NationStates Jolt Archive

Follow the link (http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4398004.stm)

Another nail in the coffin of New Labour, welcome back the Conservative party:)

Politically motivated emotion aside, is anyobody concerned, and if so, in what way? Personally, I fail to believe he was not informed he ought to resign, or be fired in a few weeks, but frankly think thre whole affair is hilarious.

Link doesnt work for me, for some reason i get redirected to microsoft.com :confused:

Link doesnt work for me, for some reason i get redirected to microsoft.com :confused:
there's two "http://"'s in the link

fuck the tories.

Link doesnt work for me, for some reason i get redirected to microsoft.com :confused:
http is written twice in the link.

He resigned AGAIN?! Damn... he's in and out of the govt fast! Whats that...3 times now! :D

Follow the link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4398004.stm)

Another nail in the coffin of New Labour, welcome back the Conservative party:)
Like it'll make any difference - Mandelson resigned twice, and now he's trade commisioner for the EU.

there's two "http://"'s in the link

fuck the tories.

Your language is inappropriate. I expected better than that. If you have a legitimate point, then make it, dont just swear.

Do you think he'll get an important job in the EU then? Like Mandy?

Like it'll make any difference - Mandelson resigned twice, and now he's trade commisioner for the EU.

Yeh... slimy slimy Peter Mandelson. He's pretty creepy actually.

http is written twice in the link.

He resigned AGAIN?! Damn... he's in and out of the govt fast! Whats that...3 times now! :D

He keeps walking into the doors leading out of cabinet:D

He keeps walking into the doors leading out of cabinet:D

Ohhhhhh...... ouch.

Do you think he'll get an important job in the EU then? Like Mandy?
Well if he did he'd probably fit in with all the other morons, militant femininsts and social retards there.

welcome back the Conservative party:)

and may god have mercy on us all

He keeps walking into the doors leading out of cabinet:D

He didn't see it all coming....etc... *hangs self*

ha ha

or not....you pathetic twunt

and may god have mercy on us all
Sorry he's apparently on our side, according to Bush. So repent heathens!

and may god have mercy on us all

it's God, with a capital letter.... disrespectful to our lord.... :(

Ohhhhhh...... ouch.

Sorry, I couldn't resist;)

http is written twice in the link.

He resigned AGAIN?! Damn... he's in and out of the govt fast! Whats that...3 times now! :D
Third time lucky, let's hope.

Your language is inappropriate. I expected better than that. If you have a legitimate point, then make it, dont just swear.
meh.

my point was, to expand, that this is hardly a 'nail in the coffin' of labour. even if it were anything of the sort, i'd rather have a dysfunctional labour party in power than any tory government. and also, how many - much worse - 'scandals' did the conservatives endure in their reign of terror (rhetorical question)? How many cabinet politicians did Thatcher get through while she was in power, bearing in mind Blair has now been PM as long as she was (another rhetorical question). Blunkett resigning is therefore nothing to cry wolf over.
add to that my usual rants about how the tories managed to screw things up last time they were in charge, and you get the full view of my nicely compact statement ;)

so i think i can safely say again, fuck the tories.

it's God, with a capital letter.... disrespectful to our lord.... :(
god-smod :rolleyes:


edit: sorry, i appear to be quite angry, and i didn't even know it... hmm *calms himself down*

meh.

my point was, to expand, that this is hardly a 'nail in the coffin' of labour. even if it were anything of the sort, i'd rather have a dysfunctional labour party in power than any tory government. and also, how many - much worse - 'scandals' did the conservatives endure in their reign of terror (rhetorical question)? How many cabinet politicians did Thatcher get through while she was in power, bearing in mind Blair has now been PM as long as she was (another rhetorical question). Blunkett resigning is therefore nothing to cry wolf over.
add to that my usual rants about how the tories managed to screw things up last time they were in charge, and you get the full view of my nicely compact statement ;)

so i think i can safely say again, fuck the tories.

I suppose it is compact, but it's still pretty vulgar. I have tory tendencies and I understand why you think what you do, and I sometimes look back at what the party's done and think "bollocks." And true this isnt really a nail in the coffin. The Iraq war should have been that and wasnt. I didnt support it and was horrified when the tories did. Still, all this just goes to prove that nobody can take the high groundm left or right, because ultimately all our representatives are knee-deep in sleaze...

