You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Keir Starmer
- Thread starter urban genie
- Start date
Clever women scare you do they?
Yeah, any woman with an IQ over 110 scares the living shit out of me.
If I think there’s one outside my house I stay in bed all day and don’t leave my bedroom.
In fact, when the Mrs speaks, I just cower in the corner.
Thankfully though, Ash Sarkar is a fucking total numpty, who should be decorated for services to comedy before being described as an “intelligent woman”.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Yeah, any woman with an IQ over 110 scares the living shit out of me.
If I think there’s one outside my house I stay in bed all day and don’t leave my bedroom.
In fact, when the Mrs speaks, I just cower in the corner.
Thankfully though, Ash Sarkar is a fucking total numpty, who should be decorated for services to comedy before being described as an “intelligent woman”.
Careful mate. Someone will claim its hate speech, find you on social media, start the campaign to ruin your life, call you childish names......you know the rest.
Luckily I don’t have social media ;-)Careful mate. Someone will claim its hate speech, find you on social media, start the campaign to ruin your life, call you childish names......you know the rest.
But yeah, disliking what someone has to say must be because I’m either scared of them or because I hate women, obviously some sort of phobia.
That’s the level of debate the far left sunk to.
Agree with us or you’ll be shamed.
Rascal
El Presidente
IncelYeah, any woman with an IQ over 110 scares the living shit out of me.
If I think there’s one outside my house I stay in bed all day and don’t leave my bedroom.
In fact, when the Mrs speaks, I just cower in the corner.
Thankfully though, Ash Sarkar is a fucking total numpty, who should be decorated for services to comedy before being described as an “intelligent woman”.
VirginIncel
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
There's rumours that Starmer will remove the whip from Corbyn over anti-semitism. I'm not sure Corbyn is anti-semitic (although he's acted like one at times) but I think it will be a great move for the electability of the Labour Party if it happens.
M
M
mat
Guest
“This party is under new management” Sir Keir said in PMQs today.
Couldn’t be clearer about culling people that give a shit about regular people’s lives and the rebirth of New Labour.
Now where’s the party I can join that gives a fuck, rather than appeasing Supreme Leader Cummings and Uncle Rupert?
Couldn’t be clearer about culling people that give a shit about regular people’s lives and the rebirth of New Labour.
Now where’s the party I can join that gives a fuck, rather than appeasing Supreme Leader Cummings and Uncle Rupert?
Gareth Barry Conlon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 15,978
There's rumours that Starmer will remove the whip from Corbyn over anti-semitism. I'm not sure Corbyn is anti-semitic (although he's acted like one at times) but I think it will be a great move for the electability of the Labour Party if it happens.
It was telling that Johnson defaulted today to two attack points: Linking Starmer to Corbyn and linking Starmer to remain.
On the Cobynite front Starmer is clearly not a continuation candidate and these lines would have worked very well against RLB but unfortunately for him Labour are putting the Corbyn years behind them and that line wont stand the test of time. On the brexit front Johnson is desperate for Labour to put up a fight - there is limited political capital left in brexit so he wants to talk up the virtue now. Starmer will not fight Johnson on the remain/leave argument, there is no point, far better to just leave him to it and let him own it. How to clean up the mess is the argument for 3 years time.
Rascal
El Presidente
“This party is under new management” Sir Keir said in PMQs today.
Couldn’t be clearer about culling people that give a shit about regular people’s lives and the rebirth of New Labour.
Now where’s the party I can join that gives a fuck, rather than appeasing Supreme Leader Cummings and Uncle Rupert?
Yes mate, Mr Woodenhead has laid his cards out on the table and the likes of us are no longer wanted or required. He has made it very plain he is the heir to Blair and intends to purge the left and move Labour to the centre ground where the Tories used to inhabit. He will be having tea and cake round at Uncle Rupe's soon so he can receive his orders as to what to do please him.
