Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Understand this - New Leader another New Labour and the same old, same old

Here are some thoughts prompted by Ed Miliband's first speech as Labour leader, I'm old enough to have heard about "new generation's" having taken over, this that or the other political party and whilst it may be a cliché to me I'm sure its a fresh concept to the odd whippersnapper or two, but any follower of politics of any age will be familiar with this meaningless banality.

Ed Miliband's selection as leader, is indicative of just how Labour and I suppose politics in general has become more like some dull corporate world, neither of the Miliband brothers look big on charisma or personality.

Politics without passion, is how I'd describe Labour today, just look at all, that apologetic language of how, Labour made mistakes but of course, the word which spokesmen of all sorts use, particularly when they've just shafted you is "understand" as in "I understand the product/service has failed" while thinking don't worry, we've taken your money.

I just counted how many times Ed Miliband used the epithetical term, 14 times, no surprise like many a dodgy salesman the word responsible was a little less frequent, in fact despite being in the last Labour government writing the last manifesto, the word responsible was not used once in the context of say we the Labour party were responsible for Iraq/banks/economy, still  Ed Miliband  says "I will be a responsible Leader of the Opposition." but responsible in the true sense, not flipping likely.

To round up then, understand this, Labour is kidding nobody, you were in government, you had a popular mandate and frankly screwed up.


  1. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this speech was the change in position now he has got the job he coveted.

    In order to win the support of the unions, he detached himself from all responsibility for the mistakes of the last government, of which he was a minister, and took a very left wing stance. Now, having effectively beaten his brother on the strength of his Red Ed image and union backing, he now lurches back to the centre ground.

    Clearly he realises that a 'red' tag is not a winner with the electorate so, to have a chance to become prime minister, he moves to the ground formerly held by his brother during the campaign.

    This guy is an opportunist and chancer of the first order. Shafts his brother, doesn't put his name on his kid's birth certificate and now he is 'New Generation Labour' a champion for all the people.

    Well, not for this one he ain't!!

  2. Thank you for sharing your analysis and thoughts, Tony. Moving from the Opposition to the Government, what makes you think that Nick Clegg isn't "dull" or "corporate" or that he has "charisma" and "personality". How is he better than Ed Miliband?

    Not a challenge, a question. I am interested in what you think are the precise distinguishing features.

    And do you not think that many who condemn Labour for their failings will also condemn the Lib Dems for going back on so many of their principles, promises and election pledges in deference to some Coalition Cabinet seats? I don't think anyone buys the "national interest" defence. Clegg would certainly have been criticised for climbing into bed with Labour, but why is it so different with the Tories?

  3. As Ed has established, his memory of his role in government is now forgotten by him and much of a delusional Labour movement, even his brother showing incredulity at his version of history.

    Nick Clegg did what he had to do for this countries stability and in the process secured greater personal freedom from Labours attack on civil liberties, hopefully also reform of the electoral system (which before the election ED's colleague Brown was offering now having lost the election bent Labour have backtracked)

    As far as I can see Nick Clegg has been working in the National interest and that of his party, of course its a tought concept for Labour, which bent as it is has mainly looked after its own funtionaries, which isn't working people, just look at all those ministers and MPs happy to effectively steal from the taxpayer with bogus expenses and the like.

    Think of some of Labours leading lights, Blair, Mandelson, Campbell they seem happy enough just to get their books published while some of us still have some money coming in.

    Craven Labour would not understand that maybe some of us still have a sense of whats right, and certainly Clegg stated he would negotiate with the largest party which was conservative and even if he hadn't anything else would have been wrong.

    ED miliband is not now or in the future going to take responsibily for making Labour unelectable.

  4. Iraq/banks/economy

    Tony, i wish you would get off your high horse regarding these subjects.

    The War in Iraq - Tony Blair did we he genuinly though was the best thing for the country and what he thought was right. He wanted to stop an evil tyrant who was killing millions of people and bringing the quality of life of everyday people like me and you to the lowest possible. Dont spin there was a conspiracy he did what he thought was best for this country at the time - He had the balls to make that decisions surley thats the type of guy that should be leading our Country ?

    Banks and Economy - Everybody knows this wasnt down to Labour, UK and the states have no manufacturing really and mainly its utilities and gambling on the stock markets thats why when .

    Your rants about people on benefits - you want to look close to home the Tory's brought this in (Thatcher) because they wanted to get unemployment figures down they brought in the DLA (or what ever it was called in that day) this encoraged people to remain on the sick which is till this day a problem that the Torys have caused.

    You really need to look at the bigger picture not your one sided biased views.

