Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

I won't be voting Labour because

318 replies

PanicMode · 24/03/2010 13:41

next year they will be spending more on debt repayments than education, and that's just one example.

From a £6bn deficit in 1997 to £167 bn now....

Oh, and the only new idea (reduction of stamp duty) came from the Tories in the first place.

All those thinking of voting Labour, please read Squandered or The Rotten State of Britain before letting these financially illiterate numpties back in.

OP posts:
daftpunk · 31/03/2010 12:29

What are you peachy....Tory..?

Haven't been able to work you out...even after all this time...

Clarissimo · 31/03/2010 12:09

Even I don't get HArman o0r Mandelson tbh

probonbon · 31/03/2010 05:47

Gawd yes Peter Mandelsohn -- quite right linctash. What a creep. How can this association help Labour at all. He makes me want to throw up all over him.

skihorse · 31/03/2010 05:23

ooja The mind boggles, however my Labourite boyfriend has been carrying an Edinburgh January 2009 one in his pocket since then so I can only assume he too has some dastardly plan!

lincstash That Harman woman! Grrrr! "Blair's babes" indeed, how insulting to each and every one of us - but how appropriate for the Labour party - talent not a pre-requisite.

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 20:46

Glad you told me, I could have got myself into a highly embarrassing conversation. I assume anyone with peachy in their name is you.

Clarissimo · 30/03/2010 20:35

there;s peachy girl and peachylovesherpoochy or soemsuch

Tashtodd · 30/03/2010 20:32

Hear hear Lincstash

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 20:13

oooji....10/10 for your posts on the LD thread...

Peachy...Is there another peachy..?

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 20:12

Lincstash;

Agree with every word of your post...

ooojimaflip · 30/03/2010 20:03

dp - ta..

ooojimaflip · 30/03/2010 19:57

What are they going to do with a used bus ticket?

lincstash · 30/03/2010 19:46

OMG i cant even BEGIBN to list Labours deficiencies.

Even if you ignore the horrendous cockup they've of almost every area of government, from education to defence, and the way they have slavishly handed the independence and sovereignty of this nation on a plate to the french and germans, you only have to look at the people themselves. To a man they are dismally untalented, corrupt, greedy, weak, and totally unsuited to hold public office.

We had the Blairs Babes, a bunch of women who, had they been left to the own devices, wouldn't to a woman have made any higher than school dinner lady. The worst offender is Harriet Harman, a bigoted harridan, anti-male, anti-white- anti-english, anti-middle class, anti christian, in fact anti- about everything this country stands for. This dreadful woman's Equality Bill is so biassed and prejudiced its amount to nothing less that state legalised bigotry, and is so far from 'eequality' its breath taking.

I coud lwrite pages on this subject. Alan Ainsworth, a coventry car plant shop steward, zero talent or knowledge, totally out of his depth and well above his competence ceiling as defence secretary. Someone was having a laugh when he got that job.

But the worst of all is Peter Mandelson. This slimt, corrupt, dishonext , immoral traitor has spent his entire life using public office to line his own pocket and further his own wealth. This man, thrown out of public office TWICE for dishonesty, shoudl never be allowed near public office of public money again, and his presence in the Labour party shoudl ring alarms bells for anyone thinking of voting labour. In any other organisation he woudl have been thrown out as untrustworthy. If £20 goes missing from the petty cash tin, Mandelson is the man whos pockets you need to search.

Policies aside, Labour are a bunch of lying two faced. immoral, dishonest, pocket lining crooks. I wouldn't trust a single one of them with a used bus ticket.

Clarissimo · 30/03/2010 19:27

Pleasant seeming then.

Still met worse; the one calling my kids gentic flaws (I mean you just dont so that to soeone do you?) and another about how I should be in a workhouse

But yep she seemed a bit.... other than to my taste.

At least you're friendly LOL DP

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 19:21

read last page of this thread

Clarissimo · 30/03/2010 19:11

Yes, who is that?

I never thought you were the biggest narrow minded bigot on MN or whatever it ewas

Course I thought you were narrow minded ands still do but heck you know I think that!

And you think I am a pinko liberal

And in fact I have had pinkoliberal amongst my many usernames for quite some time now....

