Iraq is Blairs stigma, A Pig is Daves?

Are you seriously comparing David Cameron putting his penis in a dead pig with a war criminal who's decisions resulted in thousands of deaths?

Frankly I couldn't give a damn about the former but do give a damn about the latter.

Basically Cameron is the Pig Guy. Everything else is a footnote.

Atenco ... 'seriously' i think it very sad that a previous donor who clearly was worried about a 4th Labour administration that he stumped up £8 million to keep those economy feckers out, can stoop so low with unsubstantiated shite - just because he didn't get what he thought he should have - a top job when a coalition meant less to go around.

As I said before, with that mentality, he clearly wasn't suited to an 'inclusive' government of two parties with very different ideologies.

times a million

But seriously Itsmebut, do you think it is cool that Cameron fucked a pig?

I know people may think it is trivial in the grand scheme of things, but to me is reflects a total lack of any moral compass.

Well then you just carry on if it's keeping you happy. Keep your chin up.

Ha ha ha ... Tories are not smug, they just have to defend their record from politically ignorant bottom wipes, although I concede that the record versus Labour's incompetence, may come across as smug.

BTW I didn't come on here to win people, votes or even friends over, so I don’t need your condescending advice, please save it for your mother.

I came on here a while back to add some balance to (then) wall to wall left wing bollocks, from little gangs who would look to drown out or put down others opinions.

And from time to time they TRY to silence me, trying to put my content down.

Well I’m happy to debate my views with anyone who wants to.

So you just worry about YOUR OWN content, don’t you worry yourself sick about mine.

Oh lord. You can't do sarcasm either.

You have a very weird notion of your own on line persona.

Seriously, if you are trying to win people over try stepping off the slightly hectoring dullard tone. People want to engage, they don't want to be lectured.

With the Tories least popular attributes being a tendency to be smug, selfish and self satisfied, you might help your cause more if you stop typifying them on here.

The trash talk is also a bit cringy.

HTHs

How are your "BOTS" if not Conservative, how can they support failures with proven rubbish policies - and not be deeply depressed? Bless.

Well I'm around 60-years old and ASPIRE to Last of the Summer Wine - but can eat young snipper whappers for fucking breakfast. Stick around.

"Few can call me humourless"

Well that's clearly not true. Do your fellow Tory bots think you are a laugh?

My mother thinks edumacates is hilarious . She's 82 and a fan of last of the summer wine.

Few can call me humourless, but when poster post their pig ignorance, I find the facts not only shuts them up, it edumacates them.

No charge.

Hang on. That capriSun was a joke too.

You are on fire

Hahaha at class warriors.

I'm not a class warrior. I just think that if you are going to post in a chat room it helps if you are not a humourless, cut and paste, dullard.

Although you rocked a 'lol' there. Well done you.

I can prove that you have proved yourself wrong.

CapriSun ... I always know when the class warriors have nothing, they get shitty. lol

Squidzin .... according to the IFS above, inequality rose under Labour despite trying to hook more on benefits/welfare/tax credits as we parked a few million on sick benefits and found 3 million jobs (and homes) for overseas citizens - I wonder why so many people were left out/poor/homeless?

Just how do we snap our fingers and fix the social/economic/financial train crash from Labour's designed policies - especially when not only had "the money all gone" but Labour left in 2010 a £153 billion annual deficit/overspend to fix it.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-note-successor

If creating a few million jobs, taking millions out of taxes, don't help child poverty that what, means a family has a 23k income those in real poverty would cross seas for, then feck knows what we do - AFTER finding out how they spend their money i.e. drink, fags, drugs, technology, shit expensive fast food and TV packages.

After the biggest recession in 80-years, we have food banks, but I suspect other countries do with twice our unemployment and a less generous benefits system, or their people go without.

P.S. As you know Thatchers financial reforms did not cause the financial crash, but Brown's UK bank de regulation made our situation worse, I have only proved it to you about 10 times, Brown and the FSA regulator he formed admits it above - please try and keep up.

www.primeeconomics.org/articles/was-375-bn-of-qe-raised-from-taxpayers-is-there-no-such-thing-as-public-money-only-taxpayers-money-as-pm-asserts

judging political parties by a food bank is just pig ignorant
Is a pig ignorant statement.

