You really want him as PM...

[Immenseman]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090616/video/vuk-david-cameron-in-trouble-for-fake-ge-49bfa63.html

move if wrong forum, these forums are so confusing.

light hearted or not i hate the tories so idc :eusa_danc


Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: Thread closed to prevent further arguements/posts to cause arguements.

[Hecktix]

silly buggar.
shows his maturity doesn't it, should be back in high school smoking pot like he used to.

[LuketheDuke]

What I tried to say in my epic battle on another post.


Wait for it...

[Immenseman]

Don't worry you have me here to aid you now against the tunnelled vision of -:Undertaker:-

[Caution]

it wasn't anything major, in my eyes anyway. it's not that much of a big deal, it's just parties picking the minute 'bad bits' out of each other.

[GommeInc]

I'm with whatever party the Queen is in. She knows what to do, she's blooming well lived in this country and seen all of it happen enough times :P I don't particularly like any of the parties - Cameron is immature, Gordon Brown is hated by everyone (seriously, we had solicitors in today and they called him a berk :P), the Lib Dems I haven't really looked into and the smaller parties suffer tunnel vision. What happened to good policitians? Seriously, anyone after Blair has been crap, even the ones in the cabinet.

[Immenseman]

I just don't like Cameron any more, not because of this but just in general. He's so smug and he's obviously a better public talker than Brown and has a better appearance which unfortunately has a huge impact on people. He has a face I'd love to slap.

[GommeInc]

Indeed, you take one cheek and I'll take the other. I've sort of given up on democrazy. I'd love to see what a monarch could do :P No party has interested me yet, but Labour is definitely at the bottom of the list thanks to Gordon Brown - he's a berk (like every solicitor, lawyer and businessman would say, other than Sir Alan, but he's fit anyway).

[-:Undertaker:-]

How dare he make a light-hearted joke, an utter disgrace - he should be taken to the gallows. I'd rather have David Cameron as Prime Minister anyday compared to the man who ruined the economy, refuses to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and whose party are determined to ram through a useless ID scheme which will not stop terrorism or crime.

Let us not forget Gordon Browns amazing Youtube though, because if David Cameron looks like a fool there then I don't think there is a word in the English language to describe Gordon. :)

[Immenseman]

Indeed, you take one cheek and I'll take the other. I've sort of given up on democrazy. I'd love to see what a monarch could do :P No party has interested me yet, but Labour is definitely at the bottom of the list thanks to Gordon Brown - he's a berk (like every solicitor, lawyer and businessman would say, other than Sir Alan, but he's fit anyway).
Sounds like a plan to me.

How dare he make a light-hearted joke, an utter disgrace - he should be taken to the gallows. I'd rather have David Cameron as Prime Minister anyday compared to the man who ruined the economy, refuses to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and whose party are determined to ram through a useless ID scheme which will not stop terrorism or crime.

Let us not forget Gordon Browns amazing Youtube though, because if David Cameron looks like a fool there then I don't think there is a word in the English language to describe Gordon. :)
Because joking about such matters is acceptable for a PM? Right. Obviously not - admittedly Brown lacks in some departments, most noticeably looks. However, he has a level head and maturity - two vital aspects of being PM that Cameron can't and will never grasp.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Sounds like a plan to me.

Because joking about such matters is acceptable for a PM? Right. Obviously not - admittedly Brown lacks in some departments, most noticeably looks. However, he has a level head and maturity - two vital aspects of being PM that Cameron can't and will never grasp.

I think so yes, again it was light-hearted, would we rather have a robot like Brown who has no idea when to smile and when he does it looks like the Joker from Batman? - Brown have level head and maturity?, yes selling the gold stocks when they were at a twenty year low was a really clever move by Gordon Clown.

[LuketheDuke]

You gone and done it now mate :P

I believe in what Basil Faulty said, "whatever you do dont mention the war!"

[Immenseman]

I think so yes, again it was light-hearted, would we rather have a robot like Brown who has no idea when to smile and when he does it looks like the Joker from Batman? - Brown have level head and maturity?, yes selling the gold stocks when they were at a twenty year low was a really clever move by Gordon Clown.
You genuinely think Cameron could do a better job? I was replying to your post where you insisted on comparing the two. If you're so desperate to compare the PM to a smug rival then yes Brown certainly doe have maturity, in comparison to the alternative anyway.

[Hecktix]

Does it matter what a PM looks like tbh? Even if he doesn't have a very nice smile.

Afterall your wonderful maggie was hardly the most stunning of creatures.

[ifuseekamy]

All political parties are useless. That's why the majority don't vote.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You genuinely think Cameron could do a better job? I was replying to your post where you insisted on comparing the two. If you're so desperate to compare the PM to a smug rival then yes Brown certainly doe have maturity, in comparison to the alternative anyway.

I am pretty certain he could do a better job than Gordon Brown, whether or not David Cameron can do a 'good' job remains to be seen, I have my doubts about him. As for comparison, I think Gordon Browns' economic record of unsustainable spending and mountains of large debts speak for his economic and political maturity, however other than them two factors he is mature as a human being.

