CONservative government incompetence.

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

CONservative government incompetence.

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 92 of 603 < 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 >

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 26 May 22 3.37pm
Originally posted by Nicholas91 No I think that is a fair point and q. Perhaps not very well articulated by myself. To be accurate, I would say I have no political allegiance, especially these days given that there is very little ideology left in Politics. It may be more accurate to say: Do I want Boris and co. to continue? Absolutely not Do I think Sir Kier and 'friends' could do better? Absolutely not. That was what I was getting at, that's the despair. It really is the choice between suffocating and drowning for me. I don't think just saying 'Boris out' without somebody or some body to believe in is enough. I guess I just hate the practice and mindset of people who think it is sufficient to just moan and snipe at those in power, it's only valuable when logical solutions are presented in tandem. But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity. Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour.
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 26 May 22 3.37pm

Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow

Originally posted by Nicholas91

No I think that is a fair point and q.

Perhaps not very well articulated by myself. To be accurate, I would say I have no political allegiance, especially these days given that there is very little ideology left in Politics.

It may be more accurate to say:

Do I want Boris and co. to continue? Absolutely not

Do I think Sir Kier and 'friends' could do better? Absolutely not.

That was what I was getting at, that's the despair. It really is the choice between suffocating and drowning for me. I don't think just saying 'Boris out' without somebody or some body to believe in is enough. I guess I just hate the practice and mindset of people who think it is sufficient to just moan and snipe at those in power, it's only valuable when logical solutions are presented in tandem.

But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity.

Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour.

Alert a moderator to this post

W12 26 May 22 3.51pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity. Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour. I would like to know why he is a member of the Trilateral Commission and the aims of that organisation. Co-founder David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” If that's your bad then fine but I don't agree that other people should be allowed to give away my sovereignty to foreign interests.
Alert a moderator to this post

W12 26 May 22 3.51pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

I would like to know why he is a member of the Trilateral Commission and the aims of that organisation.

Co-founder David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

If that's your bad then fine but I don't agree that other people should be allowed to give away my sovereignty to foreign interests.

Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud Any european country i fancy! 26 May 22 3.54pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity. Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour. He can"t even comb his hair ffs!
Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud

Any european country i fancy! 26 May 22 3.54pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

He can"t even comb his hair ffs!

Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 26 May 22 4.06pm
Originally posted by W12 I would like to know why he is a member of the Trilateral Commission and the aims of that organisation. Co-founder David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” If that's your bad then fine but I don't agree that other people should be allowed to give away my sovereignty to foreign interests. Ah cool, another 'theory'.
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 26 May 22 4.06pm

Originally posted by W12

I would like to know why he is a member of the Trilateral Commission and the aims of that organisation.

If that's your bad then fine but I don't agree that other people should be allowed to give away my sovereignty to foreign interests.

Ah cool, another 'theory'.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 26 May 22 4.19pm
Originally posted by croydon proud So the CONservatives are goint to windfall tax the Eenergy giants after all, they should just employ a abour party adviser and get these u turns done 3 months earlier I hope you don"t have sleepless nights about it, you were one of the posters who were dead against it! Bear in mind the tax is only 25% I still believe the companies involved won't be able to spend the remaining 75% so will return it to shareholders, who will benefit from a windfall instead.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 26 May 22 4.19pm

Originally posted by croydon proud

So the CONservatives are goint to windfall tax the Eenergy giants after all, they should just employ a abour party adviser and get these u turns done 3 months earlier I hope you don"t have sleepless nights about it, you were one of the posters who were dead against it!

Bear in mind the tax is only 25%

I still believe the companies involved won't be able to spend the remaining 75% so will return it to shareholders, who will benefit from a windfall instead.

Alert a moderator to this post

W12 26 May 22 4.21pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow Ah cool, another 'theory'. which part of that was a 'theory'?
Alert a moderator to this post

W12 26 May 22 4.21pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

Ah cool, another 'theory'.

which part of that was a 'theory'?

Alert a moderator to this post

steeleye20 Croydon 26 May 22 4.27pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity. Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour. Starmer has done a good job over the windfall tax, that's good opposition in my book. Credit where credit's due.
Alert a moderator to this post

steeleye20

Croydon 26 May 22 4.27pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

Starmer has done a good job over the windfall tax, that's good opposition in my book.

Credit where credit's due.

Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 26 May 22 4.33pm
Rishi gives some money to help with excessive fuel bills. In other news,...'I wish I'd taken a fine to be with my dying husband' "I wish I hadn't followed the rules, I'd have taken the fine," Sara said, adding she would have given anything to spend more time with her dying husband. She told BBC Radio 5 Live she followed the rules because she thought the government was doing the right thing. Enjoy your heating rebate Sara. I disengage, I turn the page.
Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly

in a hidey-hole 26 May 22 4.33pm

Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly

Rishi gives some money to help with excessive fuel bills.

