SWP's back said:All these media outlets and no one supports socialism. Not surprising I guess as no party does either.
Makes me proud to be British.
The perfect fumble said:Paulpowersleftfoot said:EalingBlue2 said:To be fair that probably cancels out the right wing media which spreads "facts" and surely gives the Tories a 20 or 30 seat head start.
The left wing media which includes the BBC has a much larger audience to preach its bullshit to. To suggest the sun and the telegraph gives the Tories a 20 or 30 seat head start is simply a ridiculous statement
Yeah right, the Daily Mail, The Times, The FT, The Telegraph and the Sun (add their circulations up, if you want to gauge their clout) are all Tory supporting papers. The Express and The Daily Star, rather ludicrously, says they support UKIP (sort of) but they are a right wing papers pushing the usual right wing BS.
The Guardian supports the Liberal Democrats, when it supports anyone, and is anti Labour without being pro Tory. The Independent? it's a case of who cares with a circulation so low, but whatever it is it isn't Labour. That leaves the Mirror as the only Labour supporting paper (though I sometimes think they believe Harold Wilson still leads the Labour Party).
Sky is right wing, subtly (and not so subtly) pushing the pro Tory line. As for the BBC, to state it has a left wing bias is ludicrous, with Andrew Neil (ex Times) and Nick Robinson (ex head of the Young Conservatives) and now we learn of Paxman's politics, the BBC eats at the right wing trough it just doesn't gorge itself.
As for boundary changes, there is a truth that you'd struggle to find in the mainstream media....
http://www.theguardian.com/public-l...rs-individual-electoral-registration-disaster
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/sep/15/shocked-mps-electoral-register-shake-up
In leafy Kensington and rural Norfolk, the Tory voting middle classes are (for the most part) on the electoral register but in the inner cities there are millions that are not and the Tories do everything they can to ensure it stays that way, but constituency MP's must represent all the people in their constituency not just those on the register or those that vote. Everyone at Westminster knows that Labour MP's have always carried a much larger load of the "hidden" than their Tory counterparts. The only way boundary changes can be "honest and fair" is if a concerted effort on a national scale were undertaken to get as many people as possible on the register, but of course the exact opposite has happened under this government.
Boundary changes without a registration push is nothing more than gutter gerrymandering.
Rascal said:Chippy_boy said:The very idea that he should cite as a criticism, Osborne borrowing £200bn more than predicted, when Labour left us having to borrow nearly £200bn every year, is quite hilarious. The fact we continue to borrow at excessively high rates is Labour's fault. And given Len would have us spend more and borrow less, if he had his way, it would be worse still.
Fucking hell.
You have lost the plot lad. Deficit obsessed nonsense.
Can you explain why we no longer bother talking about the BOP deficit or why productivity in heavily unionised Socialist France is 20% higher than in the UK. These things used to matter. The deficit if you bothered to read my long post or perhaps if you did you could not grasp its meaning has never been an issue for the UK since time immemorial.
Now seeing as though the deficit is your bag big time and you being a dutiful Tory and all that can you explain why Osborne after promising to eradicate the deficit in the last parliament failed so abysmally and had to resort to some mild Keynesianism to save his backside.
And more crucially when the deficit is eradicated as Osborne now predicts for 2019 will you advocate the surplus is used to invest, cut taxes or to pay off debt?
Can you also explain why QE has not lead to inflation as predicted when the money supply is increased especially as it diametrically opposes Thatcherite monetirist policy.
Can you also further explain why the 1.9 Million jobs the Tories claim to have created has resulted in little impact on the overall tax take of the government when you would expect it to create better conditions for lowering your beloved deficit.
Can you also explain why seeing as though this deficit is a noose around our neck Osborne is such a proponent of HS2 especially as it comes at such a ridiculous cost to the nation.
Awaiting your wisdom as ever.
Cheers
SWP's back said:All these media outlets and no one supports socialism. Not surprising I guess as no party does either.
Makes me proud to be British.
That's because he's indefatigable.Damocles said:SWP's back said:All these media outlets and no one supports socialism. Not surprising I guess as no party does either.
Makes me proud to be British.
Funnily enough, George Galloway's RESPECT party are socialists.
