William Hague's Labour legacy bitch list...

[_liam_]

Er... that's just an analyst saying he predicts it might fall to 52%. So when I said they were mostly Oxbridge chaps... I wasn't talking "bullshit" or "wank", was I?

[MinionZombie]

So when I said they were mostly Oxbridge chaps... I wasn't talking "bullshit" or "wank", was I? In a way you still are - because you speak of it negatively. It's reverse-snobbery - hence wanky bullshit. Regardless of what "might" happen, it still illustrates a trend in the party - falling numbers of privately educated MPs, and rising numbers of state educated MPs. Labour have something like 16% of theirs privately educated, and the LibDems have 30-something-% privately educated - but you know what? Who cares? What I do object to are MPs who bemoan "Tory Toffs" and "Bullingdon this, Private that", but send their kids to private school. I don't mind them sending their kids private, not at all, but I object to the bullshit hypocrisy. Reverse-snobbery is just pathetic, quite frankly. As I said earlier - I couldn't give a toss-wank what someone's background is (private or state educated, rich or poor, whatever) as long as they're doing a good job - and that's over the entire political spectrum too.

[_liam_]

Ok so the Torys don't have a record of giving preferential treatment to the monied & upper middle class via their policies I'M the charlatan, you obviously know more about politics than I do, I'll just be quiet and let you cut & paste stuff from biased sources & spout rhetoric laced with bad language and personal insults! How dare you accuse me of prejudice when you so obviously have a slightly unbalanced vendetta against New Labour

[MinionZombie]

Ok so the Torys don't have a record of giving preferential treatment to the monied & upper middle class via their policies I'M the charlatan, you obviously know more about politics than I do, I'll just be quiet and let you cut & paste stuff from biased sources & spout rhetoric laced with bad language and personal insults! How dare you accuse me of prejudice when you so obviously have a slightly unbalanced vendetta against New Labour Man, I'm just saying my view. You've been saying your piece, I've been saying my piece. Simple. What's wrong with that? What source isn't biased one way or the other, when you really think about it? I dislike New Labour because of their policies and their style of government, but I don't deny that at times they have done correct things. I myself benefitted from the influx of new school text books after they won the 1997 election, and recently I was on their side in that much hyped "animal people mad science!!!!11!1!!11!one!" bill - it was good that they voted in favour of it. I remember saying so more than once at the time, the very same thing, here on HPOTD. Equally though, at the same time as the example of the "embryology bill" (I believe it was called), there was another bill ... if memory serves it was that 42 Days bill, perhaps another, but I think it was that one ... they voted for 42 Days and I was wholly opposed to that. I'm no politician, I don't have to conduct myself politely if I don't want to when talking about Brown, in my view he's a bastard, in my view - but that's just a throw away jibe. My reason for considering him a bastard is lengthy and based on his (and his party's) policies, and how he comes across to me in his attitude. You could just as easily accuse New Labour, or a myriad of other political parties, of favouring one group or another, or indeed switching allegiances, or playing two sides at the same time. I don't mean to personally offend you, but when you go off into "Tory Toff" territory, to me that's reverse-snobbery. My point is, it shouldn't matter what background an MP has - just as long as they're in it for the right reasons and are trying their best, regardless of political hue. Diane Abbott for example - on the Labour side - I don't agree with some of the things she says, but agree with others, and I respect her attitude and approach to politics. I don't agree with her party enough to vote for them, but then I'm not attracted to the Labour or LibDem way of doing things. The Conservative Party is by no means perfect, no political party is and never can be, but I respect and believe in their core principles and attitude to governing. I don't agree with everything they say, I don't swallow their line like a cock-smoking crack addict looking for a fix by whatever means. I also believe that any political party is capable of change, and indeed - as time moves on, as people retire, as new blood is recruited, and social attitudes naturally evolve - you're going to see each party grow, change, and evolve around their core principles. Like I said above - your view, my view. How is this wrong? ... In future I won't discuss any politics with you.

[_liam_]

There's no need to do that, I'm just offended because you described an attitude I specifically aligned myself with as "retarded" or "bullshit" or whatever, while I'm sure you weren't addressing me specifically, it's still bad form. But yeah seeing I guess to a degree I'm being pedantic & throwing my toys out of the pram a bit. But I'm definitely not questioning your right to voice your opinion, I'm just saying let's keep it cricketlike The thing is New Labour are very much in bed with the same agendas & idealogy the Torys are, & because you appear to perceive a gulf between Fake Labour and the Torys, I worry that you seem to believe that today they are The Conservative Party in name only & that they really will carry out their promises. Of course I'm not mystic meg & I don't know for sure that they won't, but what astonishes me is that you see right through Fake Labour's Spin & Folly, but not the Torys. Similarly you are willing to judge NL on precedents, but obviously not the Torys. He who ignores history... I'm not being so pompous as to suggest you aren't aware of the party's past, but I question the rationale by which you ignore it... I think ultimately as fairly liberal generation y media types, we want roughly the same things from life & the state, and I myself have no Party or agenda, and to be honest I just don't get how an upstanding chap such as yourself - who sees the shortcomings of other parties - can stick up for the Torys!

[MinionZombie]

New Labour are very much in bed with the same agendas & idealogy the Torys are I don't agree with that at all personally. I'm not being so pompous as to suggest you aren't aware of the party's past, but I question the rationale by which you ignore it... I think ultimately as fairly liberal generation y media types, we want roughly the same things from life & the state, and I myself have no Party or agenda, and to be honest I just don't get how an upstanding chap such as yourself - who sees the shortcomings of other parties - can stick up for the Torys! First point you raise - I don't ignore it, for example, I'm totally against the control of the meeja during the Falklands (like that nonsense when they dubbed Gerry Adams), and quite specifically - being a monster raving loony fan for horror films - if I'd been this age in the 1980s, I'd have been REALLY fucked off with the whole Video Nasties thing (found it hilarious that they at the time never enacted the VRA properly - so right now, it's not law! - Not for long though, it's being fixed). Just a couple that spring to mind. However, as I referred to somewhat earlier, I strongly believe that all parties do change after they've been booted out. 70s Labour, and 00's Labour - while sharing the same core principles - are two different parties, in two different eras. The birth of the NHS - totally in favour of it - although I reject the opinion of the architect of the NHS who considered Conservatives to be absolute scum (can't remember the exact quote, but it was far from flattery ). As for the second part, while I'd never be a member of any party, I do firmly believe in today's Conservative Party, and when I look at the range of parties out there, they're the ones who best suit my outlook on life. The violent media 'thing' remains to be seen, but I've been impressed thus far with the Shadow Culture Secretary's talking-up of the UK's games industry, even pointing directly to the success of Rockstar Games. I'd think today they're above such scare stories as Video Nasties - I think that's run it's course long ago. I think it's perfectly fine to support one party over the other, while recognising they have flaws, but ultimately believing that their way of doing things is best suited to you. Recognising the faults of other parties is therefore more likely to happen, as they're parties that weren't best suited to your own views, but I can still say "yay" to things that the LibDems have stood up for (e.g. the whole Gurkha thing), or UKIP (although I don't believe we should be totally out of the EU, I do firmly think we should only be involved in terms of trading and issues that involve borders) - the latter one ties in with my distinct distaste for "big government". I prefer individual responsibility, and local organisation, with the central state just keeping the main things running and ticking over. an upstanding chap such as yourself ... Right, better go watch the rest of this Peep Show episode.