Former New Labour minister Alan Johnson says Labour lost because it distanced itself from Tony Blair’s government
I say RUBBISH! Labour lost because they didn’t distance themselves enough.
As an ex-Labour voter and one-time party member, I struggled long and hard with my conscience, right up to standing in the ballot booth, pencil in hand before I finally put my cross next to our Labour candidate.
Why? Because I want a socialist government who will represent the proletariat, and only the proletariat’s interests- not the bankers and big business, hoping for- or lying about ‘trickle down’ wealth.
I finally decided to vote Labour because it was, I believed our best chance of keeping the Tories out.
Unless Labour distances itself from neo-liberalism, unless it embraces its roots and supports the working class, they cannot rely on my vote in the future.
It is being reported that the use of food banks will reduce dramatically under the new Conservative government.
Most of the people who rely on them will die.
Tories got 37% of the vote but 50% of the seats and ALL of the power
Only 37% of voters lent their support to the Tories on Thursday. 63% opted for other parties.
When you take into account the fact many people didn’t vote at all, the numbers get even more extreme. Only 24% of those eligible to vote actually put a cross next to a Tory candidate on their ballot paper.
That leaves a massive 76% of people do not support a Conservative government.
Only one answer- for the rest of your lives, fight these bastards, to the death if need be.
Originally posted on Pride's Purge:
(not satire – it’s Cameron’s Britain!)
The Cameron government has not been clamping down on benefit fraud.
He and his ministers have been attacking genuinely sick and disabled people instead.
There are now numerous cases of terminally sick cancer patients being told by the DWP they are unable to receive sickness benefit and will have to work or starve because they are supposedly ‘fit for work’.
We also have parents of child cancer patients having to rely on food banks because the Cameron government decided being a carer means you will get no help from our increasingly non-existent welfare state:
Another example of a victim of the coalition government’s slashing of help and support for the sick, disabled and dying was Chris Smith, a plumber from Leicester with terminal cancer who sadly died recently:
The fact is, that under the Cameron government…
View original 230 more words
David Cameron has revealed his caring side in an interview today.
“You may think I am just a selfish millionaire who cares only about his own wealth, but I am here to tell you I care about lots of wealthy people. The electorate should consider next Thursday whether they want wealthy people to be taxed into small 15 bedroomed properties, or do they want to do the right thing and help us to amass ever more pelf?”
He went on to say that the poor should realise they are an essential part of society, for without them the wealthy would have no standard against which to measure their superiority and economic advantage. “If we were all well off, why, the rich would actually be poor.
It is obvious to anybody with half a brain [the hoi polloi] that the socialist ideal of the redistribution of wealth would mean not that we are all wealthy, but that we are all poor.
So, when you vote next week, remember to cast a vote for yourselves, a vote for Conservatives so that you paupers at least have some meaning for your existence- to maintain the differential that makes my wealth worth having.”
(Not a real interview- I made it up. But you might consider whether I actually hit the nail on the head!)
Typical media brainwashing through subliminal messaging; the headline suggests something unsavoury, the actual text reveals that Ed was at his current girlfriend’s party when he met his future wife. Duh?!
But they have planted the seed of sexual depravity with the headline, and the ambiguous references in the article will not shake the initial impression given to most people- that he is somehow unwholesome.
Now, I’m not a lover of ‘Red’ Ed- he’s far too blue for my liking, but get very annoyed when the media uses these techniques to sway public opinion.
Originally posted on Pride's Purge:
(not satire – it’s the Daily Mail!)
Of course, the Daily Mail never likes Labour leaders.
But in all the years of watching politics, I have never before seen such vitriolic and personal attacks on a Labour leader – and even his family – that we have been seeing from the Daily Mail recently (warning – link to Daily Mail dross):
In fact, the attacks are so personal I’m even starting to think the unthinkable.
Could it be because Ed Miliband is Jewish?
Don’t be so naive to think there aren’t still members of the British establishment who really really hate the idea of somebody with a Jewish background being Prime Minister.
And after all, Rothermere and his newspaper the Daily Mail have a shameful history of anti-Semitism.
In the 1930s, the newspaper supported Hitler as well as Oswald Mosley and his British Union of…
View original 446 more words