+ Visit West Bromwich Albion FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: “ Scum “ remark in The Commons.

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,150
    Quote Originally Posted by mickd1961 View Post
    “Catherine Tate.....am I bovvered” ����������������

    Classic Stripes.

    To be honest it would have been hilarious if he’d been quick enough on his feet to have retorted in that way!

    Like DaveP67 says......it’s about standards.

    To label someone as “Thcum” ......sorry....”Scum” is a disgrace and normally reserved for murderers and child molesters.

    There’s no place for that word inside our great Parliament.

    She could’ve labelled him “uncaring/callous/“ etc and that’s what you’d expect in heated debate but not the word she used.

    The other thing is this issue with free school dinners.

    When I was a kid at school in the 60’s and 70’s the number of kids on free dinners was incredibly small and it was always quite obvious these kids came from incredibly poor and usually very uneducated families.

    They were usually in very poor clothing, shoes falling apart and often they looked and smelt dirty, it was very sad to see and I can still picture those kids 50 plus years later.

    The number we seem to be feeding free of charge now is huge and I think that if they were turning up at school looking like those kids did in my era child services would be called in.

    For 99% of people it should be utterly shameful if you cannot feed your own children but I’m not sure that’s now the case.

    In the 60’s my parents were not well off and there were days when mum and dad ate jam and bread so that me and my brother could have a proper meal.

    I never once went hungry I’m glad to say.

    I wonder if today’s “me,me,me” generation are as quick to put their kids bellies first as our parents and grandparents were?
    Your political ramblings get evermore bizarre.

    You saw kids on free dinners in the 60's and 70's. Yet its all today's generation don't put their kids bellies first? Or is it 'let our children go hungry, and then they'll see how hard we had it in the 60's'...?

    Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder with the younger generation.

    Can't possibly think which newspaper might have planted that seed in your head....

    Here's a question for you, feel free to try and answer as seamlessly as possible. Our government have just wasted 12,000 million pounds on a T&T system that barely works. Given that excess, why should any child suffer hardship, poverty and hunger in our country today?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    23,883
    Quote Originally Posted by WBA123 View Post
    Your political ramblings get evermore bizarre.

    You saw kids on free dinners in the 60's and 70's. Yet its all today's generation don't put their kids bellies first? Or is it 'let our children go hungry, and then they'll see how hard we had it in the 60's'...?

    Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder with the younger generation.

    Can't possibly think which newspaper might have planted that seed in your head....

    Here's a question for you, feel free to try and answer as seamlessly as possible. Our government have just wasted 12,000 million pounds on a T&T system that barely works. Given that excess, why should any child suffer hardship, poverty and hunger in our country today?
    Too many people these days have kids without either the finances to look after them or the time to be bothered about them.

    My ex son in law was one of these types.

    He’s left two partners including my daughter ( his ex wife ) with one year old toddlers and “moved on” due to each situation being “not right” for him!

    In the brief three year period he was with my daughter and the one year he spent with my lovely grandson he spent 95% of his available free time flicking through his phone whilst my daughter looked after his own daughter on her visits and her own baby son.

    You should only bring kids into the world if you’re prepared to invest your time and love into them and be able to financially support them to the exclusion of you having all that you want ie. clothes, new phones, booze, fags etc and I don’t think enough put kids needs first.

    We should always pick up those who fall between the cracks and are made destitute by circumstances, I totally agree with that.

    I know teachers who are aghast at the number of 5 and 6 year olds who are coming into school who are not toilet trained and who haven’t been given any breakfast 123.

    It’s not small numbers either.......it’s an epidemic of kids who’s parents think that this type of responsibility falls upon someone else!

    My own nan left home in 1925 at the age of 14 and moved a long distance to become a nurse in an orphanage........she later ran the place for many years.

    Her cottage was next to the orphanage and through the 60’s I got to know through her what true poverty and suffering of kids looked like.

    Don’t make me out to be something that I’m not...........I don’t like to see that sort of injustice but I also don’t like utter fecklessness and the mindset that it’s always someone else to pick up the slack once you’ve had kids.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,863
    Quote Originally Posted by WBA123 View Post
    Your political ramblings get evermore bizarre.

    You saw kids on free dinners in the 60's and 70's. Yet its all today's generation don't put their kids bellies first? Or is it 'let our children go hungry, and then they'll see how hard we had it in the 60's'...?

    Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder with the younger generation.

    Can't possibly think which newspaper might have planted that seed in your head....

    Here's a question for you, feel free to try and answer as seamlessly as possible. Our government have just wasted 12,000 million pounds on a T&T system that barely works. Given that excess, why should any child suffer hardship, poverty and hunger in our country today?
    our government as just wasted 12,000 million pounds on a T&T system that barely works.feel free to answer this ,how much did the Blair government (still the worst MP this country’s ever had) waste on the weapons of mass destruction Iraq war,I’ll guess 10billion,but please fell free to prove me wrong.and I’m a labour voter well was.and may be again.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,150
    Quote Originally Posted by mickd1961 View Post
    Too many people these days have kids without either the finances to look after them or the time to be bothered about them.

    My ex son in law was one of these types.

    He’s left two partners including my daughter ( his ex wife ) with one year old toddlers and “moved on” due to each situation being “not right” for him!

    In the brief three year period he was with my daughter and the one year he spent with my lovely grandson he spent 95% of his available free time flicking through his phone whilst my daughter looked after his own daughter on her visits and her own baby son.