(BTW dont go thinking the new Peachy is me, she might get confused if you start linking her to BNP pages to ecritique LOL! Didnt get to that anti fascism thing eit0ehr, buggers moved it to my twnth anniversary adn we had a babysitter for once. hey ho wasnt emant to be)

ooojimaflip · 30/03/2010 19:08

daftpunk - WHO?

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 19:06

Clarissimo;

There's a new poster on MN who has been named the biggest narrow minded bigot ever....

Clarissimo · 30/03/2010 18:48

huh? Do your Surestarts do pottery and dancing then?

we didn;t have time for shit like that, too busy helping the kids of abused women and the like.

No wonder you don't like them if thats what tyou think we did. We didn;t. The only thing vaguely that way was the growing your own skills thing which we knew for a fact was taken home becuase we would see it when we visited.

Mind, where I lived was pretty shite tbh, a few deprivation index estates, loads of drug issues etc. I guess if your intake is different you might arrnage different groups.

And I raised 4 too DpP thanks, with no SS. Doesn;t mean it wouldlnt ahve been a nice option.

probonbon · 30/03/2010 14:07

ho ho

skihorse · 30/03/2010 12:56

daftpunk I'm praying for their little souls. I just hope you haven't been filling their sweet, innocent heads wiv reading, riting and riffmatic and such nonsense. You'll probably just say that you take them on bike rides and identify ducks or collect shells at the seaside or some other such gumph.

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 12:35

Oh skihorse, I have been in constant turmoil over this, will my dc be at a permanent disadvantage because they didn't dance around with pine cones at a SureStart centre?...I fear they might be....

..I have tried to compensate by reading passages from the Fabian societies handbook at the dinner table, to explain as they drift off to sleep how Tony Blair re-wrote Clause 4...I just pray it's enough

vesela · 30/03/2010 12:28

The problem with Labour is that they seem to have programmes instead of policies - properly thought-out policies that involve good decisions and good lawmaking.

On the Vote for Policies site you can tell the Labour "policies" a mile off because they're just littered with programmes with Big Names. The BNP and UKIP sections are short on detail as you would expect, but the Lib Dem, Green and Conservative sections, while obviously differing in content and approach, are similar to each other in style - i.e. not government by Big Programme.

anastaisia · 30/03/2010 12:04

Problem with Surestart is that getting used to the government providing something isn't going to help people to help themselves.

The government supporting existing local provision would have made it accessible to more people and the community would have remained responsible - actually helping themselves.

But no, now we have loads of people relying on the government to provide free or subsidised activities and lots of people who were providing the same thing independently in the community will have given up because they can't compete with FREE even when the free sessions have a 7 month waiting list.

And people are scared that funding will be cut. Children's services departments have to pay for social services, supporting children with SEN and 'looked after' children in school, for supporting children with serious disabilities at home as well as Sure Start.

Some childrens centres do exactly what they are supposed to - they do reach the groups who need real support. They should remain fully funded. If a centre isn't reaching them they should only be partially funded.

There isn't unlimited money. Would you rather pay a few pound for a few weeks of baby massage or music or whatever - or have to fight the LA for years when it turns out your child has SEN and needs support in school and there isn't any money for it? Or if not your child, then your neighbour's or a family member - surely its a far more socialist view to accept that you pay for what you can so that those in need get what they need, than it is to promote universally free provision of certain unessential services?

skihorse · 30/03/2010 11:20

I find it very strange people are so vocal about thinking the tories will take away "everything". If their cases are genuine, why on earth would this be the case? It defies logic. Nobody, but nobody (I've said this before) would want to take away benefits from those who truly need them.

daftpunk 4 children who didn't need surestart? How will those poor wee mites ever learn to express themselves via the medium of dancing with pinecones?

Someone earlier in the thread said that perhaps these Surestart schemes would help the "next generation" to not be as feckless as their parents. How's that working out since 1997? Let's take for example that gang who stabbed that kid at the station last week. D'you think they were unaware they could've been doing pottery? All that's happened is that this "underclass" has grown. Throwing money at the feckless has helped nobody.

HerHonesty · 30/03/2010 10:59

oh because i work for a private medical insurer. tories getting in would be a great thing for us. we can see a very healthy pot at the end of the rainbow as another few decades of under investment in the health service bring it to its knees..