We actually do live in a Murdochocracy.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
Starmer has lost Len and Unite i know that much.
Rascal
El Presidente
There's rumours that Starmer will remove the whip from Corbyn over anti-semitism. I'm not sure Corbyn is anti-semitic (although he's acted like one at times) but I think it will be a great move for the electability of the Labour Party if it happens.
Has this happened? I have been away and not seen the news.
If he removed the whip from Corbyn, it would split the party even further than he already has, how that makes the party more electable is a mystery to me, because lots of the membership that still remain would go nuts about that. I know this is a generalisation but most of the hardcore canvassers, leafleters, campaigners are on the left of the party and he would lose the grass roots support.
Rascal
El Presidente
Really? wow.Starmer has lost Len and Unite i know that much.
That is a lot of party funding gone.
Or Len gone at the next Unite elections.Really? wow.
That is a lot of party funding gone.
If he doesn't like that Labour settled the libel claims (his latest complaint) he can put his and the union's funds at risk by repeating the libel.
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
All you need to know about Len McCluskey and the utter irony and sheer hypocrisy of him criticising the Labour Party over using members' money in libel cases. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...es-leader-the-bullyboys-were-set-loose-on-herOr Len gone at the next Unite elections.
If he doesn't like that Labour settled the libel claims (his latest complaint) he can put his and the union's funds at risk by repeating the libel.
Rascal
El Presidente
Or Len gone at the next Unite elections.
If he doesn't like that Labour settled the libel claims (his latest complaint) he can put his and the union's funds at risk by repeating the libel.
I understand that the claims should have gone to court rather than be settled. Which is right I think, the use of members funds to pay off the people was ill judged, why not go through due process. Was Starmer scared that the party would win and the "whistleblowers" would lose?
Loads of members feel that Starmer was wrong to do this. I didn't want my fees being used to pay off people when it could have been avoided.
Rascal
El Presidente
"the leftwing sectarian hatred of centrists"All you need to know about Len McCluskey and the utter irony and sheer hypocrisy of him criticising the Labour Party over using members' money in libel cases. https://www.theguardian.com/comment...es-leader-the-bullyboys-were-set-loose-on-her
There you have the idiot Cohen in a nutshell, typical Guardinista centrist shite. It is they who did as much as anyone to undermine Labour at the last election with their constant stream of anti labour invective.
What you miss here is Mcluskey went to court whether that it was right or wrong to do so, Labour didn't go to court when they should.
G
G
ganganvince
Guest
Be interesting to see his take on whether the arrested MP should be suspended/named given that as DPP he was in favour of naming on arrest only after a conversation between police and CPS when police were struggling to gain evidence to charge and naming could help gain that evidence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22612102
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22612102
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Has this happened? I have been away and not seen the news.
If he removed the whip from Corbyn, it would split the party even further than he already has, how that makes the party more electable is a mystery to me, because lots of the membership that still remain would go nuts about that. I know this is a generalisation but most of the hardcore canvassers, leafleters, campaigners are on the left of the party and he would lose the grass roots support.
It was a rumour, think it was nonsense tbh.
He might lose some of the people you name but I'm sure Starmer would win a lot more voters than he lost, and plenty of those would be the working class voters who are now voting Tory which would be doubly effective. Whereas if the far-left were fucked off, I can't imagine them voting for the Conservatives.
You don't go to court "whether it's right or wrong". First rule of defamation cases. You go if you've been defamed and think you can win. You defend if you think you can show justification or some other defence."the leftwing sectarian hatred of centrists"
There you have the idiot Cohen in a nutshell, typical Guardinista centrist shite. It is they who did as much as anyone to undermine Labour at the last election with their constant stream of anti labour invective.
What you miss here is Mcluskey went to court whether that it was right or wrong to do so, Labour didn't go to court when they should.
At least, that's the rule if it's your own money. It may be different if it's other people's you're risking, like union members'.