Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 800147)

So there goes any chance of the "pink vote", then!

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 800153)

...and this wallflower has decided not to vote at all :)

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800205)

Sounds a good idea not to vote on internal matters in other countries. I wouldn't want any other countries deciding what our domestic policy was either. I think this highlights just how out of touch the European Union is, and why we should be out of it.

As for the clip, it's well edited. I don't think Cameron had any idea about which vote the Gay Times was talking about, and don't expect him to know every single vote that goes in the EU.

The interviewer then starts asking about a vote in the Lords to force Quakers to allow civil partnerships on their premises. The vote was signed by a Conservative peer. Cameron thought it was a free vote conscience issue, which wasn't good enough for the interviewer. I agree with Cameron. Civil Partnerships are civil contracts, not religious ceremonies. It should be up to the particular religion whether they wish to allow it.

Ben Bradshaw poped up and talked a load of rubbish about how these issues shouldn't be free votes. Yet Labour allowed a free vote on the church/civil partnerships, and demanded that the previously mentioned Conservative peer withdraw his amendment to it. Hypocrisy. They'll say anything to cling on.

Edward McMillan-Scott is a Europhile who got kicked out of his party. No surprise that he's trying to cause trouble at the end of that news clip!

Is this all Labour have to cover up balancing the budget on the backs of the poor?

Originally Posted by Less (Post 800217)

There are times you know, when I just get the slightest suspicion, no suspicion is perhaps too strong a word, I get the slightest inkling that you are biased in your political views, andrew.

But that's me always ready to jump to the nearest conclusion that happens to pass by.
:)

Too old for band wagon's they'd have to fit a tail lift for me.
:o

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 800221)

There's nothing like strong leadership.

Sadly, this in nothing like strong leadership.

Shameful.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 800223)

Oh, where's everybody gone?

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 800140)

It appears it was not the only thing that went wrong, Councillor Jones - so has your post.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800492)

Graham, who proof read your literature?

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 800495)

Is this going to degenerate into a debate about typing errors?

I would advise you, of all people, to avoid going down that route.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800492)

Graham, who proof read your literature?

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800497)

I've never made an error in any literature produced. :D

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 800500)

Has any literature even been produced for Karen Buckley?

Maybe they're too scared of typos and looking foolish and disorganised.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800492)

Graham, who proof read your literature?

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800492)

Graham, who proof read your literature?

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 800562)

I don't know who proofreads your literature, Andrew (whatever your "literature" might be), but I do hope that, unlike you, they realise that "proofread" is one word. ;)

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800563)

This is Accringtonweb, I'd put a little more effort into proofreading if it cost me £600 a post. ;)

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800138)

I have said before I like Cameron, one of the very few who does

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800606)

I think you are being picky Andrew. Good english is helpful but we are in danger of going back to Gordon Browns one eye'd, black marker pen issue.

I always make errors when typing from my mobile and half of those are the automated error correction.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800635)

I make tons of errors on Accyweb too.

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 800626)

any more outbursts like that and im gonna spoil my vote on the lib dems :p

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800653)

Ok, DC love in over.

The Gay Times interview and a number of other issues have left me not so sure he is genuine. The kids in politics thing and the recent Cam the Sam pregnancy. The Punch and Judy politics when he said he was against Punch and Judy politics. The constant personal attacks on Gordon Brown (and Brown has stayed above it all in my view).

The endless dishwater platitudes. Nice to positive but the millionth time of no policy detail, just "look! we're going to things different" and "look! we're going to clean up politics", "look! we're going to clean up this mess". "look! we're going to do something about it". Dishwater.

I am beginning to think that Howard and Hague offered more in 2005 and 2001. Howard would not have blown out that Gay Times interview. It's looking more like 'Cam - what a Sham' (look! he's losing my support fast!).

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800653)

Ok, DC love in over.

The Gay Times interview and a number of other issues have left me not so sure he is genuine. The kids in politics thing and the recent Cam the Sam pregnancy. The Punch and Judy politics when he said he was against Punch and Judy politics. The constant personal attacks on Gordon Brown (and Brown has stayed above it all in my view).

The endless dishwater platitudes. Nice to positive but the millionth time of no policy detail, just "look! we're going to things different" and "look! we're going to clean up politics", "look! we're going to clean up this mess". "look! we're going to do something about it". Dishwater.

I am beginning to think that Howard and Hague offered more in 2005 and 2001. Howard would not have blown out that Gay Times interview. It's looking more like 'Cam - what a Sham' (look! he's losing my support fast!).

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800653)

The Gay Times interview and a number of other issues have left me not so sure he is genuine.

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 800626)

any more outbursts like that and im gonna spoil my vote on the lib dems :p

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 800660)

Even the good old, ever reliable and factual, Tory supporting, Daily Telegraph, reports just how badly the Conservative leadership looks, after the cringe making gaffes Cameron made, whilst courting the pink vote, amongst other things they've done recently.

'Dave, since his car-crash interview with Gay Times, is perceived as high-risk in the vicinity of a television camera; George has just demonstrated on the BBC’s Today programme that he should not be allowed near a radio studio.
Most Tories hate David Cameron and cannot wait to see him crash and burn – Telegraph Blogs

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800699)

And Tory voters desperate to see Labour out loathe Cameron too. And where will that leave us if Labour were dispensed with?