Also when I mention looks, no it doesn't matter, however if we are calling David Cameron a fool then we can name Gordon Brown just an equal fool for his totally unconvincing smile attempts on Youtube.

[Immenseman]

I am pretty certain he could do a better job than Gordon Brown, whether or not David Cameron can do a 'good' job remains to be seen, I have my doubts about him. As for comparison, I think Gordon Browns' economic record of unsustainable spending and mountains of large debts speak for his economic and political maturity, however other than them two factors he is mature as a human being.
I don't see how anyone else would have done any better, in fact they wouldn't have. He has done what he thinks is necessary and has ensured that people aren't affected like they have been in other countries. He knows he isn't the right man, longer term but for now at least he certainly is.

[GommeInc]

I'm waiting for David Cameron to become PM. If he does a bad job, then Labour can just laugh at them. Simple. At the moment Conservatives seem to put themselves in a better light than Labour, who seem to be cowering away forgetting what democracy is.

[Immenseman]

I don't mind too much that Conservatives will be voted in. Labour will reshape, rebuild and get a new leader which will introduce a breath of fresh air. People will realise how bad conservatives are. I can basically guarantee this time in four years it will be a crippling Conservative government trying to keep power and put off the election with Labour smashing them to pieces.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't see how anyone else would have done any better, in fact they wouldn't have. He has done what he thinks is necessary and has ensured that people aren't affected like they have been in other countries. He knows he isn't the right man, longer term but for now at least he certainly is.

In yours eyes then, having public spending at unsustainable levels and still refusing to cut them despite record levels of debt & selling gold stocks when at a twenty year low where good decisions? - he nationalised the banks yet the banks are still refusing to lend to struggling business and until they do, then the recession will continue.


I'm waiting for David Cameron to become PM. If he does a bad job, then Labour can just laugh at them. Simple. At the moment Conservatives seem to put themselves in a better light than Labour, who seem to be cowering away forgetting what democracy is.

I am the same, I have doubts about David Cameron and I just hope for this sake of the country that the Conservatives get it right this time like they did in 1979, otherwise we are in trouble.

[Immenseman]

In yours eyes then, having public spending at unsustainable levels and still refusing to cut them despite record levels of debt & selling gold stocks when at a twenty year low where good decisions? - he nationalised the banks yet the banks are still refusing to lend to struggling business and until they do, then the recession will continue.

Some banks are, you can't generalise and that's a fact, not speculation which your posts are based around. The banks are making things easier for people to live and Gordon Brown and the Labour party in general have had a huge influence in that. For example, my Dad owns numerous properties and the mortgage has halved on some. This will be the same for a lot of families who are having money issues.

[MaryMagdalene]

-:Undertaker:- one day karma will run over your dogma "/ and as for the eponymous question: um no he doesn't have charisma~ i'd elect myself but unfortunately i wasn't educated in useless historic classic studies at oxford university because i was too busy having a lifex

[-:Undertaker:-]

Some banks are, you can't generalise and that's a fact, not speculation which your posts are based around. The banks are making things easier for people to live and Gordon Brown and the Labour party in general have had a huge influence in that. For example, my Dad owns numerous properties and the mortgage has halved on some. This will be the same for a lot of families who are having money issues.

Business owners have told the media time and time again they are not having the loans coming through, therefore they are having to cut jobs as they cannot sustain the business. The other issues I mentioned are also disasterous economic decisions which have cost our country billions and are costing us every second that passess, building up a mountain of debt which is just soaring higher and higher.

When Labour entered office in 1997 they had one of the best balance sheets in the countrys history, when the leave office (the sooner the better) they will leave one of the worst deficits in the countrys history.

[Immenseman]

Business owners have told the media time and time again they are not having the loans coming through, therefore they are having to cut jobs as they cannot sustain the business. The other issues I mentioned are also disasterous economic decisions which have cost our country billions and are costing us every second that passess, building up a mountain of debt which is just soaring higher and higher.

When Labour entered office in 1997 they had one of the best balance sheets in the countrys history, when the leave office (the sooner the better) they will leave one of the worst deficits in the countrys history.
Due to the global recession yeah. Nothing they could do to eradicate that. Also, I think you're forgetting they've done it to improve the quality and standard of lives of people in this country. The tories wouldn't dream of doing such a thing because their middle class support aren't affected anyway. Oh, I so just went there.

You're too influenced by the media and you've even said so yourself in the first line of your post. What are the media famous for? Exaggerating to create controversy and to ensure people are interested.

[GommeInc]

Some banks are, you can't generalise and that's a fact, not speculation which your posts are based around. The banks are making things easier for people to live and Gordon Brown and the Labour party in general have had a huge influence in that. For example, my Dad owns numerous properties and the mortgage has halved on some. This will be the same for a lot of families who are having money issues.
Not really. Care to explain the financial portfolios my family were given today regarding our trust fund and my dad's estate which hasn't recovered as fast as it should since the economic downturn? :P Seriously, most things are halved so shares and so on can't be sold! The banks are all terrible (because it is a financial portfolio, bank comparisons between all of them are added) and they're all worthless at the moment.

Though I did find something useful:

The UK on its own is a better economy than any countries with the Euro/within the EU. If anything the EU would want Britain to have the Euro just to benefit itself, which of course won't happen unless this Labour government, or the tories stand their ground and not go for the Euro.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Due to the global recession yeah. Nothing they could do to eradicate that. Also, I think you're forgetting they've done it to improve the quality and standard of lives of people in this country. The tories wouldn't dream of doing such a thing because their middle class support aren't affected anyway. Oh, I so just went there.

You're too influenced by the media and you've even said so yourself in the first line of your post. What are the media famous for? Exaggerating to create controversy and to ensure people are interested.

Global recession has nothing to do with what I just posted, the government still refuse to cut public spending and the banks are still refusing to lend out in the United Kingdom. We own the banks, and whole point of nationalising the banks was to get them to lend again yet that has failed.

It is a global recession, however I am not talking about the rest of the world I am talking about the United Kingdom and the disasterous decisions this government has made over the past twelve years. You are using the class argument again so I shall now use it on you; Neil Kinnock. The man who led the Labour party a few decades again, was against the European Union and was against the House of Lords - yet now him and his wife are involved in both and are reeping in millions of taxpayer money for their 'services'. - In the words of Jim Royale; socialism my arse.

Socialists always use the class argument because it is one of the very few things they can do, i'll turn it on its head shall I? - if you ask a prison full of criminals who they would vote for between the Conservatives and Labour I could nearly gurantee the vast majority would rather vote Labour over Conservative.

I know when things are exaggerated thank you very much, I also know that the country is building up a massive mountain of debt which will weigh this country down for many years to come, thanks yet again to Labour.

[LuketheDuke]

Lol Kinnock opposed the fact that there was no entrenched Bill of Human Rights in the EU, that was passed in 1998.

He was against the House of Lords due to the herediatary peers that existed, they were abolished in 2001.

All by a person who Kinnock himself vested belief in, the right hon. Tony Blair.

Also, have you ever heard of Black Wednesday, Undertaker? The National Debt after that little disaster back in 92 was the highest its even been, even by todays standards.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Lol Kinnock opposed the fact that there was no entrenched Bill of Human Rights in the EU, that was passed in 1998.

He was against the House of Lords due to the herediatary peers that existed, they were abolished in 2001.

All by a person who Kinnock himself vested belief in, the right hon. Tony Blair.

Also, have you ever heard of Black Wednesday, Undertaker? The National Debt after that little disaster back in 92 was the highest its even been, even by todays standards.

Kinnock opposed both the European Union and House of Lords when he was fighting his socialist corner against Margaret Thatcher, he had argued for the abolition of the House of Lords when he was leader yet now he has changed his tune and is happy to accept millions from both every year. I thought as a socialist he is supposed to oppose high wages and is supposed to be fighting for the poor yet all I see are him and his wife reeping in millions upon millions, just like Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Lenin, Chairman Mao.. the list goes on and on with historys failures.

I have indeed, however the tories managed the economy then and when they left office in 1997 they had virtually no debt left leaving Labour a clean slate to spend money on, however Labour are refusing to cut spending - that is the vital difference, knowing when to stop.

[LuketheDuke]

He opposed them due to the reasons I stated as I had to learn why he managed to lose the '92 election despite his policy on things like hereditary peers in the Lords being allowed to stand by Maggie T.

Please stop making things up to big up the tories, "no debt" in 1997. The Conservatives "knowing where to stop".

A popular quote on here is pics then it didnt happen, back yourself up.

[-:Undertaker:-]

He opposed them due to the reasons I stated as I had to learn why he managed to lose the '92 election despite his policy on things like hereditary peers in the Lords being allowed to stand by Maggie T.

Please stop making things up to big up the tories, "no debt" in 1997. The Conservatives "knowing where to stop".

A popular quote on here is pics then it didnt happen, back yourself up.

Neil Kinnock was not elected to the House of Lords so so much for his democratic crusade, as always with the Labour failures - they end up in the House of Lords or more often the European Union, just like dear old Peter Mandelson.

If it was not true then Labour would not of been able to spend as much as they have done - simple economics.

[LuketheDuke]

What? Where are you getting these things from? It was Labour who took national debt to below 40% of the countries GDP in 2001. :S

They gave the Labour gvt. over 50% of our GDP, simple economics states thats terrible!

[alexxxxx]

Can someone please post some evidence. Undertakers arguments aren't generally backed up with facts or evidence. It's like listening to the the daily mail.

"Prisoners would vote for labour' how do you know that? With what evidence can you make that claim?

[-:Undertaker:-]

If the Conservatives had left office with a terrible debt then Labour wouldn't of been able to spend as much as it has - simple. BBC and even Labour supporters/MP's don't deny that when John Major left office, the balance was at one of its best in history and now it is sprialling out of control as the government refuse to cut spending which at its current level, is unsustainable.

I didn't state that was a fact, just like you put words in my mouth like you just have. I said lets turn the claim made against the tories on its head and I stated that, and I believe that is true. Who are softer on crime? - Labour, who always get more support from crime ridden areas - Labour.

[Technologic]

The guy has a sense of humour, sue him.

[jam666]

What? Where are you getting these things from? It was Labour who took national debt to below 40% of the countries GDP in 2001. :S

They gave the Labour gvt. over 50% of our GDP, simple economics states thats terrible!

Please please please please please STOP.

These arguments from labour supporters are driving me crazy.

The conservatives left government with one of the BEST debt records this country has ever seen so do not start saying labour brought the debt level to below 40% GDP in 2001 as it is clearly stupid when you look at the mess were in now.

Why do you think we are in debt now and will be until atleast 2030? because LABOUR KEEPS SPENDING!!! and has been spending since 1997!

Can i also point out labour did not get the debt to below 40%, it was actually the economy... as the general GDP for that year was quite high so it offset the labour governments spending thats why it fell to below 40%.

[Niall!]

Hey, shouldn't you guys be going out having sex and getting pissed instead of arguing about politics? Seriously, lifes are on sale in Tesco for 49p, get one quick.

[LuketheDuke]

Not even a Labour supporter, Im just proving that this talk of the Tories being great masters of financial administration are completely ridiculous and the argument against Labour is flawed.

They spearheaded a super economy in the late 90's and early 00's and it was due to their budgets that the economy improved and national debt dropped. The spending STARTED when the war began in 2003, it multiplied recently in the face of recession.

The tories did not leave in 97 with anything credibility in that department, events like Black Wednesday proved that.

If you want a great financial reformer look at Sir Robert Peel. None exist nowadays but i detest Tory supporters thinking their parties strategy is any good as Cameron is being hasty with that sectors hed cut from without sparking outrage from us the Joe Public.

[alexxxxx]

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html

Here are the actual figures. it's not hard to back up arguments with facts. saying 'all criminals support labour because they are soft on crime' isn't a fact and isn't an opinion based on fact, it is just a statement with no backing. Find some data or a source and it becomes an argument. It's simple essay writing and discussion skills.

[jam666]

Not even a Labour supporter, Im just proving that this talk of the Tories being great masters of financial administration are completely ridiculous and the argument against Labour is flawed.

They spearheaded a super economy in the late 90's and early 00's and it was due to their budgets that the economy improved and national debt dropped. The spending STARTED when the war began in 2003, it multiplied recently in the face of recession.

The tories did not leave in 97 with anything credibility in that department, events like Black Wednesday proved that.

If you want a great financial reformer look at Sir Robert Peel. None exist nowadays but i detest Tory supporters thinking their parties strategy is any good as Cameron is being hasty with that sectors hed cut from without sparking outrage from us the Joe Public.

Here is a quote from the iron Lady herself.

"Eleven years ago we rescued Britain from the parlous state to which socialism had brought it. Once again Britain stands tall in the councils of Europe and of the world. Over the last decade, we have given power back to the people on an unprecedented scale. We have given back control to people over their own lives and over their livelihoods, over the decisions that matter most to them and their families. We have done it by curbing the monopoly power of trade unions to control, even victimize the individual worker"

This is what happened then and its what is happening now with the current labour government.

Hmmm seems abit odd that Thatchers government could manage finances during the Cold and Gulf wars but the labour government cant at this moment in time, doesnt it......

[LuketheDuke]

Hum Thatcher wasnt in charge of Britain in the peak of the Cold War in the 1960's. Neither was she in charge during the Gulf War during 1991, that was Major. The Falklands did mark a period of spending however.

Neither do I support Labour, I think Blairs failure to regulate the banking industry led to this collapse so agreed I dislike our present government. But during the last recession Thatcher dealt with it by destroying certain industires like coal mining as it was a neccessary cut from the budgets.

I just don't think anyone competant with the economy, may as well chuck a calculator at a monkey and he'd be more aware than Darling.

[alexxxxx]

The figures show a recent surge in borrowing (in % terms) as the governement attemps to spend its way out of recession (which appears to be working at the moment). However the levels of debt before this are fairly similiar to those under the tories. This fianancial crisis is not a regular occurance, it's a serious problem. That's why borrowing needed to be increased. Many developed nations in the world took this step and much of the world is in recession. You can't blame the UK government for this.

[jam666]

The figures show a recent surge in borrowing (in % terms) as the governement attemps to spend its way out of recession (which appears to be working at the moment). However the levels of debt before this are fairly similiar to those under the tories. This fianancial crisis is not a regular occurance, it's a serious problem. That's why borrowing needed to be increased. Many developed nations in the world took this step and much of the world is in recession. You can't blame the UK government for this.

No one has blamed the UK government for this, we are simply blaiming the way they have DEALT with the situation.

