|
Darth Walrus posted:Also pro-eugenics and a right bastard to the Indians. He was definitely a fucker but it's hard to deny he had charisma. e: and yes, Gandhi was a huge racist against black people and routinely slept naked with young girls in order to prove he had mastered his carnal urges. He was a loving weird man. Rush Limbo fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Jun 13, 2014 |
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I think the current strategy is based around Labour feeling pretty confident about the next election, so the safest thing for Miliband to do is be as uninspiring and boring as possible so nobody pays much attention to him. Worked for Major
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
The great question of the next election is whether it'll be more like 1992 (when the pollsters were confounded by a big swing to the Conservatives on the day), or 1997, when a strongly recovering economy did nothing to prevent Labour sweeping into power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Nevett posted:My Sun arrived today Looks like you got your cross word after all. Hiyoooooo winegums posted:In that regard it's a wonder Labour haven't deconstructed the overly-PR campaigning that both they and the Tories have been driven by since the 80/90s. Certainly works well for UKIP and the race to the middle ground has driven voters away in droves. Ed should be frank, and speak to people directly rather than in sound bites. From what I've seen and heard he is a good orator when he's talking to people as humans, and not from a script. Probably because it worked so well for Labour (they were in power since '97 remember), and because that's the political and media landscape now. Substance is baggage. Nobody cares if you have integrity or the ability to back up anything you're saying. Labour has been buying into the status quo more and more, playing the game, so they have a lot invested in the current system. Someone with more insight into internal Labour politics can probably shed a bit more light, but it always seemed telling to me that Ed was actually campaigning for the Yes to AV camp, while a lot of the old Labour guard were publicly campaigning for No. The current system entrenches the two-party system that works out so well for the Tories and Labour, so it makes sense that they'd want to protect it. Even if Ed did want to shake up the way politics are done, there'd probably be a lot of resistance within the party
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:The problem of this approach is that it's liable to give you a hopeless campaigner and then a "good" leader of the opposition. That's the political line in Labour at the moment. Blairites and those who buy their rhetoric say the way Milliband is acting is the only way to get elected, but it turns out it can only be convincingly performed by those who believe it, therefore we need a David not an Ed. Their opponents, the hodge-podge of Old Labour and the new left say the entire New Labour campaign style needs to be abandoned so that non-Blairite leaders can put up effective campaigns. We've ended up with a miserable compromise of a non-Blairite, largely, following the Blairite plan. If he fails then the pendulum will swing away from the centre, probably back to the Blairites, if he wins, who knows where Labour will end up. Depends whether or not Milliband follows the Blairite plan of governance or not I suppose, which comes down to whether Milliband believes that his campaign style is right for all cases, or whether he's just trying a breeze through on Tory unpopularity and favourable boundaries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Hmm, I see what you are saying but I disagree. The clock can be stopped. The ref's are supposed to do a correct job. There is a bit of difference between 'jumpers for goalposts' and an international competition. You dont see this sort of silly bollocks in the olympics do you? err, yeah you do. see the controversy at the fencing in 2012 for example. incorrect calls by the ref naturally fall randomly in favour of either team with equal frequency, so it doesn't actually matter really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:e: and yes, Gandhi was a huge racist against black people and routinely slept naked with young girls in order to prove he had mastered his carnal urges. He was a loving weird man. Link?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
HortonNash posted:E:Didn't Gandhi have quite a bit of hate for black people and the gays? I don't know about that, but he forbade his wife a medical treatment on religious grounds, disease killed her, he later contracted the same disease and used the same treatment he denied his wife. He's up there with mother theresa on the "massive shits that are treated like saints" list.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Link? Gandhi posted:raw kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness Gandhi in prison in South Africa posted:Many of the native prisoners are only one degree removed from the animal and often created rows and fought among themselves. Johannesburg Gandhi statue draws criticism