In other news,...'I wish I'd taken a fine to be with my dying husband'

"I wish I hadn't followed the rules, I'd have taken the fine," Sara said, adding she would have given anything to spend more time with her dying husband.

She told BBC Radio 5 Live she followed the rules because she thought the government was doing the right thing.

Enjoy your heating rebate Sara.

I disengage, I turn the page.

Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud Any european country i fancy! 26 May 22 4.43pm
bump
Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud

Any european country i fancy! 26 May 22 4.43pm

bump

Alert a moderator to this post

Nicholas91 The Democratic Republic of Kent 26 May 22 4.50pm
Am I going nuts or has a large part of this thread been cut/moved? Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!
Alert a moderator to this post

Nicholas91

The Democratic Republic of Kent 26 May 22 4.50pm

Am I going nuts or has a large part of this thread been cut/moved?

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Alert a moderator to this post

Nicholas91 The Democratic Republic of Kent 26 May 22 5.29pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity. Johnson has proved across decades and across different jobs that he cares not a jot for either - and I do believe that is quite unique, even amongst politicians. The bloke won't even admit how many kids he's got, for goodness sake, and he's the champion of the conservative values of this country. Do me a favour. That's again a fair and succinct point. I can't absolutely conclude that however would I argue that neither could anybody do the same for Kier being any better. I'm not arguing with what you are asserting, your stance etc. I think I just get a bit riled with this notion that SKS can do better in which case I'd say firstly, he'd be hard pushed to disgrace himself to a greater extent than BJ but equally no, I don't think he's fit to lead the nation, as BJ isn't, it's a subjective stance from myself. Once more, the old drown or suffocate paradox, which would be worse? I could start rattling on about SKS's policies and what he has espoused or demonstrated politically but we'll be here all night with no conclusion and you'd be debating with someone who'd soon start showing their inarticulacy, ignorance and lack of appetite for a drawn out battle! In summary, yes Kier may be the lesser of two evils for me but I am, once again despairing, at the notion that this is the only choice, which it very well could be. I am against the notion that Kier should be PM but aligned on the view that BJ certainly should not, I hope that makes sense, I can't even be bothered to read back through! Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!
Alert a moderator to this post

Nicholas91

The Democratic Republic of Kent 26 May 22 5.29pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

But then my question is on what basis can you absolutely conclude that Starmer wouldn't do better? At this point better is not breaking the law and not lying at every turn - it's a very low bar, and while I find Starmer very uninspiring, he at least seems to give some semblance of s*** about things like honesty and integrity.

That's again a fair and succinct point.

I can't absolutely conclude that however would I argue that neither could anybody do the same for Kier being any better.

I'm not arguing with what you are asserting, your stance etc. I think I just get a bit riled with this notion that SKS can do better in which case I'd say firstly, he'd be hard pushed to disgrace himself to a greater extent than BJ but equally no, I don't think he's fit to lead the nation, as BJ isn't, it's a subjective stance from myself.

Once more, the old drown or suffocate paradox, which would be worse? I could start rattling on about SKS's policies and what he has espoused or demonstrated politically but we'll be here all night with no conclusion and you'd be debating with someone who'd soon start showing their inarticulacy, ignorance and lack of appetite for a drawn out battle!

In summary, yes Kier may be the lesser of two evils for me but I am, once again despairing, at the notion that this is the only choice, which it very well could be. I am against the notion that Kier should be PM but aligned on the view that BJ certainly should not, I hope that makes sense, I can't even be bothered to read back through!

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin 26 May 22 5.43pm
Tony's cronies were as bad as this lot - albeit this lot are no good either! He promised the earth but left us potless. He shouted education, education and dumbed it down more than ever before so that everyone could go to University. He screamed loud and proud about the health service while reducing beds more than any government in living memory - look it up before you disagree. He took us into an illegal war and helped kill thousands of people. He opened up our borders and actually ensured that the Red Wall voted for brexit because of that long term immigration policy that he started He had the opportunity to do good having taken over a strong economy and spunked the lot on nothing. The list goes on - he was such a crook! He makes Boris look like a Saint!
Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin

26 May 22 5.43pm

Tony's cronies were as bad as this lot - albeit this lot are no good either!
He promised the earth but left us potless.
He shouted education, education and dumbed it down more than ever before so that everyone could go to University.
He screamed loud and proud about the health service while reducing beds more than any government in living memory - look it up before you disagree.
He took us into an illegal war and helped kill thousands of people.
He opened up our borders and actually ensured that the Red Wall voted for brexit because of that long term immigration policy that he started
He had the opportunity to do good having taken over a strong economy and spunked the lot on nothing.
The list goes on - he was such a crook!
He makes Boris look like a Saint!

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 92 of 603 < 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

CONservative government incompetence.

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors