Red, Yellow or Blue?
-
Was watching BBC last night, looks like a love fest over there, the Lib-cons are lovey-dovey, optimistic and giddy with each other...wonder how long this will last?
-
@solo said:
Was watching BBC last night, looks like a love fest over there, the Lib-cons are lovey-dovey, optimistic and giddy with each other...wonder how long this will last?
'Weeks' - at least... but we do have five years to go !
-
@unknownuser said:
looks like a love fest over there
i know, how sweet. do you think they share a bunk bed?
-
@olishea said:
@unknownuser said:
looks like a love fest over there
i know, how sweet. do you think they share a bunk bed?
Well don't forget they are both Public School educated .....
-
haha prick so am I.
so because their parents paid for their education they must be gay, right? idiot
-
And anyone who votes labour is an idiot.
-
I just caught up on this whole thread and it's been an interesting discussion from the viewpoint of a liberal (small "l") Yank.
First, it's been hard to keep track of the colo(u)rs. On this side of the pond, throughout the Bush years there were "Blue States" and "Red States" ever since the presidential election of 2000, when all the TV networks used the same colors: blue for Democrats, red for Republicans.
That distinction of which states went which way, who was a Red State and who was a Blue State, was particularly important thanks to Bush/Cheney "Democratic Theory" as I heard it articulated by John Bolton (Bush's appointee to the U.N. who thought the U.N. should be abolished), "You are only responsible to the people who voted for you". When Bolton said that, even the interviewer dropped his jaw, but it was clear to me that was the way the Bush administration operated. That attitude made Which states were Red and which Blue an important distinction, so Blue for Conservative keeps glitching for me.
Second, the party philosophies. Someone described the British Conservative Party as being like the American Republican Party with a bit of Socialism thrown in. That's been even harder to keep straight than the colors because to at least the vocal Republicans, "Socialism" is a an obsenity. One prominent Republican Congresswoman, Michelle Bachmann, even went so far as to say publicly about a year ago that there should be an investigation to determine who in Congress were anti-American Socialists. I saw the interview where she said it. I also saw her denial two days later that she ever said anything like that, and then saw her say something similar a couple of months later.
So to me, describing a political philosophy as being like the American Republican Party with a bit of Socialism is as contradictory as describing a musical style as being like Bach harpsichord with a bit of heavy metal. It may be accurate, but it's hard to imagine without the experience.
Just observations, with a bit of opinion, here in the Corner Bar.
August -
@unknownuser said:
And anyone who votes labour is an idiot.
exactly, especially after what we've just been through. but each to their own i suppose.
-
I should have added a massive dollop of sarcasm with that.
-
yeah i know remus goes without saying doesn't it. but thanks for clearing that up
you are right, we should have given a failed government ANOTHER chance. and i said you have to be kinky to vote labour, not an idiot!
-
Not everyone shares your views oli. And by not everyone, i mean the 8.5 million people who voted labour, although i suppose they're all kinky.
More generally, the point im trying to make is i find it hard to keep a straight face while you chastise PeterCharles for making a quip about public school boys being gay when you've dismissed anyone who votes labour as being kinky a couple of pages back. Both equally flippant remarks.
-
no they're all miffed!
ok i'll back away from this debate.
...until the next election mwah ha ha ha
-
@olishea said:
... and i said you have to be kinky to vote labour, not an idiot!
You're beginning to sound like an American Republican Spokesperson now. Your original statement is on the same page.
(I have freinds who call themselves Republicans, so I have to make a careful distinction between those who hope the party can return to what it once was and those who are trying to lead it off the deep end.)
Advertisement