Politics / Current Affairs / Blog thread

Rant and rave at will, that's why you're here, this is the internet after all

Moderators: marowak, Blonde, skhmmxi

User avatar
Poetofthedeed
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: Oxfordshire

Post by Poetofthedeed » Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:33 am

I was gonna watch the debate... but I went round my mates house and played Nazi zombies. Sounds like I didnt miss too much.
Poetofthedeed wrote:he sounds exactly like beans on toast, except a bit more black.
rockface wrote:So Beans on Burnt Toast then?

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Post by Pete » Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:22 pm

Clur wrote:I live in an area, where my vote actually may count for something. Shock horror! Its a marginal area, where all three major parties could potentially swing the vote. Talking to others, it does seem unfair that I am in this somewhat unique position. Its sad that amongst my friends, I am probably one of the few who actually feels that casting a vote isn't completely pointless. At the moment, I'm undecided voter, and I'm looking carefully at a number of things, and trying not to be sucked in by the propaganda of it all. And I have to say the debate on Thursday has done very little to change my opinion on any of the three parties - I remain pretty cynical about them all.

In my area, the three parties are trying to suggest only one other party can win in the area. Its not true and it is a deliberate misleading campaign by all three, which does frustrate me. It is currently held by the Labour party, but is a target for both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. Sadly, even my parents who are fairly politically aware didn't know this. The only reason I know, is because I have been doing a little research and trying to find out about all three parties. Its poor, and doesn't fill you with much hope for any of them for their integrity.

At the moment, I'm still struggling to make a final decision. I will vote, but I think I'll decide on the day. And probably vote tactically more than anything else on who I feel will keep Labour out of my area - more because of local issues rather than national politics though (and would you vote for someone with the surname Bent?!)

The Labour candidate has slagged off the Lib Dem/Tory council for 'ruining' the town. Why does this annoy me so much? Because the Labour Party hasn't even stood a councillor for local elections in my area for at least the last 8 years! I fail to see how they will represent my interests in Westminster if they only have interest in part of the constituency and in area that they think they can win votes. All Labour Campaign material has been addressed to the husband and not me too, which makes my blood boil. Its like they are completely not interested in representing me. (Plus, I work for a printers, and know that proof reading your party leaflets is a good idea. Sadly my Labour candidate does not appear to have managed to do this. The only worse example I've seen in the past have been BNP flyers where I'm not sure if English is their first language or not).

On the whole I'm finding the whole campaign somewhat nauseating and painful to watch. The level its being aimed at is only a little above the trained chimp level.

Brown has had the most cringeworthy moments so far. The Radio Times Interview was horrendous. Comments about loving Six Music (and how the bbc should bow to pressure to cut it), liking Glee and Lady Gaga and telling the story of how he introduced Amy Winehouse to Nelson Mandela. Cool Britannia was painful enough with Blair, but at least you could actually sort of believe that Blair might actually like Oasis etc, if only in an embarassing Dad kinda way. Not that David Cameron hanging out with Gary Barlow yesterday was much better by any stretch of the imagination.

I am also finding the wives pretty unbearable. It insulting to the point of sexism in my book. They strike me, with perhaps the exception of Nick Clegg's Mrs, as the worst form of spineless, Stepford Wives going. Its patronising, and insulting to me. Why don't we just vote on which wife is the hottest and most fashionable and have done with it? It really is the level some of this is on now.

On a more serious note, with regard to budget cuts which a few of you have commented on, I do have to say, that the idea of budget cuts is going to cause major cuts to services is something of a myth which I really wish people would wake up to. Every party is going to make cuts. I do not like the notion being thrown around, that throwing more money at something makes it better somehow. It doesn't. Its how the money is spent that counts. And that's where the whole system is failing. Its common sense rather than party politics to me. Something that sadly is missing from politics in general and the majority of the country it seems!

If you have someone in financial difficulty, you don't go 'here take some more free cash so you can pay your bills'. Because it doesn't teach them how to spend their money wisely and it doesn't solve the problem. They still spend money they don't have on shit like clothes or DVD etc, instead of properly budgeting.

When you hear from close friends about the NHS paying £1000 for computers with the same spec you can get at PC World for £300. Or them paying £5 per item for something because the contract hasn't been updated or reviewed in 10 years and the current market price is now 50p, then you start to really ask serious questions about how the NHS is really being run, by highly paid managers who clearly should be being sacked for that level mismanagement.

But by far the worse thing I've seen, with regard to budget cuts has been the scaremongering of Breast Cancer patients/survivors/families in Labour leaflets. It seems to have been pretty buried in the news though.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... 614075.stm
Regardless of whether its targetted or not, I find the whole thing a rather sick stunt, especially since my sister-in-law has just got all clear. Its going to be read by vunerable people and people that potentially have just lost a loved one or going through a terrible time. We don't need politics on this level.

Funny thing is, even though my vote seems to count more than most, its really not feeling like it.
really enjoyable read, that. Nice antidote to devilsadvocats 'controversial' assessment of our armed forces... Keep that for the 6th form common room, you might get a bite.

Out of interest Clur, where is your constituency?
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

devilsadvocat
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by devilsadvocat » Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:27 pm

It wasnt an assesment of our armed forces at all. It was an assesment of how politicians drone on about their pride in, and commitment to an armed forces which they shit on by not forking out for kit. Im confident i could find a double amputee who finds it as predictable and nauseating as i do!

