You are missing the important point, all these low skilled immigrants have taken over the jobs of our hard working pedophiles and pimps.
Can't you read?
So for the foreseeable future, you are not permitted to talk about grooming, directly or indirectly.
twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136/photo/1
Whatever the outcome of the #indyref, @YouGov / Times poll finds voters expect Scotland to be divided
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BwkB894IYAE-sp7.png:large
Looking at the population as a whole 37% of the Swiss popn. was non Swiss. The popn, of geneva ia 62% non Swiss.
The Swiss economy could not function without foreign workers - 'Mainly manual workers and helpers are needed, for example in the building trade and the hotel business. '
They don't come from 'similar countries' to wait on table and shovel cement.
Oh and ...
''In 2002 a new law came into force allowing the free movement of workers between Switzerland and the old members of the European Union and European Free Trade Area. An initial report on the consequences of this law, issued in 2005, showed that - contrary to some initial fears - it had had little impact on either employment figures or on wages.''
http://www.swissworld.org/en/economy/workers_and_jobs/foreign_workers/
This is the sort of thing Carswell approves of. I imagine he is not so bigoted like Farage about people on the tube.
In that case my last word will be educational: amoral familialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Basis_of_a_Backward_Society
explains all you need to know to understand about the origin of the grooming gangs although the subsequent scale of the problem is the responsibility of the PC religion - especially the high priests of the BBC
ta ra
In many respects therefore it might be better for all concerned if the Yes vote prevails in a couple of weeks' time.
One thing that will split in short order is the SNP, the only glue that holds it together is independence.
"People's rebellion
But on 9 February this year, amid growing concern that the rate of immigration from EU countries was far higher than anyone had predicted, the Swiss voted in a nationwide referendum to reintroduce quotas, effectively abandoning its free movement agreement with the EU."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27244959
In the radio interview he was pilloried for saying there was a difference... Well everyone seems to think there is a difference or the polls would gave been the same for both countries
This is the sort of thing Carswell approves of. I imagine he is not so bigoted like Farage about people on the tube.
Yes the Swiss love their immigration sooooo much they voted for Immigration quotas this year.
Swiss immigration: 50.3% back quotas, final results show
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26108597
I bet Doug Carswell just loves all that direct democracy though.........
If you look behind the comments from the Nats on here, you will notice a wide spectrum of red and blue. Both sides have a vision for an independent Scotland, unfortunately they are not the same.
What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
http://romaniatourism.com/saxon-heritage.html
Rickets are already making a comeback as it is.
Well what John DC is suggesting is really a minister for renationalisation to attract socialists.
What kind of party is UKIP trying to be?
Out of that list you missed out minister for sending children up chimneys and minister for rickets.
I never like to comment on potential Tory cabinet posts and their policies..........
My interpretation of UKIP is that it is a decentralist party which means much of their policy will adhere to the concept of redistribution of power from centralised institutions to devolved and local institutions....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2741328/What-Middle-East-crisis-Disbelief-Tony-Blair-handed-jaw-dropping-philanthropist-year-title-GQ-awards-ceremony.html
So - could the whole EU join the Commonwealth, by virtue of it using English in an official capacity? Over the centuries only Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Lithuania haven't had some kind of British or English administration or presence on their present territory.
It would square the "should the UK be more attached to Commonwealth v. EU" circle wouldn't it?
If you are anybody does not like the renegotiations then you can vote no. You might think with a poor set of negotiations you would get a better chance of a No.
Interestingly we get the idea from Carswell that he wants to see success - not like you or Farage. But not being in the tory party any more he gets no influence. Wierd - so maybe he is in the right party.
Anyway why do we all bother. If Carswell and Farage have their way we will see a Europhile Labour govt.
Oh - we have such things as local governemnt. We also have such devolved issues as elections for police commissioners. And we have 'free' schools.
'Talk' about decentralisation is easy of course. But who gives out the money and needs to see it is spent wisely. Who ultimately gets the rap and needs to ensure control?
On Mr Cameron's pledge of an in/out EU referendum in 2017, after renegotiating powers back from Brussels, he said the prime minister's advisers had "made it clear that they're looking to cut a deal that gives them just enough to persuade enough voters to vote to stay in".