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Hmm, I see what you are saying but I disagree. The clock can be stopped. The ref's are supposed to do a correct job. There is a bit of difference between 'jumpers for goalposts' and an international competition. You dont see this sort of silly bollocks in the olympics do you? The ray parlour can answer it in more depth, but ultimately its a logistical nightmare to introduce it to the game, and it all evens out in the end over the course of a season/ competition anyway. It would also massively batter the flow of the game, which is one of its unique features when compared to other sports. The minor changes they've made recently (goal line technology, vanishing spray etc.)have made the game better and aided the ref, but further change isn't absolutely necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Well kind of the point is that he was racist, classicist and sexist. He was the son of a high ranking bureaucrat and studied law in the UK before he travelled to South Africa. It was only during the Boer war when he developed his principals of non-violence and his frienships with people such as the Reverend John Langalibalele Dube, who became the first President-General of the ANC. Also both Black and Asian people attended his prayer services and his newspaper Indian Opinion often discussed events occurring within the native African communities. And there's no evidence he was a paedophile but he may have had weird sexual habits. None of which qualifies him as a 'massive poo poo' simply a man that was a product of his time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
I hope England win the World Cup so the Scots vote for independence. Also so we win the World Cup. I have a very weird relationship with patriotism because I'm dead against it unless there are sports involved.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
Gandhi and his weird sexual habits are fairly well documented. Here's a straight dope link that discusses it. http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2521/did-mahatma-gandhi-sleep-with-virgins There's a few books on it, and his racism is very well documented in his own writing. He routinely referred to black people as kaffirs which is pretty much analogous with 'niggers'. Gandhi was a bit of a poo poo. Sorry to break it to people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Gandhi and his weird sexual habits are fairly well documented. Everyone in history was a dickhead. George Washington? Aristocratic tax dodging slave owner who got his dentures from pulling the teeth from the jaws of his slaves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:a product of his time With the way things are now (i.e. certain influential people getting their rose-tinted shades on for definitely terrible bygone times) I don't think it goes without saying that the time was very definitely poo poo, so I don't think there's a problem with pointing out that individuals were also poo poo to various degrees. Like, half the reason particular historical figures get idolised like this is because their positive image remains popular the present; therefore, I don't think it's inconsistent to also judge their flaws by present standards as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Well everyone is a dick head, it's just that people who happen to have done a certain amount of 'good' tend to have their tosser status relegated to footnotes. People like Michael Jackson get away with it because of reasons, I guess. I am a huge knob, but probably not as much as most great historical figures. So yes I agree with the statement that all historical figures are wankers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Was Clement Attlee a historical wanker?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Praseodymi posted:Was Clement Attlee a historical wanker? I've only met one person that was telling the truth when they said they weren't a wanker... And he was the biggest uptight piece of poo poo twatface I've ever known.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Praseodymi posted:Was Clement Attlee a historical wanker? I have it on good authority he once littered. History's greatest monster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Did this actually happen and, if so, is IDS in intensive care from thosae burns?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
WastedJoker posted:Did this actually happen and, if so, is IDS in intensive care from thosae burns? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QRdNIDytEY "What a load of old nonsense."
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
"The fact is, I believe that I'm right."