User avatar
teamescape
Posts: 1540
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:24 pm

Post by teamescape » Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:37 pm

Pete wrote:really enjoyable read, that. Nice antidote to devilsadvocats 'controversial' assessment of our armed forces... Keep that for the 6th form common room, you might get a bite.
Yeah, but think of how many daily mail readers he's incensed!!! He's struck a blow for free speech everywhere!!!
Stu

devilsadvocat
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by devilsadvocat » Sat Apr 17, 2010 9:59 pm

They would agree, the mail loves a pop at military kit shortages

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Post by Pete » Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:06 pm

teamescape wrote:
Pete wrote:really enjoyable read, that. Nice antidote to devilsadvocats 'controversial' assessment of our armed forces... Keep that for the 6th form common room, you might get a bite.
Yeah, but think of how many daily mail readers he's incensed!!! He's struck a blow for free speech everywhere!!!
I actually wrote daily mail but thought it was too high brow!

DA - I'm sure you could, but I bet I could find ten times
more bored of hearing cliched left wingers make rubbish 'moral outrage' gags using them as any form of evidence.
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

devilsadvocat
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by devilsadvocat » Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:24 pm

I dont think you could. Ok its was a crap, cheap gag, but I think any troops would be slightly more pissed off at the politicians who failed to provide the necessary equipment, than at someone using tasteless language on the internet.

Edit, Pete your a right winger who wants to take a clawhammer to bob crow. Not a cliche at all....

User avatar
longlivethefrank
Posts: 878
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Brighton
Contact:

Post by longlivethefrank » Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:14 pm

One thing that annoyed my about the debate - not something exclusive to this debate, but it was something that reminded me about an annoying political trait - was how many times they talked about spending money getting police on the streets. I remember having a police officer come into our school a number of times in previous years, and I vividly remember him saying that a bobby will see a crime by chance like that once every 10 years or something. I understand that it makes people feel safer having police visible, but I can't help wandering if money might indeed be better spent on cars and other police equipment. Seems like an all too frequently used voter hook, "more police on the streets"...will it actually reduce crime?

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Post by Pete » Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:29 pm

devilsadvocat wrote:I dont think you could. Ok its was a crap, cheap gag, but I think any troops would be slightly more pissed off at the politicians who failed to provide the necessary equipment, than at someone using tasteless language on the internet.

Edit, Pete your a right winger who wants to take a clawhammer to bob crow. Not a cliche at all....
ha, nice call on the claw hammer... No denial of cliche here

my point being this re troops... Whatever you say about politicians and the army, be vaguely cautious. A friend of mine who just headed back to Helmand said to me (in all seriousness I think, bless him) 'I need to finger a girl this weekend before I come back with chicken dippers'. I laughed a lot. But it's like someone making a gag about their family; it's their right, not yours.




















On that note, 'insert mum joke here'
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

devilsadvocat
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:01 pm

Post by devilsadvocat » Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:21 am

point taken, I assure you my target was not the troops.

Re police, Nick Davies touches on this exact topic in Flat Earth News, Its dependant on area obviously, but bobbys randomly wandering about is pretty useless.

What comes across in the book is that its a two way problem. Yes its an over used voter hook, but only because the public are not aware of the facts. For this, Davies blames our overworked news industry.

Another classic example of this, and one ive mentioned before is the criminalisation of drugs. The government are fully aware that by making heroin illegal, the problem exploded. But imagine the headlines if they made it free and legal.

These are subsequently the areas which politicians will do anything to avoid. They know all of these arguments, but they certainly arent going to be the ones to try and change public opinion.

User avatar
newmy
Posts: 2336
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: London

Post by newmy » Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:23 am

longlivethefrank wrote:One thing that annoyed my about the debate - not something exclusive to this debate, but it was something that reminded me about an annoying political trait - was how many times they talked about spending money getting police on the streets. I remember having a police officer come into our school a number of times in previous years, and I vividly remember him saying that a bobby will see a crime by chance like that once every 10 years or something. I understand that it makes people feel safer having police visible, but I can't help wandering if money might indeed be better spent on cars and other police equipment. Seems like an all too frequently used voter hook, "more police on the streets"...will it actually reduce crime?
My response to the whole 'more police on the streets thing' is always that it's not actually addressing any of the problems which cause crime. It's like the morphine which will happily take away the searing pain from the leg you just broke into a million pieces, but it won't fix the bloody, shattered mess that it has now become.

User avatar
longlivethefrank
Posts: 878
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Brighton
Contact:

Post by longlivethefrank » Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:27 pm

Yeah, I'd agree with both of those posts.

selfishbi_atch101
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:46 am

Post by selfishbi_atch101 » Sun Apr 18, 2010 2:01 pm

http://www.thestraightchoice.org/leaflet.php?q=1339

Re: Police
I think that the crime issue always crops us because it's a way of instilling fear.
The way that we process issues logically goes completely out of the window when we are succumbing to fear. I suppose that is why it is so often used by those in power - they push us into dark, primal states of mind and then wave a big torch in our faces
'this way, this way,
over here!'
followed by pat on the head upon arrival.

(Clur - enjoyed reading your post, btw)
Re: Leafleting
I think the above example shows that the Tories are just as bad at exploiting emotionally sensitive issues:( and IMO all concerned are aware of things before they 'go to press''? They don't care about protecting sanity... they just wait until the opposition mess up so they can demand for *public* apology and look good (smug). Horrid, horrid times.

Sorry, in a cynical mood today, haha

User avatar
aidanC
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:19 pm

Post by aidanC » Sun Apr 18, 2010 4:28 pm

I was hoping for a QI style buzzer whenever one of them said 'more police on the streets', 'tough on immigration' or 'protect the NHS'.

User avatar
longlivethefrank
Posts: 878
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Brighton
Contact:

Post by longlivethefrank » Mon Apr 19, 2010 10:26 am

Oh shit forgot to mention...only Mr Gordon Brown came into our college last week. Got interviewed by Eddie Izzard and questions were asked by students and teachers etc. It was alright actually, Brown made some pretty decent jokes.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests