Is Gordon Brown and the Labour Party fucked?

[Kanda]

I think he's been dropped in the shit.

How much of this shit was on his watch?

 

[Lock&Light]

workfare: 'work or you don't eat'

The Welfare State was set for those who genuinely couldn't work. The beneficiaries, (not everyone, or even a majority) have ruined it, with their selfishness.

 

[soulman]

I don't think so.

Really? I think the loss of those data discs is going to come home to roost big time. But I could be wrong, and I'm willing to listen to other reasoned arguments.

 

[Lock&Light]

Really? I think the loss of those data discs is going to come home to roost big time. But I could be wrong, and I'm willing to listen to other reasoned arguments.

How old are you?

More than a few months of reality should have taught you that ALL governments make a mess of it.

Elections are always about who is less bad than the other.

 

[soulman]

How old are you?

More than a few months of reality should have taught you that ALL governments make a mess of it.

Elections are always about who is less bad than the other.

I'm not talking about elections I'm talking about this particular administration now being fucked. You said you don't think it is. Why?

 

[Lock&Light]

I'm not talking about elections I'm talking about this particular administration now being fucked. You said you don't think it is. Why?

Because all governments are fucked, but survive until a majority of voters realise it.

 

[soulman]

Because all governments are fucked, but survive until a majority of voters realise it.

So you do think GB and Labour are fucked then.

 

[Lock&Light]

So you do think GB and Labour are fucked then.

Yes, but it will take Cameron much less than ten years to fuck himself up. Take my word for it. I've seen it all happen before.

 

[soulman]

I'm not really interested in who the minority choose to vote for next time, more in how this weakens a serving government.

 

[Lock&Light]

I'm not really interested in who the minority choose to vote for next time, more in how this weakens a serving government.

Then I suggest you visit an optician, as you are obviously very myopic.

 

[soulman]

Then I suggest you visit an optician, as you are obviously very myopic.

eh?

 

[Lock&Light]

eh?

What I meant, (and could you really not understand?) was you seem not to have much vision.

 

[soulman]

What I meant, (and could you really not understand?) was you seem not to have much vision.

You think I would prefer a Tory administration?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

A child asking such a thing would be chastised for childishness.

Oh look here comes Lock & Shite with his no value to any thread he touches approach.

The fact is shit for brains far more credible commentaters than me are saying basically the same thing from accross the political spectrum:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article2933390.ece

http://paullinford.blogspot.com/2007/11/gordon-brown-and-steve-mcclaren.html

http://ourkingdom.opendemocracy.net/2007/11/26/will-brown-last-and-what-must-he-do-now/

http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/11/browns-impendin.html

I could go on but wont bother as I know you're not interested in a real contribution to a thread but would rather make your usual fucktard contributions. Why don't you fuck off?

 

[shagnasty]

Can he sack harman she was elected by the party democratically or can he sack her from any government or party post if so she will be a lame duck almost one with no legs at all

 

[butchersapron]

The Welfare State was set for those who genuinely couldn't work. The beneficiaries, (not everyone, or even a majority) have ruined it, with their selfishness.

Don't be so stupid. Firstly, The overwhelming majority of people in this country are beneficiaries of the welfare state in one form or another. Second, how has your minority 'ruined it, with their selfishness.'? How could they? Unless of course you mean successive governments, both Tory and labour, seeking to cut it to the bone in order to reduce their social spending to please european and global capital. If you mean that minority then yes, you're correct.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Can he sack harman she was elected by the party democratically or can he sack her from any government or party post if so she will be a lame duck almost one with no legs at all

Not sure if he can sack her as Deputy Leader but he can strip her of all her, many, ministerial briefs.

 

[chymaera]

You think disabled people can't pay their own way, you paranoid loon?

Are you totally incapable of reading a message. I know disabled people who are scared of going to a medical examination by a goverment agency in case they don't come back. This fear had fuck all to do with them being able to afford a taxi.

 

[poster342002]

I wonder when the jitters will start and nu labour start to realise that their nice cosy and enriched period in office will end and they start to break rank and talk about getting rid of brown ,and who will replace him i can't see anybody who could they are a bunch of lightweights

We'll end up with David Milliband. You mark my words - he'll be leader of the party after Brown and PM the next time NuLabour win.

 

[Dan U]

I think he's been dropped in the shit.

How much of this shit was on his watch?

you can argue that a lot of the shit was of his own making even when he was at the Treasury.

This problem of the donations is the one i find the most staggering. The Labour party has just spent well over a year embroiled in a messy saga over cash for honours and yet it has the institutional arrogance or incompetence (and both are just as bad) to carry on regardless not implementing it's own reforms of the process.

i find this extremely damning of them as a collection of individuals to be honest and as a whole

 

[nightowl]

it does seem like events are running away with them. i know loads of people are saying it, but it does feel like those last tory years when everything seemed to go tits up no matter what they tried to do. what i'm curious about is which way labour would go if the tories did win the next election. would there be any significant left wing resurgence? i've heard one or two people actually saying that they think a tory win might be a good thing, purely from the point of view that it might provide a glimmer of hope that labour might change direction

 

[poster342002]

I agree with the first bit - Brown doesn't look like a long-term leader at all right now, and NL is disintegrating - but I haven't a clue what that will mean. The Tories are still shit and if they took over would be baffled, deer-in-the-headlights. They're still mired in the wilderness attitude and Cameron is patently a tit (though this being the Tories they may change him for someone else before then). Lib Dems? Right, yeah.

