LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksThe problem is that they are all politicians.
They all tell lies to get into power then become immensely unpopular whilst IN it, then get chucked out and lose the power because someone else can lie better than them.
The problem is that they are all politicians.
They all tell lies to get into power then become immensely unpopular whilst IN it, then get chucked out and lose the power because someone else can lie better than them.
I have to agree with mediaboy, the next lot will come in, say that it will take time to repair all the damage done by the previous government, release grand plans and ideas, eventually everyone will release they are the same as the previous goverment (regardless of which party it was) and want a change.
Ok Gordon was in charge of the finance but Tony was the little eel who saw the tide was turning and jumped ship just before it all went to pot. Then someone decided to make him a peace envoy after he supported war!
Not all polletitions are like that by a long way.
Look at maggie, she had a vision, no matter how un-popular it made her, she was determined to break inflation, reduce government spending and interference (down sizing civil service etc). Regardless of how much of her achivement was down to dumb luck. She was unlike any other PM we've seen. You never know when we might find another. Problem is cameron is a bit of lame duck.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
The trouble is that they're all useless, selfserving, deceitful scumbags. There's not one of them I'd trust to hold a fiver for me. Labour, Conservative LibDem. They're all as bad as each other.
"Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."
There's a consipiracy theory (think it was in the independent), that Brown would be ousted, Jack Straw temporarily replace him, and then Labour wouldn't put up much of a fight in the next election.
Tories would then take control in a time of economic uncertainty, damage the few tats of the econony control image they all still cling to, then Labour would roar back in 4 years time.
Seems a bit risky though
There's also a conspiracy theory to say that everything that happened didn't happen, and therefore we don't exist.
It doesn't mean that it's true.
Indeed. That's why they are called theoriesOriginally Posted by mediaboy
Although the 'existence?' theory is an interesting one - who's to say we aren't all just figments of some alien thing's vast imagination? Not a theory I'd personally want to spend too much time on, I've got better things to do
yes, hell yes and guess what hell yes this nut shud leave b4 he if forced to quit, i hate his politics and i hate that he jus keeps rising all tax and stuff
Yes and she tried to downsize the Royal Navy aswell, rather lucky for her that the argies invaded the falklands before she got her chance to sell off our aircraft carriers.
Politicians are all the same, no matter what party
They do not represent their electorate, but line their pockets (or in maggie's case her son's) with cash from the lobby groups.
Gordon should have been made to hold an election as soon Blair stepped down.
Like i said did many things that people find wrong. (the falklands.... very lucky woman given it was her downsizing that allowed it to happen!)
But she did have a vision, and she executed it mercelylessly.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
I can't see how a modern political party can claim to have a "central leadership" any more. We're seeing the end of a long collapse of the current system whereby people now expect to be able to voice their opinions and have them listened to, whether or not they actually understand a single thing about the subject in question!
It doesn't matter who'se in charge, or which party has control because quite frankly I vote for my MP based on that person's ability to most closely represent my views. Jobs like Prime Minster, Chancellor etc shouldn't go based on a political party, but on merit and compitancy to run the position, just like any other job.
But I'm dreaming to think change will ever happen
"The Government should be afraid of the People, the People should not be afraid of their government"
(\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/)
(='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=)
(")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(")
This is bunny and friends. He is fed up waiting for everyone to help him out, and decided to help himself instead!
Brown isn't really the problem, it is his party.
I suppose he's in charge so ultimately he is responsible and should go in that sense, but there's at least 50 labour MPs who need to "go" as well before anything gets any better..
it's not brown's fault, why should he go?
cameron cannot do anything better than him.
Whats not his fault? The fact our economy is in reccession and he had been chancellor for 10 years, and instead of making hay whilst the sun shined he squandered the money and spent billions more with "off sheet" PFI schemes...... Yup can't see how anyone could blame him.
Without giving him 10+ Years its hard to say something like that.cameron cannot do anything better than him.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Its not exactly big Gordo's fault the economy is starting to suffer a reccession.
He has'nt encouraged the sub-prime market, and is actually doing things useful for the economy.
I'd place more blame at the papers and news media, fanning the flames of panic amongst folk telling them their savings are gubbed.
The knives have been out since he started, I think we just lay off the man for a couple of months and see what happens.
I agree with your point about the media causing alarm and despondancy but you have to remember what Brown has done since they have been in power.
He's plundered our pensions, sold off our gold reserves at a knock down price after ensuring that the market would be at an all time low by anouncing his intentions before hand and for the last ten years while the economy has been healthy he's been on a spending spree like no other we've seen. He's allowed our utilities to be controlled by foreign interests, which means that we are now subsidising the French electricity market. They have price controls in place where we have none so the money they can't make up in France they are loading onto us.
Not a good record for someone who inherited a very healthy economy in 1997 and prides himself on prudence. He doesn't seem to have been very prudent to me.
"Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