A mess.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 800705)

Cameron's now being shown up for what he is...a very mediocre Blair wannabe. However, unlike the Dear Leader who was a dab hand with the old smoke and mirrors routine, Cameron just can't carry off the deception and ends up floundering on the shores of public opinion.

However, there is such an instinctive feeling of dislike towards Brown and humourless, PC-obsessed haridans like Harman that the boy David might just scrape through anyway.

I might just put my money on a minority Tory administration this time around (closely followed by another election).

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 800705)

Cameron's now being shown up for what he is...a very mediocre Blair wannabe. However, unlike the Dear Leader who was a dab hand with the old smoke and mirrors routine, Cameron just can't carry off the deception and ends up floundering on the shores of public opinion.

However, there is such an instinctive feeling of dislike towards Brown and humourless, PC-obsessed haridans like Harman that the boy David might just scrape through anyway.

I might just put my money on a minority Tory administration this time around (closely followed by another election).

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 800712)

You wont get any better odds than 5/4 Hung Parliament at the moment Mr H.And that's with Labour as the biggest party.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800706)

We're already in a mess. Largely of Gordon Brown's making. Labour have spent, spent, spent over the last decade, with no thought about the future. I don't trust them to reduce the deficit, since they're the ones that have built it up. If we don't reduce the deficit quickly, and Labour plan to do nothing in the first year, we'll see rising interest rates which will hit mortgage owners hard.

Brown is balancing the budget on the backs of working people.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 800718)

And the 50p tax rate and 5% stamp duty on mansions? Didn;t you aregue that all Labour want's to do is penalise the successful?

Your argument would have merit if Germany's and Japans economy hadn't had deeper recessions, if unemployment was higher in the EuroZone and USA.

It would also be an acceptable argument if Britain wasn't so reliant on financial services or that every other country has adopted Gordon Brown's solution.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 800753)

The ‘Output, prices, and jobs‘ section of this week’s Economist clearly shows that there are at least five G20 countries still in recession: Britain, Canada, Mexico, South Africa, and Russia. Spain, who attend G20 meetings, are also still in recession.

this was posted december,on an economics site, seems the others on this list have come out of recession P.D.Q.?:confused:

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800758)

Spain do attend G20 meetings, they're not in the G20 though. Canada, Mexico, South Africa and Russia came out of recession before we did.

UK recession longest and deepest since war, says ONS | Business | guardian.co.uk (We've since come out of recession with 0.3% growth)

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 800759)

you n many others may buy that "weve come outa recession" Crap, but i sure don't.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800760)

I was talking about officially. I still think our economy is terrible and we have worse to come.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 800753)

The ‘Output, prices, and jobs‘ section of this week’s Economist clearly shows that there are at least five G20 countries still in recession: Britain, Canada, Mexico, South Africa, and Russia. Spain, who attend G20 meetings, are also still in recession.

this was posted december,on an economics site, seems the others on this list have come out of recession P.D.Q.?:confused:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 800765)

A better way of making comparisons perhaps, for those of us old enough to remember, would be to try and weigh up if we are better, or worse off today, than we were twenty years ago, when Queen Margaret was still on the throne.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 800716)

Yep, not worth a flutter really, Bernard. Outright Labour victory's coming up at 13/2...hmmm, might be worth a trip down the bookies today...especially if the boy David makes a few more gaffes in the coming weeks. ;)

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 800659)

honestly think this election will be closer than some think, never oer till the fat lady sings.

Originally Posted by Nickelson (Post 800870)

5/6 on Labour to win in Hyndburn. Worth a punt surely.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 800760)

I was talking about officially. I still think our economy is terrible and we have worse to come.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 800899)

You could be right, the Tories could get in.

I'll be alright though, this time I won't be on the Dole with a family to bring up.
:)

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 800906)

Happy days, I'm sure.

Have you gone all misty eyed, remembering the 'good old days'?

:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 801053)

I wonder how any country can expect to operate when 1/5 of all able bodied adults in employment are public employees (non producers and non taxpayers) .note ...... Taxes paid by public employees are just recycled £s paid into the system previously by private emplyees and compaies and as such cannot be counted as 'new wealth')

National Statistics Online

and 1/3 of all homes are in reciept of Govt. benefits for at least 1/2 of its income, and therefore are non contributors to the system

One third of homes dependent on benefits - Telegraph

simple math shows that a majority of the population 1/5 +1/3 = 8/15 (20% +33.3% = 53%) is being financially supported by a lesser number of legitimate taxpayers , hardly conducive to a competive economy :confused:

Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 801053)

simple math shows that a majority of the population 1/5 +1/3 = 8/15 (20% +33.3% = 53%) is being financially supported by a lesser number of legitimate taxpayers , hardly conducive to a competive economy :confused:

Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 801053)

I wonder how any country can expect to operate when 1/5 of all able bodied adults in employment are public employees (non producers and non taxpayers) .note ...... Taxes paid by public employees are just recycled £s paid into the system previously by private emplyees and compaies and as such cannot be counted as 'new wealth')

National Statistics Online

and 1/3 of all homes are in reciept of Govt. benefits for at least 1/2 of its income, and therefore are non contributors to the system

One third of homes dependent on benefits - Telegraph

simple math shows that a majority of the population 1/5 +1/3 = 8/15 (20% +33.3% = 53%) is being financially supported by a lesser number of legitimate taxpayers , hardly conducive to a competive economy :confused: