O/T Even the Tory Party are Blaming Johnson!

[swaledale]

Regrettably rA its merely a foretaste of what the Right Wing ideologues currently in power plan for the country. rather than advance serious proposals for the good of all in the country, their aim is to further the interests of a few very rich people and they are behaving as every right wing politician does elsewhere in the world, feed peoples prejudices and misconceptions in order to control or remove any media which might actually scrutinise what they are doing and make it public.

They are able to do this because a large proportion of the electorate are incapable of actually thinking for themselves and lap up simplistic concepts that seem to be in tune with their own thoughts.

People need to be careful what they wish for!

[ramAnag]

Regrettably rA its merely a foretaste of what the Right Wing ideologues currently in power plan for the country. rather than advance serious proposals for the good of all in the country, their aim is to further the interests of a few very rich people and they are behaving as every right wing politician does elsewhere in the world, feed peoples prejudices and misconceptions in order to control or remove any media which might actually scrutinise what they are doing and make it public.

They are able to do this because a large proportion of the electorate are incapable of actually thinking for themselves and lap up simplistic concepts that seem to be in tune with their own thoughts.

People need to be careful what they wish for!

Agreed.

[Andy_Faber]

Regrettably rA its merely a foretaste of what the Right Wing ideologues currently in power plan for the country. rather than advance serious proposals for the good of all in the country, their aim is to further the interests of a few very rich people and they are behaving as every right wing politician does elsewhere in the world, feed peoples prejudices and misconceptions in order to control or remove any media which might actually scrutinise what they are doing and make it public.

They are able to do this because a large proportion of the electorate are incapable of actually thinking for themselves and lap up simplistic concepts that seem to be in tune with their own thoughts.

People need to be careful what they wish for!

You really do despise your fellow man don’t you, your disdain for ‘ordinary joe’ would be annoying if more folk actually took notice of you

[ramAnag]

You really do despise your fellow man don’t you, your disdain for ‘ordinary joe’ would be annoying if more folk actually took notice of you

At the risk of being called Swale’s ‘tail gunner’ or ‘apologist’ - he doesn’t need either - I really don’t see it as ‘disdain’ but ‘concern’, Andy.

There can be little doubt that both the UK and the USA are currently under the ‘rule’ of the two most right wing, dishonest and divisive ‘leaders’ for decades...possibly ever.
Both, imo, delight in making controversial statements which are regularly either verging on, or more overtly, homophobic, mysoginistic or racist.
Unfortunately their is a section of society which supports such views. They tend to have much in common with those who seek short term, knee jerk, ill thought through populist ‘solutions’...blame the blacks, blame the ’Pakis’, blame Jonny Foreigner, blame the gays, blame the pensioners, blame the homeless etc.

I think I only have genuine disdain for bullies and bigots but I do share Swale’s concern.

[Andy_Faber]

At the risk of being called Swale’s ‘tail gunner’

There can be little doubt that both the UK and the USA are currently under the ‘rule’ of the two most right wing, dishonest and divisive ‘leaders’ for decades...possibly ever.
Both, imo, delight in making controversial statements which are regularly either verging on, or more overtly, homophobic, mysoginistic or racist.
Unfortunately their is a section of society which supports such views.

God forbid anyone should ever accuse you of being Swale's tailgunner rA...I think it was rear gunner.

But that 'section of society' (which I would say is in the majority or at least a significant minority, and growing) are no more influenced by the incumbent administrations (not sure why you keep bringing Trump up, there are small c conservative adminstrations the world over) than they are by a revulsion for what I (apparently quaintly) call PC but has now gained a new moniker, 'woke'. The word, originally defined as 'having a social conscience' is progressively being hijacked from a positive to a negative meaning 'social conscience gone mad'. An observation by me, not a stance

[swaledale]

You really do despise your fellow man don’t you, your disdain for ‘ordinary joe’ would be annoying if more folk actually took notice of you

Your correct I despise people who seem unable to think for themselves and take simplistic falsehoods and spew them out as if they are sensible factual comments. I despise people who use lazy stereotypes, who pretend they are only "broadly racist" who lay claim to being part of a forgotten, victimised group because it justifies their lazy uniformed views.

Far from despising "ordinary people", I despise the views of all such people that I've described. In my experience they are not defined by income, social status, education nationality, job or whatever you care to label people by.

I don't make a judgement on people due to their perceived social status, their income, their job, their accent or their education, in the same way I don't make a judgement on a persons race, ethnicity, nationality.

Thats precisely why I'm not bothered as you seem to be by BAME people appearing on TV, I judge a person on what they say and how they preform their job, who or what they are is irrelevant, in fact I don't give it another thought. If they speak crap and are ****e at their job then why would I respect them?

I know people who you would presumably class as "ordinary" who do not parrot *******s from dubious sources, but have views that are well founded and actually their own. I know very intelligent, people earning six figure sums who spout crap! I know people who have significant power, who are complete and utter ****s.

Neither am I threatened by people who are "different" or who have different views, some of my closet friends have completely opposite views to me, there is always an opposite and opposing view, sometimes several but they do all need to have one thing in common, they need some basis in fact and a demonstrate some individual thought. I mean its not too much to ask is it?

