I’ll worry about that then Tim. Meanwhile the bastards that have screwed Britain and her citizens through incompetence or on purpose (ERG, Rees-Mogg, et al) need to be dealt with. Their disastrous rule needs to be terminated ASAP.
1 Like
I don’t give a damn what Labour will do either as I now am now residing in France and it makes no difference to me, so if the population vote Labour in for a decade they are welcome to them.
One is as bad as the other as far as I am concerned, promise the world and usually don’t deliver on those promises.
Hopefully the prisons will be even more overcrowded with a lot of ex MP’s and PM’s due to backhanding fraud investigations.
4 Likes
if only…
Surely the future is more important than the past?
Only if (whoever) learns from the mistakes of the past
The present is more importent than the future. The past just tells us what the Tories are (in)capable of, honesty, transparency, integrity, fiscal competence, etc. Without fixing the present the damage will continue to be done and the future is bleak.
A Labour government is fixing the present, continually harping on about the Tories who will soon be the past and consigned to years in the wilderness is futile.
when were Labour in the present in Government? Did I miss something?
1 Like
Why not?
I don’t know the circumstances so can’t comment on those individual cases - but generally speaking the fact is this:
Whatever your political views, you have to live in the real world - the world as it is. This applies to everybody. If you’re confused by the idea of a wealthy socialist, you ought to be equally confused by a low-tax-small-state conservative using the public roads.
Some conservatives are so stupid they think that if a socialist advocates better public transport they ought to use it all the time - even if there is no bus going their way. They think Diane Abbott is hypocritical for sending her child to a private school - but that’s absurd. There is nothing inconsistent in advocating something that will improve life for everybody, such as integrating private schools with the state system as part of a programme for improving the state system, but also, given the available choices where you live now, deciding that the best school for the particular needs of your child is a private one.
You live in the world as it is - you have no choice - even while advocating a better one.
This is so obvious I question why I have to point it out.
Maybe because conservatives never actually think anything through?
1 Like
What’s absurd is doing that and then supporting your party’s push to abolish them. 
2 Likes
The electorate is fickle (and as we learnt in 2016, +/- 48% of them are downright stupid). Many Tories are not stupid, incompetent, yes, devious, yes, liars, yes, but stupid, no. They are busy figuring out now how they can throw some of the electorate’s own cash back at them (e.g. latest levelling up bribes) before the election, or exploite some real or fabricated Labour weakness or whatever to cling on to power.
Everyday people need to be reminded of the damage the bastards have done. In my opinion not half enough is said, nor is there even a modicum of the outrage and opprobrium they deserve. Members of Conservative Associations should be ostracised in their communities. They should be burning their membership cards in shame, packing their twin sets and pearls and loading their gin sodden, superannuated husbands into the Volvo and heading for hills.
Geof said above ‘you have to live in the real world - the world as it is’ and right now the media (who hold massive power) are tearing into the Tories which will continue until they’re gone. There is no possibility that Labour won’t have anything other than a landslide victory next year, if they’re lucky the Tories might might get to 100 seats but even that is a long shot.
Again, why?
What’s actually ‘absurd’ in this argument Tim:
There is nothing inconsistent in advocating something that will improve life for everybody, such as integrating private schools with the state system as part of a programme for improving the state system, but also, given the available choices where you live now, deciding that the best school for the particular needs of your child is a private one.
Or do you think, like the Queen of Hearts, that anything you say 3 times becomes true?
That’s a bit rich coming from Professor ‘Left is Best’.
Diane Abbott herself admitted that what she did was in her words ‘indefensible’ given that she had criticised Tony Blair and Harriet Harman for doing exactly the same thing.
1 Like
That was Labour under Corbyn… there’s a new kid on the block now and they seem only to wish to remove the special tax status from what I can see.
Only because you remind us every so often 
Yes - that is 3 times you’ve asserted your (plainly irrational) view Tim - but still no sign of you accepting the challenge to find anything wrong with my reasoning, eh?
Actually the Labour policy was never to abolish the private schools, but to integrate them in the state system - rather like the French model, in fact !
Classic “Do what we say, not what we do” mentality.
1 Like
Exactly that, if you look at DA’s decision it was purely self motivated and went against her politics, she made things worse by saying (as justification) that the nearest state school was crap at a time when Labour were in power and governed her local area.
However you dress things up (by calling it integration for example) Labour’s plans would have meant the end of private schools which was the real aim.