Boris Johnson Last Night

[citydreams]

Motherfuck! I just repeated one for the third time. What more do I have to do?

maybe electing boris would help?

*cries*

 

[kabbes]

Holy fuck. The only reason he can be ignoring me is that he doesn't like the implications, so it is more convenient to pretend that they don't exist.

Shall I post it again?

 

[bluestreak]

The arguments are all at sea in this thread. And some of the points being put forward are a bit fishy if you ask me.

Pfft. Says a member of the cod-left.

*scarpers*

 

[cockneyrebel]

^^^ is even worse than my pun haha......

But KBJ I'll repeat:

So voting for an anti-working class, racist, Eton toff benefits the working class in what way exactly? He represents a party with 200 years of anti-working politics and has carried it out with glee.

But you think that despite this because you don't like Livingstone you'll vote for him? Where is the logic in that?

 

[goldenecitrone]

It's not difficult to understand. Livingstone still has socialist principles and believes in redistributing income and creating a more equal society. Johnson is a Tory boy through and through who believes in looking after the wealthy at the expense of the poor. I know who I'm voting for. And it's not Doris.

 

[Harold Hill]

But you're quite prepared to vote for him and promote him on this thread. The man is a racist and you would be voting for a racist. You're a disgrace.

I think you're either being extremely naive or you're totally enamoured by Johnson's rhetoric that you can't see straight.

Have you got a link for this article he wrote? I see lots of talking about it but never the actual article itself. I've tried looking and all I find is bloggers quoting it.

I'm a bit loathed to criticise him on it till I read it going by the amount of people that still think he wrote that Liverpool article.

 

[Harold Hill]

But it is easy to overlook two things: the first, is that the Evening Standard has been running an anti-Ken campaign on and off, since the 1980's. The second, is that the Rothermere Press - the owners of the Daily Mail and Evening Standard, supported Moseley and his blackshirts.

Nothing like historical perspective- eh?

If you think organisations should be accountable forever for supporting fascism then do you refuse to buy certain German products??

 

[cockneyrebel]

If you think organisations should be accountable forever for supporting fascism then do you refuse to buy certain German products??

But whatever way you look at it they are still rabidly anti-working class right wing papers.

 

[kabbes]

For the sixth time, KeyboardJockey, it would be nice to get at least some acknowledgement that the idea of "voting Boris to get rid of Livingstone" is not an acceptable argument, since it presupposes that Boris is better than Livingstone, which is the very thing you are trying to prove.

KBJ, you are repeatedly failing to grasp the most basic tenet of logic here. You keep saying, "I have to vote BJ because there is no other alternative to KL." But this is a classic example of "begging the question" -- you are making an assumption at the outset that BJ is better than KL and using that assumption in order to "prove" that you therefore have to vote for BJ.

This doesn't work.

You have to prove that BJ is better than KL in the first place before you can use the "there is no alternative" argument. Which is why I keep pointing out to you that your "logic" also "works" in the opposite direction. You may just as well say that you MUST vote for KL because "there is no other alternative" to BJ!

Do you see? You can't keep using this as your excuse. The "there is no alternative" excuse only works if you already accept that BJ is better than KL, which the rest of us in this thread do not. So stop using it. You have to address this fundamental issue first.

You have been saying that "you are answering all questions", but your silence on this point speaks volumes.

 

[poster342002]

Livingstone still has socialist principles )

Does he?

 

[Jonti]

Just in case KBJ is abusing the Ignore facility to just stick his fingers in his ears and shut out polite questioning ....

For the sixth time, KeyboardJockey, it would be nice to get at least some acknowledgement that the idea of "voting Boris to get rid of Livingstone" is not an acceptable argument, since it presupposes that Boris is better than Livingstone, which is the very thing you are trying to prove.

...KBJ, you are repeatedly failing to grasp the most basic tenet of logic here. You keep saying, "I have to vote BJ because there is no other alternative to KL." But this is a classic example of "begging the question" -- you are making an assumption at the outset that BJ is better than KL and using that assumption in order to "prove" that you therefore have to vote for BJ.

This doesn't work.

You have to prove that BJ is better than KL in the first place before you can use the "there is no alternative" argument. Which is why I keep pointing out to you that your "logic" also "works" in the opposite direction. You may just as well say that you MUST vote for KL because "there is no other alternative" to BJ!

Do you see? You can't keep using this as your excuse. The "there is no alternative" excuse only works if you already accept that BJ is better than KL, which the rest of us in this thread do not. So stop using it. You have to address this fundamental issue first.

You have been saying that "you are answering all questions", but your silence on this point speaks volumes.

Can you address Kabbes' point please, KBJ?

 

[tarannau]

KJ just hates Livingstone and wants to drive his old landie around and wants Livingstone out- no other comment is really necessary.

Logic and reason don't really enter into it. BJ has absolutely no track record bar an ability in racist spiel and a fine line in foot in mouthery. Equally, if KJ's hyperbolic witterings are to be believed Ken's seemingly brought the city to its knees, suffocating under the CC and a sea of corruption. That clearly isn't true - hell, public transport's even notably improved - but KJ wouldn't allow a bit of reality cloud his diatribes and distaste for Livingstone/LIvingslime.

 

[nino_savatte]

If you think organisations should be accountable forever for supporting fascism then do you refuse to buy certain German products??

Come again? You're being a wee bit silly here.

 

[nino_savatte]

Have you got a link for this article he wrote? I see lots of talking about it but never the actual article itself. I've tried looking and all I find is bloggers quoting it.

I'm a bit loathed to criticise him on it till I read it going by the amount of people that still think he wrote that Liverpool article.

You seem to be the only poster on this thread who has a problem with what I've said. Care to explain yourself?

Oh and I think you'll find that the article actually does exist and it was published in the Daily Telegraph on 10 January 2002. As for the Liverpool article, he wrote that too....or do you find it hard to understand how such a 'nice man' like him could write such a thing?

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

The fact that Livingstone and Johnson are the only realistic prospects when Berry and Paddick are the best candidates says quite a lot.

 

[butchersapron]

Just in case KBJ is abusing the Ignore facility to just stick his fingers in his ears and shut out polite questioning .... Can you address Kabbes' point please, KBJ?

He only has to prove that BJ is not KL. Not that he's 'better' - surely?

 

[STFC]

Livingstone still has socialist principles...

In this day and age? The man's obviously not the full ticket.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Just in case KBJ is abusing the Ignore facility to just stick his fingers in his ears and shut out polite questioning .... Can you address Kabbes' point please, KBJ?

Apologies I've been to dentist

Originally Posted by kabbes
For the sixth time, KeyboardJockey, it would be nice to get at least some acknowledgement that the idea of "voting Boris to get rid of Livingstone" is not an acceptable argument, since it presupposes that Boris is better than Livingstone, which is the very thing you are trying to prove.

Its not that Boris is better than Livingstone its just that I see Livingstone as having the capacity for getting worse. Livingstone said that he wanted to make London a better place for all and it doesn't seem to be getting better for many. There is much that I disagree with with Boris for example his housing policy but the fact that he wants to strengthen the GLA is a major selling point for me. Livingstone himself I believe said that the position of mayor and the concentration of power lends itself to corruption and the Lee Jasper situation is proving this. Sometimes you have to vote AGAINST something rather than for something. Its not an ideal situaiton rather a reflection of how piss poor our polticial system is in the UK.

...KBJ, you are repeatedly failing to grasp the most basic tenet of logic here. You keep saying, "I have to vote BJ because there is no other alternative to KL." But this is a classic example of "begging the question" -- you are making an assumption at the outset that BJ is better than KL and using that assumption in order to "prove" that you therefore have to vote for BJ.

There is no ELECTABLE alternative to KL. Paddick don't really stand much of a chance and if I was voting according to my own morals I would vote Paddick but voting for Paddick would not remove Livingstone. I believe that sometimes a change even for one term isa good thing.

This doesn't work.

You have to prove that BJ is better than KL in the first place before you can use the "there is no alternative" argument. Which is why I keep pointing out to you that your "logic" also "works" in the opposite direction. You may just as well say that you MUST vote for KL because "there is no other alternative" to BJ!

Do you see? You can't keep using this as your excuse. The "there is no alternative" excuse only works if you already accept that BJ is better than KL, which the rest of us in this thread do not. So stop using it. You have to address this fundamental issue first.

I'm afraid that it does work. We now have a mayor who is showing a severe lack of judgement by surrounding himself with people like Jasper. When you have a bad MP/Councillor/Mayor etc then voting for a small party even though it may better reflect your views will not achieve the desired result. Much more practical to swallow pride and vote for something that removes the disease even though it tastes horrible.

If I was to put forward a positive reason for voting Boris it would have to be his attitude to the Olympic legacy. Boris said that the Olympic legacy wouldn't benefit ordinary Londoners and I think he will be proved right in that respect. He also said that he will resist if he can plans to increace council tax to pay for the Olympics.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

KJ just hates Livingstone and wants to drive his old landie around and wants Livingstone out- no other comment is really necessary.

Logic and reason don't really enter into it. BJ has absolutely no track record bar an ability in racist spiel and a fine line in foot in mouthery. Equally, if KJ's hyperbolic witterings are to be believed Ken's seemingly brought the city to its knees, suffocating under the CC and a sea of corruption. That clearly isn't true - hell, public transport's even notably improved - but KJ wouldn't allow a bit of reality cloud his diatribes and distaste for Livingstone/LIvingslime.

I do think that Livingstone is using too much stick and not enough carrot as regards motor transport around the capital. There is some logic to congestion management in central London but much more could be done to encourage other methods of milage reduction that don't cause resentment not just to me but to many, many others.

Just have a look at areas where there are small shops and draconian parking restrictions have killed off small shops which is why residents and small businesses campaign against over restrictive parking regulations. Inadvertantly KL is killing off Londons small businesses and handing yet more power over to thelikes of Tesco et al.

To move away from transport etc I and many others who believe in bringing people together and I was very impresed when Boris gave the assurance that he would never(unlike Livingstone) invite to London anyone who expoused views that were sexist racist or homophobic. That made sense to me and is a move away from KL's policy of playing off one group against another. It was piteous and transparent to see KL sucking up to the Jewish community for example while the image of him embracing an antisemitic nutter like Qadawi is in the front of the minds ofmany.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

The fact that Livingstone and Johnson are the only realistic prospects when Berry and Paddick are the best candidates says quite a lot.

Sadly it does. Paddick to me is the best candidate but has no chance of winning.

 

[newbie]

The fact that Livingstone and Johnson are the only realistic prospects when Berry and Paddick are the best candidates says quite a lot.

Sadly it does. Paddick to me is the best candidate but has no chance of winning.

best??

why?

 

[citydreams]

.

Just have a look at areas where there are small shops and draconian parking restrictions have killed off small shops which is why residents and small businesses campaign against over restrictive parking regulations. Inadvertantly KL is killing off Londons small businesses and handing yet more power over to thelikes of Tesco et al..

You don't half talk bollox.. the vast majority of money spent in London shops is by people using public transport - even in Tesco's.

The draconian parking restrictions you talk of is more likely to be a result of borough councils acting under pressure from local residents so that they can park their cars within walking distance of their homes.

Too many cars in London perhaps?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

best??

With Paddick it is because he has run part of a large public sector org. He understands a fair bit of how govt works and I think he is a humane and reasonable man from what I've read around. I think he would be a balanced mayor who doesn't indulge in corrupt practices and have questionable judgement like KL and isn't a public schoolboy and a record for putting his foot in his mouth like Boris. The Greens association with Livingstone in some peoples eyes will taint them IMO. Also the Greens are seen by some as authoritarian tax junkies. The Greens might do well in one or two areas but I can't see them making a big splash.

why?

Paddick isn't as high profile as the other main contenders. He would make the best mayor but doesn't have the recognition factor that the other two have got. Couple that with the fact that his entry into the race appeared ragged and that is why I think he won't win. I don't think his sexuality will pull his vote down except with those who have conservative religous beliefs. Those people like me who are cheesed off with KL's arrogance and the current shenanigans at city hall are looking to who is most likely to defeat KL.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

You don't half talk bollox.. the vast majority of money spent in London shops is by people using public transport - even in Tesco's.

The draconian parking restrictions you talk of is more likely to be a result of borough councils acting under pressure from local residents so that they can park their cars within walking distance of their homes.

Too many cars in London perhaps?

I'm seeing local newspaper campaigns by small shopkeepers which are saying that draconian parking restrictions are killing their businesses.

I agree that we have to reduce car miles in London but there are more carrot than stick ways to do it as I have outlined earlier in the thread.

 

[citydreams]

missing the point again i see. perhaps you need an optician's as well as a dentist.

 

[citydreams]

To move away from transport etc I and many others who believe in bringing people together and I was very impresed when Boris gave the assurance that he would never(unlike Livingstone) invite to London anyone who expoused views that were sexist racist or homophobic. .

While editor of the Spectator Boris Johnson reacted to the July 2005 London bombings and the Paris slum riots of that year with horrendously unbalanced coverage, commissioning articles from the likes of Patrick Sookhdeo, full of sweeping generalisations, plain falsehoods and outright absurdities. The tone was that Islam itself, not an extremist movement, or the western policies off which it thrives, was to blame.

Hypocrite?

 

[citydreams]

What the Tories would really be like for London?

..weeks ago an alternative budget was moved by Angie Bray AM (Tory) with a commitment to abolish the free bus and tram travel concession for all under-18s in London. Nine members of the Assembly backed the alternative policy.

http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=10850

 

[newbie]

With Paddick it is because he has run part of a large public sector org. He understands a fair bit of how govt works and I think he is a humane and reasonable man from what I've read around. I think he would be a balanced mayor who doesn't indulge in corrupt practices and have questionable judgement like KL and isn't a public schoolboy and a record for putting his foot in his mouth like Boris.

oh, his political nous is unquestioned: a cop who publicly proclaims sympathy with anarchists and who marches alongside the BNP, he's obviously got a clear understanding of how the media works. His intervention on these very boards might have been a brilliant move if it had worked, but as it was his career crashed and burnt (after a spell in charge of paperclips) while he got stitched up in the press by his squeeze, thus ably demonstrating what a great judge of character he is. Oh yes, a sure political touch.

Of course his administrative credentials are well polished (all those paperclips) but, coming as he does from a hierarchy taught to be obedient, I wonder how he'll take to uppity civil servants or their trades unions? Or them to him.

Not that he'll find out, this little Krameresque foray is simply a precursor to a parliamentary candidacy.

I don't think his sexuality will pull his vote down except with those who have conservative religous beliefs.

I'm pleased to agree with you about that, at least.