Also, why bother saving failing industries that are a drain on the economy for example mining.

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_chart.html

Here are the actual figures. it's not hard to back up arguments with facts. saying 'all criminals support labour because they are soft on crime' isn't a fact and isn't an opinion based on fact, it is just a statement with no backing. Find some data or a source and it becomes an argument. It's simple essay writing and discussion skills.

I didn't say it was a fact as I said before, so stop putting words in my mouth as you Labour supporters are so good at. I said it wasn't a fact and it can't be backed up, however I then put the point across that in a area such as the criminal estates/bad parts of cities across the United Kingdom, parts of Liverpool included - who do them areas normally vote for? - Labour.

If people are going to play the class war then I shall play the class war, its amazing how Labour supporters dont like playing the class war when its on them, but when its on the Conservatives they are always first to dish the dirt.


Hey, shouldn't you guys be going out having sex and getting pissed instead of arguing about politics? Seriously, lifes are on sale in Tesco for 49p, get one quick.

Coming from the person who still plays Pokemon?


Not even a Labour supporter, Im just proving that this talk of the Tories being great masters of financial administration are completely ridiculous and the argument against Labour is flawed.

They spearheaded a super economy in the late 90's and early 00's and it was due to their budgets that the economy improved and national debt dropped. The spending STARTED when the war began in 2003, it multiplied recently in the face of recession.

The tories did not leave in 97 with anything credibility in that department, events like Black Wednesday proved that.

If you want a great financial reformer look at Sir Robert Peel. None exist nowadays but i detest Tory supporters thinking their parties strategy is any good as Cameron is being hasty with that sectors hed cut from without sparking outrage from us the Joe Public.

Labour never spearheaded anything, they just were caretakers of the reforms Margaret Thatcher made and meanwhile made awful financial decisions. Whether we had regulation or not would not of made any difference, capitalism needs bust to boom. This myth that has grown around Gordon Browns chancellorship is a myth, it was not Brown who created that prosperity it was the individual who was able to create such a boom thanks to the reforms Thatcher brought in.

I do not blame Labour or Gordon Brown for the bust, I think overall in the end the bust was nessacery and will in turn create new growth as it always does and has to in a capitalist economy. I do however blame him for awful financial decisions and for being unprepared.


Hum Thatcher wasnt in charge of Britain in the peak of the Cold War in the 1960's. Neither was she in charge during the Gulf War during 1991, that was Major. The Falklands did mark a period of spending however.

Neither do I support Labour, I think Blairs failure to regulate the banking industry led to this collapse so agreed I dislike our present government. But during the last recession Thatcher dealt with it by destroying certain industires like coal mining as it was a neccessary cut from the budgets.

I just don't think anyone competant with the economy, may as well chuck a calculator at a monkey and he'd be more aware than Darling.

The difference between the Conservatives and Labour are evident in terms of recovery time. The Conservatives in the recession recovered quickly without large debts, because they had saved money and spent sensibly and knew when to stop. Labour does not know when to stop and never had, 1979 a prime example when we had to appeal to the IMF because the idiot James Callaghan had run the country into the ground, along with his party and its unions.

Margaret Thatcher had a far bigger job than sorting out a recession, the reforms she placed were the difference between falling into a socialist nightmare or surviving and transforming into a strong, capitalist and free country in which the individual and not the state had control. It worked.

[Wolves]

Hey, shouldn't you guys be going out having sex and getting pissed instead of arguing about politics? Seriously, lifes are on sale in Tesco for 49p, get one quick.

I so agree with you, politics is for virgins.

Cough *half of this thread* Cough

[alexxxxx]

this forum is pathetic and every thread turns into the same argument. which is never coherent. undertaker, find out what an argument is, it's where you back things up with facts, hard facts or where you can put an opinion over with some backing.

until people can come up with decent arguments without justs saying things, i'm not posting here again.

[Wolves]

I thought I was the only one that didn't agree with Undertaker, now I realize so does the whole forum!

[Niall!]

Coming from the person who still plays Pokemon?

Something I can talk about to other people without sending them to sleep, and some exs of mine also played Pokemon. *Removed*

Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: Please do not be rude to others.

[-:Undertaker:-]

this forum is pathetic and every thread turns into the same argument. which is never coherent. undertaker, find out what an argument is, it's where you back things up with facts, hard facts or where you can put an opinion over with some backing.

until people can come up with decent arguments without justs saying things, i'm not posting here again.

You mean like the other threads where you decided to leave, and just like this thread again which you are leaving. I know why you are leaving, because jam666 has come in and started talking some sense into you all which you all seem to have no reply/comeback to what he writes.

That is always the way isn't it, get annoyed/don't know what to say and just call the thread pathetic and leave, the next Neil Kinnock.


I thought I was the only one that didn't agree with Undertaker, now I realize so does the whole forum!

You mean as in alexxxx and a few other Labour supporters?