A country that measures real poverty, including food bank usage, is more representative than a government that conceals both unemployment figures and true poverty by changing the definition.

www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/23/child-poverty-measures-figures-first-rise-in-decade

All the damage to the economy/jobs was done before then
Yes... By Westminster's debt to the private financial sector. NOT MY DEBT.

And Thatcher deregulated the finance industry.
Not labour.

MagpieRainbow.

Isitmebut thinks you are 'pig ignorant'

Bot. A dull as fuck bot

I would never call you a bit. That would be rude.

Oh isitmebut, I'm sure you are a happy little bit but you sound dull as all fuck.

MaggieRainbow ... you are all pathetic class ideology, no facts, if you refuse to see the damage the 'party of the people', with an ex postman, ex ship steward and other simple folk managed to inflict on the poor with all those billions to spend - and choosing to always blame the Conservative Party that sorts it out - including Thatcher, were YOU around in 1976 when Labour called out the IMF to financially bail us out and the UK was disappearing up its own arse hole, I was.

Labour over 13-years build up a client State BIGGER than the private sector that could support it, hence needing to borrow over £30 bil a year ON TOP of record tax receipts from a banking bubble before the crash, JUST TO SUPPORT IT - so it was always going to go tits up at the first recession when the state had to also support the unemployed as tax receipts crashed.

Labours policies was encouraging the landlords by screwing private pensions in their first year and lowering Capital Gains Tax (the real millionaires tax) to record lows (10%) - together with a 2000 secret policy to encourage migrants in before 2004 and not building anywhere near enough homes- why do you think they'd be no fall out from those POLICIES, not the fallout Cameron inherited?

Shelter (2009); The housing crisis in numbers – and the need for spare bedrooms, never mind homes.
england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns/why_we_campaign/the_housing_crisis/what_is_the_housing_crisis.

• Over 1.7 million households (around 5 million individuals) are currently waiting for social housing
• 7.4 million homes in England fail to meet the Government's Decent Homes Standard
• 1.4 million children in England live in bad housing. [3]
• In 2008/09, 654,000 households in England were overcrowded. [4]
The number of new households is increasing faster than the number of house builds

Labour just put up taxes to the poor, not take millions out of tax, had no idea how to create non government jobs when the Conservatives have created over 2 million.

In 2005 there were around 500,000 unemployed 16-24 year olds, around 700,000 before the crash began in 2007 and nearly 1 million by 2010 - spot the trend, as real earning fell under Labour from 2008 and Labour was 'helping' the poor by putting up National Insurance to employer and employee, so a tax on jobs.

Judging political parties by a Food Bank is just pig ignorant, as god knows what the take up would have been if Labour were returned to power in 2010 - as all the damage to the economy/jobs was done BEFORE then.

'screwed the poor?'
Unequivocally the Tories are guilty of this. Instead of having a seasoned old hand with experience of administrating the most premier decision office in the land, we got Cameron. A man who has never really earned anything in his life and then has the gall to refer to benefit claimants as 'having a sense of entitlement'. Of course there needed to be cuts, most modern state's after the crash were caught with their pants down and also had to recede what the government could do. But to go about it with the exuberant glee they demonstrated has damaged this country in ways that will NEVER TRULY BE APPARENT IN THE EXTENT OF THEIR AWFULNESS FOR GENERATIONS (like Thatcher). All the time this Government has been protecting the wealthy, the powerful, the employer, the landlord and all the time degrading the poor, the sick, the worker, the tenant or squatter. Please don't waste time put forward the premise that accusations of 'screwing the poor' are open to any sort of debate. Cameron and his cadre of cronies are guilty of this. If you were feeling lenient you might only accuse them of trying to make society more Victorian. If you weren't feeling so charitable than many would say they were trying to go past that into Draconian even Orwellian territory. Need proof?
ARE THERE MORE FOOD BANKS?
ARE THERE MORE FOOD BANKS?
ARE THERE MORE FOOD BANKS?
Oh and also he had sex with a pig.