    You should only bring kids into the world if you’re prepared to invest your time and love into them and be able to financially support them to the exclusion of you having all that you want ie. clothes, new phones, booze, fags etc and I don’t think enough put kids needs first.

    We should always pick up those who fall between the cracks and are made destitute by circumstances, I totally agree with that.

    I know teachers who are aghast at the number of 5 and 6 year olds who are coming into school who are not toilet trained and who haven’t been given any breakfast 123.

    It’s not small numbers either.......it’s an epidemic of kids who’s parents think that this type of responsibility falls upon someone else!

    My own nan left home in 1925 at the age of 14 and moved a long distance to become a nurse in an orphanage........she later ran the place for many years.

    Her cottage was next to the orphanage and through the 60’s I got to know through her what true poverty and suffering of kids looked like.

    Don’t make me out to be something that I’m not...........I don’t like to see that sort of injustice but I also don’t like utter fecklessness and the mindset that it’s always someone else to pick up the slack once you’ve had kids.
    But we are talking about different things, is it your Granddaughters fault she has a father who isn't interested? Absolutely not, and she shouldn't have to suffer because of it.

    My point is that children who have feckless parents should not go hungry. We have the resources to make sure that doesn't happen. And the Tories voted against it last night.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,150
    Quote Originally Posted by albion68 View Post
    our government as just wasted 12,000 million pounds on a T&T system that barely works.feel free to answer this ,how much did the Blair government (still the worst MP this country’s ever had) waste on the weapons of mass destruction Iraq war,I’ll guess 10billion,but please fell free to prove me wrong.and I’m a labour voter well was.and may be again.
    Again, strange comparison.

    But if you want to compare today's Government with Blair's, we have 600,000 more children in poverty now compared to 2010.

    It's laughable you think Blair is the worst PM we have ever had. Have you been around for our last 3 PMs? Again, the Tory propaganda project is working well with you.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    23,883
    Quote Originally Posted by WBA123 View Post
    Again, strange comparison.

    But if you want to compare today's Government with Blair's, we have 600,000 more children in poverty now compared to 2010.

    It's laughable you think Blair is the worst PM we have ever had. Have you been around for our last 3 PMs? Again, the Tory propaganda project is working well with you.

    The "poverty" word is an interesting one.

    If you want to see what "poverty" actually truly looked' looks like then take a look back at film from the 1900's and right into the 80's.

    Watch programmes about the street children of India,Brazil and other countries where tiny tots are foraging on rubbish tips and being looked after by 6,7,8 and 9 year olds.

    Poverty is not your 18 stone, tattooed mother who's smoking 40 a day whilst expecting free school meals 123 and you know it and you know it's going on in huge numbers across this country.

    My brother ( who I no longer speak to ) has a 28 year old daughter with 5 kids ranging from 10 downwards and she's never done a days work in her life.

    Played her mouth constantly to the council due to her lack of bedrooms until she was awarded a nice 5 bedded house paid for by the rest of us.

    This is just wrong.

    I'm not saying there aren't true cases of poverty even now but i think that the word is misused in the main and it's an insult to those waifs of the 1900's to label today's poorer element using the same terminology.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,652
    I fear that Mick and 123 will never see eye to eye! It is a massive problem, though, and it all falls into the social care area which, as we all know, will never have enough resources to satisfy the requirements of society. I am very glad that I am not the one responsible for this balancing act. There will always be children that are genuinely in poverty and there will always be some people that try to milk the system and get something for nothing; separating these into those with real need and those that are not, will always be difficult. I don’t think that all Tories are the hard hearted, callous individuals that some make them out to be; there are also some on the Labour side that will always oppose any Tory policy on principle. Most MP’s I do believe have genuine concerns about their constituents and do their best; it doesn’t always work out, though, does it? By the way, I didn’t vote for Boris in the election, so don’t class me as a Tory sympathiser.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    12,083
    Quote Originally Posted by mickd1961 View Post
    The "poverty" word is an interesting one.

    If you want to see what "poverty" actually truly looked' looks like then take a look back at film from the 1900's and right into the 80's.

    Watch programmes about the street children of India,Brazil and other countries where tiny tots are foraging on rubbish tips and being looked after by 6,7,8 and 9 year olds.

    Poverty is not your 18 stone, tattooed mother who's smoking 40 a day whilst expecting free school meals 123 and you know it and you know it's going on in huge numbers across this country.

    My brother ( who I no longer speak to ) has a 28 year old daughter with 5 kids ranging from 10 downwards and she's never done a days work in her life.

    Played her mouth constantly to the council due to her lack of bedrooms until she was awarded a nice 5 bedded house paid for by the rest of us.

    This is just wrong.

    I'm not saying there aren't true cases of poverty even now but i think that the word is misused in the main and it's an insult to those waifs of the 1900's to label today's poorer element using the same terminology.

    There can't be that much poverty in this country as those f uckin dinghies keep crossing the channel daily. Don't see these people desperately knocking on the door of countries like Romania!! Why is that!

    Some of the poorest streets always seem to have satelite dishes and there always seems enough cash for fags and booze. Strange how jobs like fruit picking - no ****er seems to want to know and you would have thought parents would be desperate to put meals on the table for those kids!

    What chance do some kids have with awful parents and the old saying is mostly true - a child is the product of a parent! If parents can't be bothered then what chance does a child have! Everyone is born with the same brain but when in one house there's thieving and the F word used constantly and in another house the mum reads to her child daily and promotes values - you know which child will succeed!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •