Maybe it isnβt fair to βblameβ the media (who mostly supported New Labour in 1997); maybe it is what the electorate actually wanted!
I was more thinking of the media coverage that lost Labour the 1992 election.
I think you might be right ~Alan~.
It has nothing to do with “right” to have everything. Our athletes work damned hard to get to where they are and many times the media build them up to levels the athletes simply aren’t capable of. The media will never blame itself though.
It’s early days though.
I think you might be right ~Alan~.
It has nothing to do with “right” to have everything. Our athletes work damned hard to get to where they are and many times the media build them up to levels the athletes simply aren’t capable of. The media will never blame itself though.
It’s early days though.
Of course I realize how wealth the City generates for the country and for itself. Anyway, I was actually referring to a particular “upper-class twit” and his mate. π
Because of the nature of our beloved media, the Labour party changed to make themselves electable, and by and large it worked. They may be less “socialist” than they were but the alternative was permanent opposition. In terms of values and principles, the Labour party still match my own far closer than the Conservatives ever will. Personally I would rather Labour went much further in terms of national ownership and actual socialist policy but there you are.
There are are many aspects of our society that need “socialist” processes to solve. We already have a national health service but it needs to include care for the elderly which will become a major burden on the nation very soon if it isn’t already. A proper wealthy nation such as ours should have proper provision to care for those vulnerable groups. Are we as a nation willing to pay for it though? I doubt it somehow and I doubt any party will grasp that particular nettle.
Of course I realize how wealth the City generates for the country and for itself. Anyway, I was actually referring to a particular “upper-class twit” and his mate. π
Because of the nature of our beloved media, the Labour party changed to make themselves electable, and by and large it worked. They may be less “socialist” than they were but the alternative was permanent opposition. In terms of values and principles, the Labour party still match my own far closer than the Conservatives ever will. Personally I would rather Labour went much further in terms of national ownership and actual socialist policy but there you are.
There are are many aspects of our society that need “socialist” processes to solve. We already have a national health service but it needs to include care for the elderly which will become a major burden on the nation very soon if it isn’t already. A proper wealthy nation such as ours should have proper provision to care for those vulnerable groups. Are we as a nation willing to pay for it though? I doubt it somehow and I doubt any party will grasp that particular nettle.
Was he, was he really.
So Labour are socialists then. Previous posters reckon all the parties are the same – that can’t be right then.
Still, keep trying, you’ll get there in the end.
A question for the Anti-Blair camp. If he is a “war criminal” , and I’m sure we still have an “innocent until proved guilty” justice system, how come he has never been indicted, charged or convicted of said “crime”?
I’m sure you’ll be able to answer that one.
27
Was he, was he really.
So Labour are socialists then. Previous posters reckon all the parties are the same – that can’t be right then.
Still, keep trying, you’ll get there in the end.
A question for the Anti-Blair camp. If he is a “war criminal” , and I’m sure we still have an “innocent until proved guilty” justice system, how come he has never been indicted, charged or convicted of said “crime”?
I’m sure you’ll be able to answer that one.
27
bazv
Naughty boy. Partially quoting to take it out of context.
If you really truly don’t like all politicians, I don’t remember seeing many anti-Tory posts. Maybe you could point out some just for the sake of balance if it is true what you said.
To be honest, I couldn’t care less what side of the political fence you’re on, rubbish is rubbish. π
(not long now – 28)
bazv
Naughty boy. Partially quoting to take it out of context.
If you really truly don’t like all politicians, I don’t remember seeing many anti-Tory posts. Maybe you could point out some just for the sake of balance if it is true what you said.
To be honest, I couldn’t care less what side of the political fence you’re on, rubbish is rubbish. π
(not long now – 28)
Work Hard…Bliar? ..you are havin a Giraffe :rolleyes:
So many Labour cabinet members have come from deprived backgrounds !! π
Calling Tony Blair, Bliar – very good – never seen that before:rolleyes:
Anyway here is the future PM and his chums.

Don’t forget to doff your cap to your betters. π
Work Hard…Bliar? ..you are havin a Giraffe :rolleyes:
So many Labour cabinet members have come from deprived backgrounds !! π
Calling Tony Blair, Bliar – very good – never seen that before:rolleyes:
Anyway here is the future PM and his chums.

Don’t forget to doff your cap to your betters. π
John Prescott, remind me Arthur wasn’t he refered to as two Jags. Didn’t he take the law into his own hands despite having Police protection and brawl in public. Not to mention the vows of the santity of Marriage? Thats the sort of role model to live up to is it?
The words get twisted and warped don’t they. He had access to a ministerial Jaguar and already had one. Big deal. Hardly crime of the century is it. Cameron has his own car and access to a government one (so that he can leave his kids in the pub). So what. Most people admired Prescott for trying to defend himself against a yob – something many on here have advocated in the past. But because he his Labour it’s wrong somehow.
Having affairs? Well, he is very much in Tory territory there (Back to Basic Major ring any bells?)
Prescott is to be admired because of his rise from lowly beginnings and despite the press continually trying to undermine his post.
(29 and counting)
John Prescott, remind me Arthur wasn’t he refered to as two Jags. Didn’t he take the law into his own hands despite having Police protection and brawl in public. Not to mention the vows of the santity of Marriage? Thats the sort of role model to live up to is it?
The words get twisted and warped don’t they. He had access to a ministerial Jaguar and already had one. Big deal. Hardly crime of the century is it. Cameron has his own car and access to a government one (so that he can leave his kids in the pub). So what. Most people admired Prescott for trying to defend himself against a yob – something many on here have advocated in the past. But because he his Labour it’s wrong somehow.
Having affairs? Well, he is very much in Tory territory there (Back to Basic Major ring any bells?)
Prescott is to be admired because of his rise from lowly beginnings and despite the press continually trying to undermine his post.
(29 and counting)
Indeed, you could work hard for it or you could get it from the City or from Mater and Pater. π
Indeed, you could work hard for it or you could get it from the City or from Mater and Pater. π