Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
oh what a surprise. resorts to attempted 'wit' to hide inabiliity to refute. ducks whole dialectical thrust of my post. fails to engage at all.tbaldwin said:
pathetic.
blunkett
- Thread starter nightowl
- Start date
pathetic.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
oh YESS!! it's the daily tbaldwin "I can't argue to save my life, so I'll save myself by refusing to engage and resortinjg to schoolboy insul;ts, whilst blind to how big an arse i'm making of myself" show.tbaldwin said:
1. I have made it abundantly clear which political party I was a long-term member, employee and officer of. if you can't work out what 'LP' means, you're either blind yourself, or too dim to post here.
2. The principle of not supporting a political party when its' posho leadership starts making life even harder for w/c youth, hmmmm?
Look, son, either learn to debate properly (you know,like, say, using FACTS and EVIDENCE to substantiate ideas), or go back to school to get your vast knowledge deficit reduced, or simply don't even attempt to debate. you really have made yourself look stupid here.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
I have assumed you are in the labour party. this - given that you are just about the only person on the boards to have given a 100% whitewash-defence of blunkett (and that you sound like a parody of all the 90-years-old ultra-right wing LP members in my first branch) , it struck me as a reasonable and unremarkable assumption. If you're a Tory instead (and you should be, I think) I can only apologise for misreading you, ditto if of no affiliation.tbaldwin said:
So - how's about you not being so coy? which party, if any/
the last 2 were party policy in one form or another, going back to before I joined, and the first was not perceived to be needed then (and, tbh, thirty quid big deal). I come from the era of full grants.
Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting Labour has moved to the left since the michael foot era?
see, tbaldwin, THIS is what debate is. Now - your turn - how about YOU refuting the points made about Blunkett by myself, belboid and others? this ain't goin' nowhere till you do.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
because this is a discussion forum you dishonest little man, hence one is generally supposed to defend the positions the yput forward.tbaldwin said:
yours have been completely contradicted, and indeed shown to be false (eg about education, about working-class support for him), but you have not even attempted, let alone succeeded, in rebutting any of thopse positions. hence i must assume you are incapbable of doing so.
And, of course, one can oh so easilly turn around and ask you, if we are such intellectual pygmies, why does a man of your great intellect bother with us?
Red Jezza said:I have assumed you are in the labour party. this - given that you are just about the only person on the boards to have given a 100% whitewash-defence of blunkett (and that you sound like a parody of all the 90-years-old ultra-right wing LP members in my first branch) , it struck me as a reasonable and unremarkable assumption. If you're a Tory instead (and you should be, I think) I can only apologise for misreading you, ditto if of no affiliation.
So - how's about you not being so coy? which party, if any/
the last 2 were party policy in one form or another, going back to before I joined, and the first was not perceived to be needed then (and, tbh, thirty quid big deal). I come from the era of full grants.
Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting Labour has moved to the left since the michael foot era?
see, tbaldwin, THIS is what debate is. Now - your turn - how about YOU refuting the points made about Blunkett by myself, belboid and others? this ain't goin' nowhere till you do.
erm Interesting you would like to go the days of Foot and Kinnock? Fuck me.. What a load of shit. You might just be the last betamax salesman.
Time has moved on and your views are shit.
Socialism is not about being academically pure it is about changing things for the better,s o i would much rather have NL than Foot etc.
But you seem to rather like being a loser.....
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
oh dear he's off with the 'trendy' again.
let me explain this s-l-o-w-l-y; to be against Blunkett for his pandering to racists, his use error/emergency legislation to silence protest, his asbo legislation...is NOT trendy.it is to be mindful of the importance of civil liberties.
let me explain this s-l-o-w-l-y; to be against Blunkett for his pandering to racists, his use error/emergency legislation to silence protest, his asbo legislation...is NOT trendy.it is to be mindful of the importance of civil liberties.
belboid said:
No i argued that he was a good socialist education minister. Who has contradicted that? Nobody.
If you think Blunkett has little WC support satnd against him in the election, it will be very interesting to see who has the most support wont it??? HA HA HA.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
both points answered and rebutted (ie your comment re fee's was untrue!, and his w-c support for him has been falling quite massively). but you ignored them, as you couldn't reply. his measures have not helped more w-c people attend HE, as they were supposedly intended, or to attend FE even, but facts are something you care little about it would seem.tbaldwin said:
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
congratulations! Yet another thought-free, kiddie-insult post. How do you KNOW what I like or not? WHERE did I say i wanted to go back there? Which 'views' are 'shit' - seeing as I took great care to purposely OMIT my personal views?tbaldwin said:
fucking hell you are poor at this, you ignorant little man.
so - are we now gonna get FINALLY to your meisterwerk in defence of Blunkett?
(btw, 100 socialists will define the word 100 different ways, but if it is about anything, high up my list would come the concept of 'redistributing wealth from rich to poor'. Under Blair, it's gone the other way. as their own stats unit at the treasury admitted)
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
are you trying to be funny? EVERYONE knows that andy adonis set all the education policy, including the divisive and unsuccessful city academies, for the whole of his term theretbaldwin said:
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
yup-who brought in all them 'consultants'? who's done all the PPP/PFI ripoff?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
like I say, this labour government's own....tbaldwin said:
and are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the labour party?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
ooh gorn all quiet in 'ere
Red Jezza said:like I say, this labour government's own....
and are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the labour party?
Really amusing how youve gone on. No ive never been in the LP.. But i usually vote for them as the least worst option. And i like DB he is a much better Socialist than most of the losers who have left the party.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
so never been a member but more of a cheerleader than the 200,000+ poor sods still left in? fucka duck! 
No but most of the people who have left the LP. I mean just look at those losers in the 80s and 90s who were against "one member one vote" etc...mattkidd12 said:
Very Socialist, i dont think.
I would far rather a LP that wins elections but a lot of the people who left the LP seemed happier under losers like Kinnock and Foot..
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
and do please enlighten us all as to how Mr Blunkett has advanced the cause of socialism since first entering the cabinet.
He was a socialist - when he was the pioneering, radical leader of Sheffield council. but those days are way, way gone.
He was a socialist - when he was the pioneering, radical leader of Sheffield council. but those days are way, way gone.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
you mean 'the majority of those who were members in 1987'?tbaldwin said:
That's an awful lot of losers!
Similar threads