Basically we'll either limp on with a NL govt, or end up with the Tories who will be out the election after that. Either way the whole business will be even more obviously farcical than it is at the moment, and non-parliamentary action will become even more obviously important than it is now. I suppose the latter is a good thing.

Interesting post. I think it looks like what we're witnessing is the end of "normal" parliamantary democracy as we had from post-WW2 to now. I think from here on in we'll be seeing coalitions leading to unified "national governemnts". One-party rule in all but name.

 

[poster342002]

A comedian recently described him as someone who waited their whole life for their dream job and then finds out they are not very good at it.

It had the ring of truth.

A bit like a small kid sitting in the back seat of a car going "I wanna drive! I wanna drive!" until his parent finally gets fed up, plonks him in the driver's seat and says, "well, go on then!".

 

[Fruitloop]

Interesting post. I think it looks like what we're witnessing is the end of "normal" parliamantary democracy as we had from post-WW2 to now. I think from here on in we'll be seeing coalitions leading to unified "national governemnts". One-party rule in all but name.

Fuck, the first National Unity Government will really mean it's time to head for the hills.

Agree about David Milliband btw - and what an arse he is.

 

[butchersapron]

Interesting post. I think it looks like what we're witnessing is the end of "normal" parliamantary democracy as we had from post-WW2 to now. I think from here on in we'll be seeing coalitions leading to unified "national governemnts". One-party rule in all but name.

You keep suggesting this but i see no evidence or need for it. Capital/the state has it nice already with 3 parties all pursuing substantially the same set of narrowly defined policies with any prospect of serious change off the mainstream political agenda for the forseebale future. What benefit would there be in upsetting the apple cart and potentialy exposing the whole systmem by establishing a national government. There's simply no need.

And the few recent placements of tories and lib-dems by Brown were not a genuine coming together (they've already come together on the policies), they were merely an extension of the old tribal loyalties being played out under the guise of a modernised inclusivity - they were designed to mess with the 'opposition' and cause internal panic and arguments. That's all.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

The big problem as far as I can see it for New Labour is that the party itself has become the news story now, rather than any particular issue or issues. Thus, they are now having to defend their own behaviour and attitudes rather than their own discrete policies and initiatives. This inevitably means a drip-drip effect of shrinking of confidence in their ability to govern and a lack of cohesion in trying to move forwards, fueled by the media and seized upon by opponents who need do little more than flag up the failings without being required to engage in any constructive debate or credible alternative strategies.

 

[treelover]

No, i don't agree, what we will see if NL fail is even more of a shift to the right and even more embedding of the right wing consensus thats holds in the Uk. I see it very much, (Britain being the 51st state) like the US political culture, where(until perhaps recently) there was/is no difference in the two parties.

it does seem like events are running away with them. i know loads of people are saying it, but it does feel like those last tory years when everything seemed to go tits up no matter what they tried to do. what i'm curious about is which way labour would go if the tories did win the next election. would there be any significant left wing resurgence? i've heard one or two people actually saying that they think a tory win might be a good thing, purely from the point of view that it might provide a glimmer of hope that labour might change direction

 

[_angel_]

Yes Brown and Labour are fucked and good riddance. However, the prospect of posh Mr potato head doesn't do much to alleviate my gloom.

Soulman : piss off and troll somewhere else.

 

[poster342002]

what we will see if NL fail is even more of a shift to the right and even more embedding of the right wing consensus thats holds in the Uk.

I agree. People should note that it's not NL's policies that are being criticised in the wider domain - just individuals. Just with the fall of the last tory government, the issues bringing it down are rather apolitical in lots of ways and the rightwing trajectory of the country was (and is) not being altered or crticised bythe media or the public at large.

Basically, there's still no real sense of anyone saying that it's the political direction we're going (and have been going since 1979) that's in any way wrong. The country continues to turn right, right and right again.

 

[treelover]

Simon Jenkins in the Guardian (no socialist he) has always been very good nailing
NL, his new article doesn't disappoint.

The truth is that New Labour has been a sucker for "business" from the moment in the early 1990s when Blair and Brown decided to curry favour with the City. Eager to seem business-friendly, Brown abandoned his pledge to reverse Thatcher's union legislation and privatisation. He decided never to raise income or business taxes, and bizarrely chose Geoffrey Robinson as his buddy. His only act of delegation, ever, was to the one profession he trusted, the financiers of the Bank of England.

The word business still mesmerises Brown. To most people the occupation is about making money. To Brown it is a mysterious priesthood of infinite competence. To build a school or hospital, run a prison or plan an urban renewal, you must pledge partnership with a "businessman". Private money is always good, public bad.

If business wants a new runway at Heathrow, Brown orders one. If business wants the planning regime collapsed, he will collapse it. If business worries over capital gains tax, it will be heard. Never was the maxim, what is good for General Motors is good for the nation, so enshrined in one man. Any theory that Brown is not a real Thatcherite is rubbish.

In Brown's Britain there is no longer a public service ethos, only a business ethos applied to public services. No longer do Presbyterians render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's. Everything goes to Caesar under a private finance initiative.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2218037,00.html