He added: "Once I realised that, my position in the Conservative Party became untenable."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26108597
And its one thing to waste all that money on the paraphenalia of localism when all the power is held by the Minister of Communities, the Home Secretary & the Education Secretary and all of it just about can all be changed at a whim by Brussels in order to fit their one size fits all vision for the New Dark Ages.
One of the main reasons I no longer support the Tories is their dishonest attitudes toward the redistribution of power and faux localism
As a simple slogan 'Big Is bad' is the decentralists motto
(apols. for the morbid 'humor')
Net Trust:
Cameron: +57
Miliband: +5
Salmond: +74
Sturgeon: +70
Darling: +13
Lamont: +2
Rennie:+8
Davidson:+30
Brown: +20
Can anyone spot the weakest links?
Ed Miliband, under fire for his absence, will this week divert a trip to Aberdeen to visit Glasgow, while strategists plan to send ‘big beasts’ Gordon Brown and former home secretary John Reid to party heartlands.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2741350/Pound-slumps-5-month-low-Scottish-poll-rocks-markets-Shares-slide-support-independence-grows.html
The news came as Edinburgh-based Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, revealed it has finalised contingency plans which could see it quit Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.
It looks increasingly likely that using the pound without agreement from the UK is the SNP’s favoured option if a formal currency union is rejected.
But yesterday Olli Rehn, who stood down two months ago as European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, warned the absence of a central bank would block Scotland’s hopes of joining the European Union.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/using-pound-could-bar-independent-scotland-from-eu-1-3529181
Cough....told you so.....cough....
Scots voting no to independence would be an astonishing act of self-harm
England is dysfunctional, corrupt and vastly unequal. Who on earth would want to be tied to such a country?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/scots-independence-england-scotland
Its also worth noting that its not just Ed Miliband who has chosen to totally airbrush himself out of the Independence debate/campaign in recent weeks, the Libdems both at Holyrood and Westminster have also been completely invisible too.
Earlier today on another thread, I highlighted Jim Murphy's ability to not only take charge of a political campaign, but also to re-energise it and grab the media focus in a positive way. He is IMHO one of the most astute political campaigners in Scottish/Westminster politics right now.
Well after obviously missing the positive news coverage Jim Murphy has garnered on the every news channel today, as well as the excellent STV Independence debate tonight which saw the Better Together team mix both facts and passion very effectively. By far the best TV debate so far in this long running campaign. Meet one of the least astute political pundits on the Independence Referendum debate in action on twitter after he caught Jim Murphy's performance on BBC Newsnight.
Fraser Nelson @FraserNelson · 3h AUDIO: Jim Murphy laments the “energy of nationalism” on #Newsnight. Where’s the energy of unionism? | My blog http://specc.ie/1x7PQAg
The state shouldn't control our lives, but to the extent it does, it should be more than mob rule, which is why I am only half in favour of more direct democracy. Unfortunately, UKIP is all about mob rule, a bunch of pitchfork-wielding ignoramuses who neither know nor care what makes the world turn, or why.
http://www.brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/douglas-carswell-direct-democracy-and.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11070055/Jim-Murphy-Nationalists-have-called-off-their-mobs.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740490/Police-urged-zero-tolerance-intimdation-bullying-voters-ahead-Scottish-referendum.html
He certainly seems to get this more than Miliband....
But given UKIP is far more comfortable with the idiot certainties of opposition than in having a genuine platform for government, he may just fit right in.
And
When Quentin Davis defected to Gordon Brown's Labour party in 2007, Matthew Paris remarked "when a Tory crosses the floor to Labour, the Average IQ of both parties goes up..."
http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/independence-referendum-plenty-labour-worry/28997#sthash.EqIp1mjQ.dpuf
So, that's about another three quarters of million to go then.....
I'm starting to wonder if we DID close all private schools plus Oxbridge, would that destrpy the Left in this country ?
Or at least the Guardian.
Or.
Although I was born here and my family have lived here for many generations there are many things wrong and I would like to see them put right.
I know which I prefer!