Keir Starmer

[mosssideblue]

Not as embarrassing as it will be for him :-)

And my response to that is, isn't it odd how wanting to see the rags fail is good honourable stuff. Wanting to defend the indefensible is perfectly fine. But wanting to see a **** get what's coming to him, that's "embarrassing"?

Whatever mate, whatever.

Indeed, but you keep clutching at straws

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Of course you hope that.

Why? I thought his poodle act last night was embarrassing.

Not sure the point of spending any energy hoping that obvious lies are true.

 

[BrianW]

The problem is there's a lot of sensationalism in what is generally an anti-Labour press.

So you get articles like: 'What it would mean if Labour follows through on suggestion to tax cat food.'

Even though it was just a suggestion and there's no evidence Labour plans to tax cat food. It's great for papers as it creates a climate of fear bordering on paranoia. Exactly what they want.

Then you have follow-up articles: 'How to thwart Labour's planned tax on cat food.' with suggestions like emigrating to Jersey or buying 5,000 tins of Kit-e-Kat today. All good stuff from the paper's POV.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Not sure the point of spending any energy hoping that obvious lies are true.

Obvious lies? If something is obvious then clearly you just have evidence to support your (laughably biased) view. So what is it? I'm all ears.

When I posted the quote I specifically said I don't know whether it's true or not, but you obviously have a closed mind and I wonder why? Could it be because you dogmatically support everything Starmer says and does and defend anything and everything in the face of scandal after scandal? Yes, I think that's probably got a lot to do with it.

 

[Hertzblue]

 

[Chippy_boy]

The problem is there's a lot of sensationalism in what is generally an anti-Labour press.

Strange. They were in the main, pro Labour before the election. I wonder why they might have turned on him? Perhaps it could be something to do with what he's said and done? Just a thought.

 

[Phil1]

The media insinuating that Party A is corrupt and Party B is also corrupt is great for business and enables them to do what they do best. Keep the country divided and at war with each other.
Rinse and repeat. There’s only ever one winner and it ain’t the general public. Though tbf a lot deserve it due to their incredible gullibility.

 

[BrianW]

Strange. They were in the main, pro Labour before the election. I wonder why they might have turned on him? Perhaps it could be something to do with what he's said and done? Just a thought.

The Daily Mail, Daily Express, Times, Daily Telegraph, and Sun cannot be remotely called Labour papers. They have been pro-Tory since Adam was a lad. They occasionally put in a bit of 'balance', normally when a Tory government is so fucking dire it becomes indefensible, but they are essentially Tory in outlook.

The Guardian is sort of leftish, but it hated Jeremy Corbyn with a passion. It's more Liberal, indeed that is its tradition. It does tend to support public services though, at least on the surface and can get very hissy about anything it sees as an 'injustice'.

The Daily Mirror is right-wing Labour. It's the nearest to a Starmer paper we have, but it's very 'popular' in its approach. You don't get a lot of complicated analysis there.

The Morning Star, which has a circulation of about 12, is Communist in sentiment, though it tends to support the Labour left.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that whatever Labour did most of the press would be on their backs. But most of them are inherently critical of Labour. They will leap on things they would barely have touched on if the same thing had been done by a Tory government. For example, we have all this talk of Starmer's gifts. When Johnson was trousering (literally) millions it was barely mentioned in most of the press. Labour is held to a higher standard.

 

[Chippy_boy]

The media insinuating that Party A is corrupt and Party B is also corrupt is great for business and enables them to do what they do best. Keep the country divided and at war with each other.
Rinse and repeat. There’s only ever one winner and it ain’t the general public. Though tbf a lot deserve it due to their incredible gullibility.

Honestly until a few months ago, I certainly was gullible enough to believe that I lived in a free country, where the press pretty much told the truth on important stuff. I now realise that we're constantly being fed a pack of lies, but not just random lies, often it is coordinated and that the government has an agenda on some topics that it pushes through the media. It's quite depressing really.

Just one example, in the endless list is the reporting of the conflict in the Middle East. Israel is able to pound Gaza and now Lebanon with relative impunity, and not a newspaper in sight will criticize them because that's the government's line.

They murder, on foreign soil, the leader of Hezbollah, and again that's perfectly fine. But Iran take revenge with some (failed) rocket attacks and it's an outrage?

Do you remember when Russia tried to murder someone on British soil with the novichok attack. Was that perfectly OK? It was an international outrage, and yet Israel wants to go after one of it's enemies - killing scores of civilians btw - and that's fine, and not a newspaper will question otherwise? It's a disgrace how our news is controlled.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Obvious lies? If something is obvious then clearly you just have evidence to support your (laughably biased) view. So what is it? I'm all ears.

When I posted the quote I specifically said I don't know whether it's true or not, but you obviously have a closed mind and I wonder why? Could it be because you dogmatically support everything Starmer says and does and defend anything and everything in the face of scandal after scandal? Yes, I think that's probably got a lot to do with it.

I just said I find him poodling, embarrassing?

It's obvious lies because it comes from a highly unreliable source and because Starmer is far too boring and charmless to start and carry on an extra marital affair.