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:"The fact is, I believe that I'm right." Marks off for not using "at the end of the day".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:"The fact is, I believe that I'm right." To be honest. This just seems to be the current Conservative motto.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 08:42
|
|
|
I do, I do, I do believe in Scroungers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 08:44
|
|
|
 That dismissive wave looks well practiced
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 11:05
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:
I wonder if he's mentally dismissing her because she's a woman... or because she's not white. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
So many possibilities! IDS is a man of many complex layers
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
It's cool how he makes that disbelieving face at the £39 breakfast thing too.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/iain-duncan-smith-claimed-breakfast-1810086 posted:Iain Duncan Smith’s claim he could live on £53 a week fell apart last night after evidence emerged of a £39 breakfast he tried to put on expenses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:It's cool how he makes that disbelieving face at the £39 breakfast thing too. IDS doesn't believe that this happened, so it didn't. I don't see why you all have to keep bringing up these blatant lies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
Well there's your answer right there in the last line. "I didn't claim £39 for a breakfast, no such claim was ever paid, and even if I had it was someone in my office, obviously in error"
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:It's cool how he makes that disbelieving face at the £39 breakfast thing too. In fairness, the only things he's done wrong here are trying to charge an expensive breakfast to the taxpayer and refusing to prove that he can live on £53 a week after claiming he could. Just because you can live on the breadline doesn't mean that you should even if you can afford better, and he shouldn't be visiting food banks regardless of whether he takes on the challenge or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In fairness, the only things he's done wrong here are trying to charge an expensive breakfast to the taxpayer and refusing to prove that he can live on £53 a week after claiming he could. Just because you can live on the breadline doesn't mean that you should even if you can afford better, and he shouldn't be visiting food banks regardless of whether he takes on the challenge or not. That's a lot of leeway to give someone. But I'm sure he won't do it again until the next time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
As an update on my friend's ESA case. Took ages to eventually get through to one of the decision makers, who gave us an email address to send the appeal information (we have been told multiple times that simply wasn't a possibility). It took them nearly 3 weeks to decide that the information was too late to be considered, despite them having received multiple copies of the appeal information before then by registered post, and previously agreeing to consider the information. So now, we have to full-on appeal it. She's still missing over a third of her income, with two kids to support, as well as dealing with her illness. Oh, and ATOS, after 3 months eventually replied with a letter that was essentially 2 pages of "nuh-uh, that's not what the HCA said happened, she's faking", not sent to her, to her MP who then forwarded it. She's relapsed from the stress of it, had a severe panic attack when her mum broke the news. Jedit posted:In fairness, the only things he's done wrong here are trying to charge an expensive breakfast to the taxpayer and refusing to prove that he can live on £53 a week after claiming he could. Just because you can live on the breadline doesn't mean that you should even if you can afford better, and he shouldn't be visiting food banks regardless of whether he takes on the challenge or not. You mean, other than forcing countless (well, the count them then refuse FoI requests to disclose) people to suicide by taking their only means of survival from them, overseeing a slump into poverty that hasn't been seen since WW2, all while blaming those common thieving scroungers for not simply accepting their god-given fates and just not pulling their weight with the aspirational classes. Oh, and openly inventing his own reality when challenged on things like a massive rise in child poverty (much like his CV), or handwaving away factual claims about the above. If the media/government hadn't pulled off the "skiving scum" narrative so well (though to be honest, they are well practised) then IDS would have been sacrificed long ago after one of the many costly fuckups, like wasting 25 billion on a computer system that will never work. The man is utter scum, even for a loving tory scum.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
To be fair, he did specifically say "did wrong here". If we're tallying back past misdeeds of IDS it would probably have to go right back to him forcing his way out of his father's cock.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:To be fair, he did specifically say "did wrong here". Ugh I kind of angrily rambled in the post, I meant more the sheer audacity of him handwaving the long and factual laundry list of his fuckups and the situation away with a "nuh uh" being a pretty wrong loving thing, at least cameron et. al normally have the decency to do a slick repeat of the party line and misdirect (or in millibands case, a crap redirect then PANDAVISION), the fucker just makes up his own reality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:If we're tallying back past misdeeds of IDS it would probably have to go right back to him forcing his way out of his father's cock. I don't believe that happened. But if it did, it just proves that IDS really is a self made striver. Alternate joke: I wish he'd landed on the bedsheets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
I've just had an idea for a summer blockbuster scifi film. IDS travels back in time, and has to coach his father into not spilling him on the bedsheets via the power of belief. In a surprise twist ending he fails and moments before he fades from existence he cries out in despair: "That could be cleaned with expenses!" I'm ready if you are film industry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Is Sperminator too easy?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Ddraig posted:To be fair, he did specifically say "did wrong here". Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. IDS is one of the worst human beings ever to make it questionable if the term is appropriate for use, but his claim to be able to live on £53 a week doesn't fall apart just because he had a £40 breakfast when he's not living on £53 a week.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 20:04
|
|