"Ordinary Joe"? Mm more broad brush assumptions about people - and me it seems, just who is this "ordinary joe" and what about "ordinary jill"? Doesn't she count? Its so simplistic to apply a label like this, in real life it does not apply and of course people aren't one dimensional.

This is another simplistic way of grouping people under a handy convenient label, presumably because your too lazy or too thick to think beyond such simplistic concepts? I notice you haven't explained who the "PC Brigade"are either, mind you thats kind of your style, not answering questions and making observations which no doubt you think are "clever" and sharp, unfortunately they don't come across as that, just clumsy and dull witted!

Its interesting that you think folk don't take any notice of me, I wonder quite how you reach that conclusion or is it just another lazy assumption. Or is it that your comforted by the thought that its the select few who post on here don't?

Ah well never mind keep taking the tablets because I couldn't give a ****!

[Andy_Faber]

Your correct I despise people who seem unable to think for themselves and take simplistic falsehoods and spew them out as if they are sensible factual comments. I despise people who use lazy stereotypes, who pretend they are only "broadly racist" who lay claim to being part of a forgotten, victimised group because it justifies their lazy uniformed views.

Far from despising "ordinary people", I despise the views of all such people that I've described. In my experience they are not defined by income, social status, education nationality, job or whatever you care to label people by.

I don't make a judgement on people due to their perceived social status, their income, their job, their accent or their education, in the same way I don't make a judgement on a persons race, ethnicity, nationality.

Thats precisely why I'm not bothered as you seem to be by BAME people appearing on TV, I judge a person on what they say and how they preform their job, who or what they are is irrelevant, in fact I don't give it another thought. If they speak crap and are ****e at their job then why would I respect them?

I know people who you would presumably class as "ordinary" who do not parrot *******s from dubious sources, but have views that are well founded and actually their own. I know very intelligent, people earning six figure sums who spout crap! I know people who have significant power, who are complete and utter ****s.

Neither am I threatened by people who are "different" or who have different views, some of my closet friends have completely opposite views to me, there is always an opposite and opposing view, sometimes several but they do all need to have one thing in common, they need some basis in fact and a demonstrate some individual thought. I mean its not too much to ask is it?

"Ordinary Joe"? Mm more broad brush assumptions about people - and me it seems, just who is this "ordinary joe" and what about "ordinary jill"? Doesn't she count? Its so simplistic to apply a label like this, in real life it does not apply and of course people aren't one dimensional.

This is another simplistic way of grouping people under a handy convenient label, presumably because your too lazy or too thick to think beyond such simplistic concepts? I notice you haven't explained who the "PC Brigade"are either, mind you thats kind of your style, not answering questions and making observations which no doubt you think are "clever" and sharp, unfortunately they don't come across as that, just clumsy and dull witted!

Its interesting that you think folk don't take any notice of me, I wonder quite how you reach that conclusion or is it just another lazy assumption. Or is it that your comforted by the thought that its the select few who post on here don't?

Ah well never mind keep taking the tablets because I couldn't give a ****!

Yes I can tell by this post that you don’t give a ****. Sorry but you are still missing the point

[Trickytreesreds]

Can we put this BBC/Licence Fee bashing to bed?
8 National TV Channels, 6 Regional TV Channels, 12 Local TV Channels, 11 National Radio Stations, 9 Regional Radio Stations, 40 Local Radio Stations and a range of International TV Channels etc...all for 43p per day - or absolutely free for those in the greatest need.

We won’t all like everything...can’t remember the last time I listened to Radios 1&3 or watched ‘East Enders’, and I think ‘Mrs Brown’s Boys’ is an abomination...but each to their own. Perhaps those who are so critical could suggest something that offers better value for less than 50p per day.

It's called freedom of choice.

Perhaps you would like to contribute 50p a day to NFFC?
Something you will never use or like.
Now if that was "forced" on you, would you be happy to comply?

[ramAnag]

It's called freedom of choice.

Perhaps you would like to contribute 50p a day to NFFC?
Something you will never use or like.
Now if that was "forced" on you, would you be happy to comply?

But you do ‘use’ the BBC don’t you? You just choose to avoid paying your 43p per day and go down the parasitic route of watching via YouTube.

The comparison with NFFC is a nonsense. As I’ve said before the existence of an independent, responsible and largely impartial national broadcaster is beneficial to society as a whole. The existence of NFFC is (occasionally) beneficial to about 25,000 Nottingham folk.

Now...if you could actually answer the question about value for money, rather than asking another irrelevant one we might get somewhere.

[Trickytreesreds]

And the BBC falls at the first hurdle of impartiality, as Gary Loincloth laughs at their attempts to curb his political rants on Twitter.
Work for the Police/Fire/NHS/Prisons etc and you get a good kicking from your employers.
Not that great bastian of impartialty though the BBC.
Loincloth/Boyle/Kumar and "throw acid, not milkshake" Brand carry on with their outlet at the BBC.

How anyone kept their job after that acid comment is beyond me.