Something I can talk about to other people without sending them to sleep, and some exs of mine also played Pokemon. *Removed*

You brought up the topic of not having a life, to me and to many they would rather talk about politics than talk about pikachu and ash throwing their pokemon balls at evil pokemon monsters. :)

[Immenseman]

Brown > Cameron :eusa_danc

[Wolves]

You mean like the other threads where you decided to leave, and just like this thread again which you are leaving. I know why you are leaving, because jam666 has come in and started talking some sense into you all which you all seem to have no reply/comeback to what he writes.

That is always the way isn't it, get annoyed/don't know what to say and just call the thread pathetic and leave, the next Neil Kinnock.



You mean as in alexxxx and a few other Labour supporters?



You brought up the topic of not having a life, to me and to many they would rather talk about politics than talk about pikachu and ash throwing their pokemon balls at evil pokemon monsters. :)

*REMOVED*

Edited by :Mobile (Forum Moderator): Please do not post inappropriately.

[leah]

I thought I was the only one that didn't agree with Undertaker, now I realize so does the whole forum!
I agree with him. Labour have completely ruined this country, and we need something new. I believe that the conservatives can start to rebuild the country again. I think we should at least give them a chance without backing the party that trashed everything.

Brown > Cameron :eusa_danc
No.

[Wolves]

You obviously have not a clue what you're on about, do you know what the conservatives were like before labour come into power? please, stop barking up the wrong tree.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You obviously have not a clue what you're on about, do you know what the conservatives were like before labour come into power? please, stop barking up the wrong tree.

You mean saving the country from financial destruction from 1979 and leaving one of the best financial situations behind for Labour in 1997?

Thank you Leah. :)

[alexxxxx]

No, i can't keep posting on pointless debates forever. Because they are circular. You claim to know about economics but you fail to recognise the EU's free-trade ideas, which you bang on about. You don't understand how investment by the givernment can increase national income and that you only understand the basic principals of the circle of income. So when I argue that nationalisation of certain industries (ie rail, bus) i get told that it hurts the economy. You fail to see that the EU does NOT say who makes what and wwhere it goes, it isn't a command economy. It's quota's, limits, subsidies are to keep a steady price in the marketplace for consumers and farmers/producers.

You keep on banging on about a refferendum, which was for the Constitution. Believe it or not, but the constitution is not the lisbon treaty. Much of it is the same, but it is not the same. You don't understand how democracy works in the way that you elect your MPs to do a job, you can't have refferedum on every single law/treaty as everyone doesn't have the time to educate themselves well enough. That's why you elect people to REPRESENT you. The EU IS democratic.

You can't (or don't) back up your arguments with facts, opinions aren't the same. You blind yourself with nationalism and the war and the good ol' days to see what the USA are doing to us (one-way treaties, making us their bum-buddies in pointless and costly wars that don't serve our interests, poorly regulated banking codes, corrupt governments) and what the EU are doing to us (free/common market, eu-wide work etc, pooling sovereignty). I KNOW there are benefits with being friendly with the USA I KNOW there are problems with how the EU works.

Frankly, you sound like what a daily mail would be if they were a person. A xenophobe with dodgy, unfounded arguments, a far-right bias who cries at 'broken britain' and how it's the fault of ZaNULIABORE nazis.

Alright.

PS. i'm not a labour supporter.

[-:Undertaker:-]

They are only circular because you ignore it all and bang on about these made up dreams such as a European Federal State and how our economy would collapse without the European Union. The European Union does NOT free up trade, it has a command economy structure similar to the idea of the Soviet Unions economy, if it didn't then it wouldnt exist as free trade would be between individual nations and not one trading bloc - that is part of a command economy. The farmers and fishermen DO NOT WANT THE EU & ITS REGULATIONS - why is it so hard for you and the EU to UNDERSTAND AND LISTEN to that!?.

The Libson Treaty is exactly the SAME as the Constitution, even SUPPORTERS of the EU and EU officals have said it is around 98% THE SAME, just minus the badge and embelm. I shall ask yet again, why is it so hard for you are the EU to understand people DO NOT WANT THE EU.

Democratic? - do we elect the Commission? - NO WE DO NOT. That is not democratic at all. No one chose it, it refuses to give us a referendum on whether or not we want the European Union or the Libson Treaty - you have a strange idea of democracy, one similar to Chinese/Soviet democracy in which you have one party which means no choice, then again at least they get to vote for it. We didn't say a referendum on every treaty, but when so many soverign powers/reform is to take place in a system which can overrule our sovereign parliament WE WANT A SAY.

You constantly use this arguement, oh god we have to be all centralised and together to survive this cruel new world! - no, you are wrong, if anything the world has got more de-centralised and argument that we need to sign away our sovereign powers away to a foreign and unelected body is absolute rubbish. I still do not see why you cannot face the fact that although you think their are benefits, the people of Europe still DO NOT WANT EUROPEAN UNION. Three countries were given a say on the treaty and not to the delight of the ruling governments in those countrys, out of the THREE countrys that were asked, THREE said NO. To put that in simpler terms; out of the poll sample of them three nations 100% of the countrys asked do not want more powers given to the EU, 3/3 TURNED THE EU DOWN.

