TOT G & A & a lab

On 13/03/2010 16:17, Brian Gaff wrote:
The whole problem is that there is no school you can send people to to learn
how to run a country, its on the job training!
Brian

Sitting on the bog reading the Beano, you mean?

On 13 Mar, 17:17, Noggin wrote:
On 13/03/2010 16:17, Brian Gaff wrote: The whole problem is that there is no school you can send people to to learn
how to run a country, its on the job training!
Brian

Sitting on the bog reading the Beano, you mean?

Graham and Dave I am surprised that you are so relaxed about off topic
content appearing in the group. My political'neutrality' was not
closet conservatism, quite the opposite. If this thread is a political
one then I would express my tremendous disappointment in New Labour.
They have governed the country according to Tory principles and
abandoned the aspirations of all those who thought "things are going
to get better!"
They didn't, they got a whole lot worse for the main part. David
Cameron is modelling himself on Tony Blair's 1997 handbook and IMHO
the last thing the country needs is another ego-maniac. I think a well
hung outcome to the election would be the best result so that no party
has such a huge majority that they can push through the most savage
agenda. However, I did agree with the controls on fox hunting.

For now I'll go and read "What Satellite" - happy surfing.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:17:51 +0000, Brian Gaff wrote:

The whole problem is that there is no school you can send people to to
learn how to run a country

Eton and Harrow, surely?

In article ,
J G Miller wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:17:51 +0000, Brian Gaff wrote:

The whole problem is that there is no school you can send people to to
learn how to run a country

Eton and Harrow, surely?

but, interestingly, the school that has provided more Lord Chancellors than
any other is the Edinburgh Academy.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.16

In article
,
galaxyguy wrote:

If this thread is a political one then I would express my tremendous
disappointment in New Labour. They have governed the country according
to Tory principles and abandoned the aspirations of all those who
thought "things are going to get better!"

With that, I'd largely agree. I did initially hope that with TB we might
*not* "get what I saw" as I saw a smooth PR merchant. Alas, we got what I
saw.

They didn't, they got a whole lot worse for the main part.

That I don't really agree with. More mixed than that. On the plus side they
did do things like introduce the Minimum Wage and Devolution, and despite
carping from the Tories the world didn't end as a result. But on the minus
side they went on with various mad Tory ideas and allowed the private rip
offs - railways, etc - to continue. And allowed the City spivs to go on
dominating the economy to the detrement of other sectors.


David Cameron is modelling himself on Tony Blair's 1997 handbook and
IMHO the last thing the country needs is another ego-maniac.

Back in agreement with you. :-) Although the real problem isn't so much
the ego part but the cluelessness (in both cases).

I think a well hung outcome to the election would be the best result so
that no party has such a huge majority that they can push through the
most savage agenda.

Alas, in our given economic situation a hung parliament would probably be a
disaster as the money-boys would decide we could not run the economy. So
we'd get a run on the pound, huge interest rates, etc, etc. Mind you, I'd
expect Osbourne to take us to the same place due to his Ladybird Books
understanding of economics.

However, I did agree with the controls on fox hunting.

I would have been happier with fox hunting if they'd ensured the fox knew
how to aim its gun more accurately at the riders in the red coats. Shocking
business when they used to hit the horse by accident. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 09:14:29 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:
Just remember that Gordon only has one real eye so he can turn a blind
eye literally.

Never mind. At least he has one more brain than Cameron.

Though to be honest what really scares me is the thought that Osbourne
might get to be Chancellor!

What really scares me is that either Labour or the Conservatives will
win . . .

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:39:53 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


2) Cameron just looks to me like a frantic "Tony Blair clone with a blue
tie might get us elected". i.e. all "I'm a nice kinda guy" and no substance

What I want to know is who will be running things behind the scenes
while he acts as the frontman. Norman Tebbutt?

A while ago the BBC might have had some incisive and useful commentary
about such things rather than repeats of drivel

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:55:12 +0000, Albert Ross wrote:

What really scares me is that either Labour or the Conservatives will
win . . .

It would be nice if it was a scoreless draw.

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:59:23 +0000, Albert Ross wrote:

What I want to know is who will be running things behind the scenes
while he acts as the frontman. Norman Tebbutt?

Unlikely, as Norman Tebbitt has advised people to vote for UKIP
and regards Cameron as the Pol Pot of the Conservative and Unionist Party.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:39:53 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

I agree this is all TOT, though. Hence the title of the thread. FWIW I
agree that in many ways the Tories and New Labour are pretty similar in
policy terms. But the distinctions are

1) I think that Brown/Darling have an understanding about dealing with the
present economic situation

I agree. Its a pity that Harriet Harperson is part of the same package
though.

ColinM


- whereas I doubt that Cameron/Osbourne can
count beyond 20 between them without taking their socks off or asking a PR
hack or a focus group. Their flip-flops on how to deal with the situation
and their current cluelessness about how to try and avoid dropping the ball
should they get in are quite alarming.

2) Cameron just looks to me like a frantic "Tony Blair clone with a blue
tie might get us elected". i.e. all "I'm a nice kinda guy" and no substance
whereas I can't see Brown as a clone of Blair at all. Different kettle of
fish entirely.

I also agree this could all end in tears by bedtime if people get annoyed
that someone else doesn't like their views. So I'll now duck out... 8-]

Slainte,

Jim