Another nail in the coffin of New Labour, welcome back the Conservative party:)

I'm sorry - are you trying to claim that these are two seperate parties?

I'm starting to give up on British politics. All the parties are basically the Conservatives.

David Blunkett is a capitalist and conservative if ever I've seen one. So really, any conservatives should be sad that he is out, considering he was implementing many policies that conservatives support and any true socialists should be glad that he's gone. I know I am. It could maybe, perhaps, mean "New Labour" inching ever-so-slightly back to actually being left-wing.

I suppose it is compact, but it's still pretty vulgar. I have tory tendencies and I understand why you think what you do, and I sometimes look back at what the party's done and think "bollocks." And true this isnt really a nail in the coffin. The Iraq war should have been that and wasnt. I didnt support it and was horrified when the tories did. Still, all this just goes to prove that nobody can take the high groundm left or right, because ultimately all our representatives are knee-deep in sleaze...

It is a nail if one considers that now the majority of the original new labour ministers, barring Prescott and Brown, have gone from high office, to be replaced by political non-entities. Compare the labour cabinet to the prospective Tory cabinet following the elections,and the intellectual capacities and personalities do not stand comparison. Gordon Brown against Hague? Prescott against Clarke? Jowell against Davis? No comparison, Tory victory.

But true, had either Hague or Howard been in power throughout the actual war, we would have won in 2005.

All the parties are basically the Conservatives.
and the Conservatives aren't even conservative :eek:

if you look at the differences between the republicans and the tories, i think it's obvious they're different and that the republicans are more conservative.....

if you look at the differences between the republicans and the tories, i think it's obvious they're different and that the republicans are more conservative.....

*shudders*

That's just because US politics are drastically skewed to the right, by European standards. They have one right-wing party, and one party that's so far to the right it leaves most of us Europeans blinking in amazement that such things can still be in the 21st century. When I think that the Democrats are more right-wing than the French UMP, it seems... odd...

*shudders*

That's just because US politics are drastically skewed to the right, by European standards. They have one right-wing party, and one party that's so far to the right it leaves most of us Europeans blinking in amazement that such things can still be in the 21st century. When I think that the Democrats are more right-wing than the French UMP, it seems... odd...

no, i think european parties are just too left wing for me... and i'm european...

and the Conservatives aren't even conservative :eek:

if you look at the differences between the republicans and the tories, i think it's obvious they're different and that the republicans are more conservative.....

The Conservatives are bad enough for me :p

It is a nail if one considers that now the majority of the original new labour ministers, barring Prescott and Brown, have gone from high office, to be replaced by political non-entities. Compare the labour cabinet to the prospective Tory cabinet following the elections,and the intellectual capacities and personalities do not stand comparison. Gordon Brown against Hague? Prescott against Clarke? Jowell against Davis? No comparison, Tory victory.

But true, had either Hague or Howard been in power throughout the actual war, we would have won in 2005.


I agree that the present cabinet is decidedly uninspiring, but the Tories have a long way to go in order to get into power at the next election; not least to get over the manner in which the electoral odds are stacked against them in the present system.


However your assertion about Hague/Howard is plainly absurd. Neither of these two would have ever been elected prime minister under any circumstances over the last eight years. After 97 the Tories were f*cked for a whole generation of MPs - they'll be back; maybe in time for the next election, possibly the one after that.


By the way I'm not a Labour supporter, I'd rather see a centrist, prudent Tory government than a load of tired fat wasteful reactionaries. The Conservatives just need to be a lot more 'Economist' and a lot less 'Daily Mail'

Another nail in the coffin of New Labour, welcome back the Conservative party:)

Unlikely. The Conservatives are still either hated at worst or distrusted at best. It'll be a while before they get back in. And if they do it won't be of this more recent Blunkett fiasco.

Politically motivated emotion aside, is anyobody concerned, and if so, in what way?

Yep, I'm concerned. Concerned that he will worm his way back into government like Mandy did. :p

I dunno, maybe he should just be made ambassador to Lichenstein or something.

There's no depths this governments could dive to that would suprise me.

Your language is inappropriate. I expected better than that. If you have a legitimate point, then make it, dont just swear.
Well if he did he'd probably fit in with all the other morons, militant femininsts and social retards there.

Swearing: Bad
Being Insulting: Good.

:confused:

The blind jokes have no place in a political discussion, and they aren't funny in the least.