What you do know is that people do not want the European Union, yet you and Labour just carry on as usual and ignore what people want. I am nationalist of this country you are right, because I am proud that we fought a world war and a cold war to fight the very thing that we are signing up to today, an unelected foreign superstate. Did we want to be ruled by the Third Reich? - NO. Did we want to be ruled by the Soviet Union? - NO. Do we want to be ruled by the European Union? - NO.

You and the European Union know the answer is NO from the majority of Europe, and that is why you are making Ireland vote yet again until it comes back with the answer that the European Union wants. If you and the EU are so sure of its support and how great it is, why not do the honourable thing and put the matter to bed forever - LET US CHOOSE.

I am not an xenophobe, i'm a europhobe.

[jam666]

No, i can't keep posting on pointless debates forever. Because they are circular. You claim to know about economics but you fail to recognise the EU's free-trade ideas, which you bang on about. You don't understand how investment by the givernment can increase national income and that you only understand the basic principals of the circle of income. So when I argue that nationalisation of certain industries (ie rail, bus) i get told that it hurts the economy. You fail to see that the EU does NOT say who makes what and wwhere it goes, it isn't a command economy. It's quota's, limits, subsidies are to keep a steady price in the marketplace for consumers and farmers/producers.

You keep on banging on about a refferendum, which was for the Constitution. Believe it or not, but the constitution is not the lisbon treaty. Much of it is the same, but it is not the same. You don't understand how democracy works in the way that you elect your MPs to do a job, you can't have refferedum on every single law/treaty as everyone doesn't have the time to educate themselves well enough. That's why you elect people to REPRESENT you. The EU IS democratic.

You can't (or don't) back up your arguments with facts, opinions aren't the same. You blind yourself with nationalism and the war and the good ol' days to see what the USA are doing to us (one-way treaties, making us their bum-buddies in pointless and costly wars that don't serve our interests, poorly regulated banking codes, corrupt governments) and what the EU are doing to us (free/common market, eu-wide work etc, pooling sovereignty). I KNOW there are benefits with being friendly with the USA I KNOW there are problems with how the EU works.

Frankly, you sound like what a daily mail would be if they were a person. A xenophobe with dodgy, unfounded arguments, a far-right bias who cries at 'broken britain' and how it's the fault of ZaNULIABORE nazis.

Alright.

PS. i'm not a labour supporter.

Ok, Point number one. How do we not understand investment? Its not exactly difficult to know, infact its common sense to know that when your in debt you dont spend more and get yourself more in debt. You get yourself out of it!

Nationalisation of some industries is a VERY bad idea. What do you think Thatcher did? She Privatised industry which BENEFITED the economy. So of course people argue with you as then the public does not have control!

You say the EU is democratic? What a foolish thing to say, MEP's are elected yes but i hardly call the EU Comission elected... Please rephrase your sentance.

You say we cant or wont support our arugments with facts? Ha! how stupid this is. I certainly remember me saying this about you and your labour friends a week or so ago!. Atleast we actually do give evidense and things that support our claims, we dont go giving into something like yourself and your labour friends with all guns blazing going OMGZ LABOUR IS TEH BEST! When it clearly isnt.

Im afraid i dont read the daily mail. I read the Independant as I find that it is more factual.

Your not a labour supporter? Ha! this is the best phrase ive heard all day, if you were not a labour supporter then why are you trying to defend them so much?.

[Wolves]

They are only circular because you ignore it all and bang on about these made up dreams such as a European Federal State and how our economy would collapse without the European Union. The European Union does NOT free up trade, it has a command economy structure similar to the idea of the Soviet Unions economy, if it didn't then it wouldnt exist as free trade would be between individual nations and not one trading bloc - that is part of a command economy. The farmers and fishermen DO NOT WANT THE EU & ITS REGULATIONS - why is it so hard for you and the EU to UNDERSTAND AND LISTEN to that!?.

The Libson Treaty is exactly the SAME as the Constitution, even SUPPORTERS of the EU and EU officals have said it is around 98% THE SAME, just minus the badge and embelm. I shall ask yet again, why is it so hard for you are the EU to understand people DO NOT WANT THE EU.

Democratic? - do we elect the Commission? - NO WE DO NOT. That is not democratic at all. No one chose it, it refuses to give us a referendum on whether or not we want the European Union or the Libson Treaty - you have a strange idea of democracy, one similar to Chinese/Soviet democracy in which you have one party which means no choice, then again at least they get to vote for it. We didn't say a referendum on every treaty, but when so many soverign powers/reform is to take place in a system which can overrule our sovereign parliament WE WANT A SAY.