  5. Apologies for the bad spelling and grammer typed in a hurry.

  6. 5 33 high horse? I've a giraffe.

    Grammer and spelling I am the master of poor use

    The outcome of the iraq war and illegality was clear to me. still well done for killing a war criminal

    Banks Ed Brown presumably all complicit

    What rants about people on benefits, I'd like to see people like me get benefits, when there is a genuine need unfortunately, instead of giving benefits to people who work, vast sums are given to work shy low life, I like many others pay vast sums in and if out of work would only get pocket money, those career spongers who spend their time making babies as a career get many thousands and frankly want shooting.

    Perhaps for the long term scrounger we could introduce a modern day workhouse.

    The above is a rant a rare thing on these pages, most of my stuff is well considered opinion

  7. Spot on Bluenote.

    The Labour party is indulging in lamentable comfort thinking.

    We barely have sufficient Army to support the duty cycles for Afghanistan and no way sufficient to deploy in support of the civil authority if the UK descends into disorder.

    As for "Workhouse" Tony. The point I have often made (such as in opposing sainthood for Leonard Cheshire and Sue Ryder) is that we ended incarceration of the fit unemployed, the workhouse. But charities like those of Ryder and Cheshire perpetuated and increased incarceration of the disabled.

    Leonard Cheshire charges the state about £1400 per week fees for each inmate.

    Many such inmates cry freedom. The disabled persons human rights movement began with an inmates revolt at LeCourt Cheshire Home in 1972.

    I hope Mr Clegg will look at this.

    We have idle hands on fit people drawin g benefits in a community from which the incarcerated disabled are excluded.

    And it costs £1400 per week incarceration fees from the public purse for disabled residents of private and charity care homes.

    What you get for £1400 per week taxpayers

    There are ways to deliver freedom, provide useful work and save money.

    Similarly we have a skills shortage and an expertise shortage (The IEE has been warning for decades that we cannot continue with having greater numbers of students of drama studies than of engineering) and a way to address this is through Reserve Forces.

    Our nephew (A Staff sgt PTI with APTC) has just began his Afghan tour. New Labour took us unlawfully into the Iraq war and the so called strategic justifications for deploying the Afghanistan are cobblers.

    Yet our best people have to go out there and risk their lives for Blair's follies.

  8. It doesnt matter which party gets in, the government always gets elected thats why the agenda never changes.

  9. quick note to rick or retired google now intercepts comments it reckons are spam and holds on to, hence the late show of your comment

  10. Retired

    We do not always see eye to eye so your support for my assessment of Mr. Miliband Jnr is appreciated.

    Also in accord with you over the size of our army and have only today sent a paper to a number of MPs supporting Liam Fox's stance over cuts in numbers being potentially detrimental to morale.

    Don't really know sufficient about Leonard Cheshire or Sue Ryder to comment on the rest of your submission but must admit to having real reservations about care in the community. I firmly believe that there are some unfortunates who are best served by institutional care, both in their own best interests and those of the public.

    How many people have to be randomly attacked, even killed, or classrooms disrupted before we consider the human rights of the majority over the PC idea of rights for the few taking precedence?

  11. Thank you for sharing your further views, Tony. Given what you have said about Nick Clegg, I am pleased to see that you are just as delusional as you claim the Labour Party to be. Of course you may revise your thinking when - because of Clegg's bending over to satisfy Tory ideology, not the needs of the nation - your Party faces electoral oblivion.

  12. Interesting to see the parallels between your posts and those of your political ally - now - Tory "Doctor" Simon Moores. His latest, and laughably pathetic, attempt to lambast the Labour Party sees him reproducing the words of the traditional Labour anthem "The Red Flag". He clearly thinks that the words can be used to frighten people away from supporting the Party. Perhaps it will work on some of the more fragile blue-rinsers, or the orange order now streaked with blue, who get turned on by the wilder claims and scare-mongering of the Daily Mail.

    Obviously those of you on the right prefer the empire-extolling, foreign domination and battle encouraging songs traditionally loved and performed by the Tory Party.

  13. 7 33 electoral oblivion for doing the right thing, so be it,7 35, Tory boy Simon Moores is not a political ally, and until he gets around to apologising for his cheap shot at me during the last cabinet meeting, will be persona non grata here at bignews

    I haven't read Mr Moores post so really I cannot comment, other than to say whatever he writes seems to have the style of a toadying, gung ho, boy scout.

    I don't follow your references, to Blue rinsers, or Orange men and on that later group, I was going to post on the spectical of a bunch of religious bigots, responsible for much carnage of the last century, but then I'd have to attack all the other relgious bigots in society.