advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seeker_UK said:
Plenty of ammo there for the press to attack Labour. You would think that after the period under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour would have at least learned not to give the press the opportunity.
Click to expand...

I stand with Rayner. This bunch of Tories are scum. They are criminally corrupt, xenophobic, hard-right nationalist Trump clones who are destroying the country. This can all be backed up with incontrovertible evidence. I have no time for the wishy washy doublespeak we always see from Labour’s leadership, both current and past. They always try to face all directions at once and that is getting remarkably old. Rayner only said what needed to be said. Starmer was given a BBC platform and said nothing at all about the Tories stealing £bns of our tax money and giving it to their mates for no discernible national benefit. WTF is he for?

If the press wish to attack those who speak truth to power they also need to repeat the truth. It is far more dangerous to say nothing, yet the Labour leadership do just that time and again.
 
Seeker_UK said:
Plenty of ammo there for the press to attack Labour. You would think that after the period under Jeremy Corbyn, Labour would have at least learned not to give the press the opportunity.
Click to expand...
Lesson from the Corbyn years is the press don’t need ammo - they’ll just make stuff up if they have to. The whole of the Starmer strategy is to not give the press ammunition, and look how that’s turning out.

You can’t not give the press ammunition in the UK if you’ve ever said or done anything vaguely progressive (even Sir Keith has defended NONCES and victimised OUR BOYS). What leadership need to do is learn to have an answer ready. Quite like Rayner’s: I’ll apologise for my tone when Johnson apologises for his racism.
 
Anyway interesting to see the front page of the Observer today: bit of a hatchet job on Starmer. The Observer is the authentic voice of the unreconstructed Blairite right, so looks like they’ve lost faith in their boy.

Poor Keith. Imagine trusting these people. He 100% did not need to do it either: if he’d done what he actually pledged to do the party would actually be in pretty good shape right now.
 
Starmer will be roasted whatever he does or doesn’t say or do. If his own party don’t get him, the press will.
Calling politicians names makes an interesting soundbite and may even be true, but it will achieve nothing.
 
Le Baron said:
I sort of love it when people publicly parade how little they know about...practically everything, yet try really hard to sound grounded and aloof. Who knows, maybe you really believe the things you write? It's sad in a way though that people can also get decades into life and have learned so little. My condolences.

There is no 'far left' economics in operation. The world is currently operating under extremist market economies organised with a mixture of very little knowledge of how monetary economies work and an irrational obsession with "left-wing" phantasms of their own invention. Which is why the gap between rich and poor is the widest it's ever been and the world is falling apart and super-rich 'capitalist' countries have food banks for middle-class people and the working poor, drug-addiction and mental health epidemics, homelessness, collapsed social cohesion, collapsed employment. Of late the utter failure of these practises has led to increasingly worsening crises, but that was always to be expected because when you put garbage in, you get garbage out, every time. Which explains why you keep writing garbage. I've explained to you in great detail (because you need lecturing to in order to learn) how a monetary economy works, but you choose to fall back on your comfortable ignorance or incompetence perhaps.

Falling into line with that is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result and assuredly a definition of insanity. Sorry 'Kirk', but you are in a dying paradigm, you are yesterday's news, thinking you are the future.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear there are no far left economics in operation (I think there are but admittedly it is a shrinking pool). Anyway, you seem very vexed by my posts and continue to over-focus on the poster rather than the topic at hand in your replies so I will leave it there.
 
Tony L said:
I stand with Rayner. This bunch of Tories are scum. They are criminally corrupt, xenophobic, hard-right nationalist Trump clones who are destroying the country. This can all be backed up with incontrovertible evidence. I have no time for the wishy washy doublespeak we always see from Labour’s leadership, both current and past. They always try to face all directions at once and that is getting remarkably old. Rayner only said what needed to be said. Starmer was given a BBC platform and said nothing at all about the Tories stealing £bns of our tax money and giving it to their mates for no discernible national benefit. WTF is he for?

If the press wish to attack those who speak truth to power they also need to repeat the truth. It is far more dangerous to say nothing, yet the Labour leadership do just that time and again.
Click to expand...

I find myself in total agreement with you there Tony & Starmer is a hopeless coward for not calling out Johnson when he gets the opportunity. Now is not the time for politicians to be nice to each other, it’s the time for sorting this country out; good on you Angela, respect!
 
Tony L said:
I stand with Rayner. This bunch of Tories are scum. They are criminally corrupt, xenophobic, hard-right nationalist Trump clones who are destroying the country. This can all be backed up with incontrovertible evidence. I have no time for the wishy washy doublespeak we always see from Labour’s leadership, both current and past. They always try to face all directions at once and that is getting remarkably old. Rayner only said what needed to be said. Starmer was given a BBC platform and said nothing at all about the Tories stealing £bns of our tax money and giving it to their mates for no discernible national benefit. WTF is he for?

If the press wish to attack those who speak truth to power they also need to repeat the truth. It is far more dangerous to say nothing, yet the Labour leadership do just that time and again.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Starker could’ve easily disapproved of language but actually grown a pair and called Johnson out for what he is. There is a whole dictionary of viable alternatives to ‘scum’ that makes the same point.