Dick Barton !cibaman said:The perfect fumble said:Paulpowersleftfoot said:The left wing media which includes the BBC has a much larger audience to preach its bullshit to. To suggest the sun and the telegraph gives the Tories a 20 or 30 seat head start is simply a ridiculous statement
Yeah right, the Daily Mail, The Times, The FT, The Telegraph and the Sun (add their circulations up, if you want to gauge their clout) are all Tory supporting papers. The Express and The Daily Star, rather ludicrously, says they support UKIP (sort of) but they are a right wing papers pushing the usual right wing BS.
The Guardian supports the Liberal Democrats, when it supports anyone, and is anti Labour without being pro Tory. The Independent? it's a case of who cares with a circulation so low, but whatever it is it isn't Labour. That leaves the Mirror as the only Labour supporting paper (though I sometimes think they believe Harold Wilson still leads the Labour Party).
Sky is right wing, subtly (and not so subtly) pushing the pro Tory line. As for the BBC, to state it has a left wing bias is ludicrous, with Andrew Neil (ex Times) and Nick Robinson (ex head of the Young Conservatives) and now we learn of Paxman's politics, the BBC eats at the right wing trough it just doesn't gorge itself.
As for boundary changes, there is a truth that you'd struggle to find in the mainstream media....
http://www.theguardian.com/public-l...rs-individual-electoral-registration-disaster
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/sep/15/shocked-mps-electoral-register-shake-up
In leafy Kensington and rural Norfolk, the Tory voting middle classes are (for the most part) on the electoral register but in the inner cities there are millions that are not and the Tories do everything they can to ensure it stays that way, but constituency MP's must represent all the people in their constituency not just those on the register or those that vote. Everyone at Westminster knows that Labour MP's have always carried a much larger load of the "hidden" than their Tory counterparts. The only way boundary changes can be "honest and fair" is if a concerted effort on a national scale were undertaken to get as many people as possible on the register, but of course the exact opposite has happened under this government.
Boundary changes without a registration push is nothing more than gutter gerrymandering.
The BBC is full of Martin Tylers. The words are fine but the tone is very pro Labour. A definite Agenda.
remember arthur mann said:Dick Barton !cibaman said:The perfect fumble said:Yeah right, the Daily Mail, The Times, The FT, The Telegraph and the Sun (add their circulations up, if you want to gauge their clout) are all Tory supporting papers. The Express and The Daily Star, rather ludicrously, says they support UKIP (sort of) but they are a right wing papers pushing the usual right wing BS.
The Guardian supports the Liberal Democrats, when it supports anyone, and is anti Labour without being pro Tory. The Independent? it's a case of who cares with a circulation so low, but whatever it is it isn't Labour. That leaves the Mirror as the only Labour supporting paper (though I sometimes think they believe Harold Wilson still leads the Labour Party).
Sky is right wing, subtly (and not so subtly) pushing the pro Tory line. As for the BBC, to state it has a left wing bias is ludicrous, with Andrew Neil (ex Times) and Nick Robinson (ex head of the Young Conservatives) and now we learn of Paxman's politics, the BBC eats at the right wing trough it just doesn't gorge itself.
As for boundary changes, there is a truth that you'd struggle to find in the mainstream media....
http://www.theguardian.com/public-l...rs-individual-electoral-registration-disaster
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/sep/15/shocked-mps-electoral-register-shake-up
In leafy Kensington and rural Norfolk, the Tory voting middle classes are (for the most part) on the electoral register but in the inner cities there are millions that are not and the Tories do everything they can to ensure it stays that way, but constituency MP's must represent all the people in their constituency not just those on the register or those that vote. Everyone at Westminster knows that Labour MP's have always carried a much larger load of the "hidden" than their Tory counterparts. The only way boundary changes can be "honest and fair" is if a concerted effort on a national scale were undertaken to get as many people as possible on the register, but of course the exact opposite has happened under this government.
Boundary changes without a registration push is nothing more than gutter gerrymandering.
The BBC is full of Martin Tylers. The words are fine but the tone is very pro Labour. A definite Agenda.
SWP's back said:That's because he's indefatigable.Damocles said:SWP's back said:All these media outlets and no one supports socialism. Not surprising I guess as no party does either.
Makes me proud to be British.
Funnily enough, George Galloway's RESPECT party are socialists.