Still, all this just goes to prove that nobody can take the high groundm left or right, because ultimately all our representatives are knee-deep in sleaze...
:p too true


The Conservatives are bad enough for me :p
and me :p

How many cabinet politicians did Thatcher get through while she was in power, bearing in mind Blair has now been PM as long as she was Emphasis added - surely Margaret Thatcher was in power for a total of 12 or 13 years? 1979 - 1991 or 1992? Blair has only been in power for eight.

As regards the topic, I think it's hilarious. Further embarrament for Bliar.

has anyone noticed that new labour is the same as tories but they have red ties instead.

Emphasis added - surely Margaret Thatcher was in power for a total of 12 or 13 years? 1979 - 1991 or 1992? Blair has only been in power for eight.

As regards the topic, I think it's hilarious. Further embarrament for Bliar.

Wait a second... So many people here on this forum think it was ridiculous to harangue Clinton over his sex life - and here goes the UK to ride Blunkett out on an affair? Paternity?

Next time we roast our politicians in the US over a little fun on the side, the people in the UK can sit on the sidelines and be quiet.

Wait a second... So many people here on this forum think it was ridiculous to harangue Clinton over his sex life - and here goes the UK to ride Blunkett out on an affair? Paternity?

Ahem, surely you mean fast tracking visas and breaking parliamentary rules concerning taking company directorships? His affair was of great interest to the tabloids but nothing to do with his resignation (other than being the reason that he fast tracked his lover's nanny's visa obviously. No lover, no lover's nanny :) )

Ahem, surely you mean fast tracking visas and breaking parliamentary rules concerning taking company directorships? His affair was of great interest to the tabloids but nothing to do with his resignation (other than being the reason that he fast tracked his lover's nanny's visa obviously. No lover, no lover's nanny :) )

So he got caught for doing what most of them already do?

I seem to recall Mr. Galloway's more recently verified financial transactions - even verified by the UN - but I don't see him resigning. Maybe he needs to get a mistress or two - if that were physically possible.

I seem to recall Mr. Galloway's more recently verified financial transactions - even verified by the UN - but I don't see him resigning. Maybe he needs to get a mistress or two - if that were physically possible.

George Galloway is not a minister, he's not even in the same party as the government :-/

Just to make it clear Sierra BTHP, David Blunkett has just resigned from his cabinet position. He's still an MP...

Wait a second... So many people here on this forum think it was ridiculous to harangue Clinton over his sex life - and here goes the UK to ride Blunkett out on an affair? Paternity?

Not even the same, Blunkett isn't married, he has no Hilary to cheat on.

Other things were brought up, as Eyonistan mentions above, but my feeling was that it was the sex that did it for him. Fast tracking visas and the like are very boring, nothing like a sex scandal to grab the publics imagination. (Well I say scandal, it was "Divorced blind man has sex.")


Thankfully this time round he is definately in the wrong, without any sex to side track people.

Emphasis added - surely Margaret Thatcher was in power for a total of 12 or 13 years? 1979 - 1991 or 1992? Blair has only been in power for eight.

As regards the topic, I think it's hilarious. Further embarrament for Bliar.
1979 to 1990: 11 years (she was ousted before the 1992 election which major won after he stood in as tory leader (for the most part) in-between)
1997 to 2005: 8 years

ok you're right. i heard it on the radio and just assumed the today show, you know, actually checked their facts for a change :p
Wait a second... So many people here on this forum think it was ridiculous to harangue Clinton over his sex life - and here goes the UK to ride Blunkett out on an affair? Paternity?

Next time we roast our politicians in the US over a little fun on the side, the people in the UK can sit on the sidelines and be quiet.
i was quiet over clinton... and not in that way you dirty bastards ;)

ok you're right. i heard it on the radio and just assumed the today show, you know, actually checked their facts for a change :p


Maybe they were going slightly forward in time and said he will have been in power as long as Thatcher by the next election.

Not even the same, Blunkett isn't married, he has no Hilary to cheat on.

Other things were brought up, as Eyonistan mentions above, but my feeling was that it was the sex that did it for him. Fast tracking visas and the like are very boring, nothing like a sex scandal to grab the publics imagination. (Well I say scandal, it was "Divorced blind man has sex.")

Thankfully this time round he is definately in the wrong, without any sex to side track people.

Ethics violations abound. It is my assumption that unlike his peers (and similar level politicians over here) that his crime was that he got caught.

And I would never begrudge a blind man some sex.