You constantly use this arguement, oh god we have to be all centralised and together to survive this cruel new world! - no, you are wrong, if anything the world has got more de-centralised and argument that we need to sign away our sovereign powers away to a foreign and unelected body is absolute rubbish. I still do not see why you cannot face the fact that although you think their are benefits, the people of Europe still DO NOT WANT EUROPEAN UNION. Three countries were given a say on the treaty and not to the delight of the ruling governments in those countrys, out of the THREE countrys that were asked, THREE said NO. To put that in simpler terms; out of the poll sample of them three nations 100% of the countrys asked do not want more powers given to the EU, 3/3 TURNED THE EU DOWN.

What you do know is that people do not want the European Union, yet you and Labour just carry on as usual and ignore what people want. I am nationalist of this country you are right, because I am proud that we fought a world war and a cold war to fight the very thing that we are signing up to today, an unelected foreign superstate. Did we want to be ruled by the Third Reich? - NO. Did we want to be ruled by the Soviet Union? - NO. Do we want to be ruled by the European Union? - NO.

You and the European Union know the answer is NO from the majority of Europe, and that is why you are making Ireland vote yet again until it comes back with the answer that the European Union wants. If you and the EU are so sure of its support and how great it is, why not do the honourable thing and put the matter to bed forever - LET US CHOOSE.

I am not an xenophobe, i'm a europhobe.

Bloomin heck, every time you post you turn it into a speech, you try and make yourself sound like David Cameron and it doens't work, give your views normally instead of posting speeches every time your in a debate.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Bloomin heck, every time you post you turn it into a speech, you try and make yourself sound like David Cameron and it doens't work, give your views normally instead of posting speeches every time your in a debate.

I assume the same applies to alexxxx then?

I can write as much as I want, better than what you have come up with which are one liners which you throw out a claim, I reply to that claim with a one liner to match it and you ignore it still. I shall ask again and this time do not ignore me; You mean saving the country from financial destruction from 1979 and leaving one of the best financial situations behind for Labour in 1997?

[Japan]

Anyone who comes after Blair is going to look rubbish anyway
We're in the middle of a recession and Blair left at exactly the right time so all the fingers are pointed at Gordon. David cameron is far too smug and his policies favour the upper classes rather than the majority.
TBH all of the main political parties are full of crap.

[Wolves]

I assume the same applies to alexxxx then?

I can write as much as I want, better than what you have come up with which are one liners which you throw out a claim, I reply to that claim with a one liner to match it and you ignore it still. I shall ask again and this time do not ignore me; You mean saving the country from financial destruction from 1979 and leaving one of the best financial situations behind for Labour in 1997?

You answered your own question, maybe I don't write huge essays unlike you cause I have better things to do than get pissed off over politics.

There you go, a three sentence answer. :rolleyes:

Short but sweet. ;)

[-:Undertaker:-]

You answered your own question.

Come on now, lets not keep ducking the question, you stated; "You obviously have not a clue what you're on about, do you know what the conservatives were like before labour come into power? please, stop barking up the wrong tree. "

I replied with; "You mean saving the country from financial destruction from 1979 and leaving one of the best financial situations behind for Labour in 1997?"

What is your reply, or are you now in agreement with me?, if so then i'm chuffed. :)

You have better things to do? - then please for the sake of everyone here, go and do them.

[Wolves]

Come on now, lets not keep ducking the question, you stated; "You obviously have not a clue what you're on about, do you know what the conservatives were like before labour come into power? please, stop barking up the wrong tree. "

I replied with; "You mean saving the country from financial destruction from 1979 and leaving one of the best financial situations behind for Labour in 1997?"

What is your reply, or are you now in agreement with me?, if so then i'm chuffed. :)

You have better things to do? - then please for the sake of everyone here, go and do them.

A 'politician' who doesn't know the difference between an argument and a debate? surprising, I love pissing guys like you off.

Am I annoying you yet?

*Ducks the question.*

[-:Undertaker:-]

A 'politician' who doesn't know the difference between an argument and a debate? surprising, I love pissing guys like you off.

Am I annoying you yet?

*Ducks the question.*

Not really, now that I know you don't really mean anything you say.

[Wolves]

Just like you, everything you say I can read in the paper.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Then why won't you debate it? - you claim things yet refuse to discuss them which goes to show and does show who knows what their talking about and who is away with the fairys.

[Wolves]

Haven't you given up yet? lol.

[Jordy]

You answered your own question, maybe I don't write huge essays unlike you cause I have better things to do than get pissed off over politics.

There you go, a three sentence answer. :rolleyes:

Short but sweet. ;)How can you possibly say anything about debating when you just ignored all his questions? I do believe in short can be sweet but you haven't said anything to do with politics in your post? I'm guessing your post comes from something like this:
- You're wrong and want to get out of it by criticising his posting
- You can't be bothered to read it
- You're jealous he can write so much on a topic yet all you can do is write meaningless posts about the 'art' of debating which you completely fail at

It bemuses me your so 'pissed' about football that you name yourself after it, I could quite easily say you've took it too far and there's better things to do. It's just as well I like football but my point is everyone has their own interests, clearly your not interested in Politics but there's no need to spam the thread with crap and then insult people.

[Wolves]

EDIT: NVM LMAO.

Carry on with your pathetic little politic quabbles.