Another opportunity to grown a pair missed by miles
 
Le Baron said:
Be quiet, you have nothing to offer.
Click to expand...
Perhaps he’s entitled to his opinion as much as you are.
I notice that you’ve been on PFM for less than a month, have posted nearly 300 times, hardly any of which are hifi related. As my old pal Dec would usually ask, tell us about yourself, music likes and dislikes, and what system do you have?
 
Seanm said:
Anyway interesting to see the front page of the Observer today: bit of a hatchet job on Starmer. The Observer is the authentic voice of the unreconstructed Blairite right, so looks like they’ve lost faith in their boy.

Poor Keith. Imagine trusting these people. He 100% did not need to do it either: if he’d done what he actually pledged to do the party would actually be in pretty good shape right now.
Click to expand...
That's the crux of the matter. Starmer inherited enormous goodwill from all wings of the party (apart from the Blairite twunts, obvs). It's sad that he's squandered it through political timidity and factional war against the left (an effort to appease the aforementioned Blairite twunts who, by their very nature, are unappeaseable).

I honestly believe that if Starmer had stuck to his leadership campaign promise - to deliver a diluted, but more professional, version of Corbyn's programme - Labour would have a decent lead over the Tories by now (though not 20%, obviously ;)). A great opportunity wasted.
 
doctorf said:
Perhaps he’s entitled to his opinion as much as you are.
I notice that you’ve been on PFM for less than a month, have posted nearly 300 times, hardly any of which are hifi related. As my old pal Dec would usually ask, tell us about yourself, music likes and dislikes, and what system do you have?
Click to expand...
An opinion is surely better if it is backed up by substance. If I haven't done that, please guide me.
Perhaps you may have seen that the general discussion is actually quite popular, even in comparison to hi-fi related talk. If it is forbidden to not have a correct balance between the two in 'month one', I'll do my best to reach an equilibrium; though I don't see how this invalidates any discussion so far.

I posted in the music listening thread yesterday (and have done previously), but you know I don't always find it necessary to give a running commentary of what I have on at any given moment unless it motivates me especially. I'd be interested in longer-form discussion of (particularly) classical music, so posting an album cover and three words is not that interesting to me.

I don't see why I should tell you what systems I use until I find it necessary. Be patient old bean, pass it on to Dec.
 
doctorf said:
Perhaps he’s entitled to his opinion as much as you are.
I notice that you’ve been on PFM for less than a month, have posted nearly 300 times, hardly any of which are hifi related. As my old pal Dec would usually ask, tell us about yourself, music likes and dislikes, and what system do you have?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I think that’s unfair. Yes, Kirk is entitled to an opinion as much as anyone, but he doesn’t express one. Any substance of Kirk’s posts have been addressed comprehensively but the subsequent responses have been personal and apparently designed to provoke anger more than address or engage with any point in good faith.
 
ks.234 said:
Sorry, but I think that’s unfair. Yes, Kirk is entitled to an opinion as much as anyone, but he doesn’t express one. Any substance of Kirk’s posts have been addressed comprehensively but the subsequent responses have been personal and apparently designed to provoke anger more than address or engage with any point in good faith.
Click to expand...
It probably is a little unfair, although his opinion is his opinion which he is entitled to espouse, no matter how much the content has been discussed/dissed by the cabal on this thread.
 
Le Baron said:
An opinion is surely better if it is backed up by substance. If I haven't done that, please guide me.
Perhaps you may have seen that the general discussion is actually quite popular, even in comparison to hi-fi related talk. If it is forbidden to not have a correct balance between the two in 'month one', I'll do my best to reach an equilibrium; though I don't see how this invalidates any discussion so far.

I posted in the music listening thread yesterday (and have done previously), but you know I don't always find it necessary to give a running commentary of what I have on at any given moment unless it motivates me especially. I'd be interested in longer-form discussion of (particularly) classical music, so posting an album cover and three words is not that interesting to me.

I don't see why I should tell you what systems I use until I find it necessary. Be patient old bean, pass it on to Dec.
Click to expand...

I’m sure Dec will be interested in your reply, as I am of course.
He tends to ask the question when comments are made by new members on here who appear to want to discuss politics and have little or no interest in music or music systems.
 
doctorf said:
I’m sure Dec will be interested in your reply, as I am of course.
He tends to ask the question when comments are made by new members on here who appear to want to discuss politics and have little or no interest in music or music systems.
Click to expand...
"Appear to" is the key there.
 
paulfromcamden said:
You know there's a classical forum right?
Click to expand...
Yes, I think I didn't express clearly what I meant. That I prefer to talk in that, so that in general just posting 'I'm listening to this' (which I've also done a few times) isn't going to make up for delving in there now and again to discuss a bit more at length.

In general though I don't see why I ought to be forced to discuss this or that at a given moment. I don't make appointments to 'enjoy Willam Walton' on a certain time, day or month. Motivation isn't like that. I also read more elsewhere than post. Perhaps other people have more useful and interesting things to say on the matter of hi-fi, which I read, but don't have to chime in on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top