Quote: Aaron @ April 28 2010, 11:34 PM BSTI'd put it down to anguish and exasperation when confronted by a smarmy, lying politician.
I've been over and over the video but I can't see Cameron anywhere !
General Election 2010 Page 62
I do find it interesting though that in all the news programmes I've watched tonight, nobody has even mentioned the "f**king defence", as it must now be called.
Right, I'm flocking off to bed.
Sometimes Fate plays a hand in matters, and today was when Brown's fate was sealed. He's never been a particularly lucky sort of guy, he's fought hard for what he's got - real winners don't usually have to work that hard, they have something about them that the Fates and the public go for.
Brown is probably a nicer, more honest bloke than Blair, but he never had Blair's gift for communicating with people and just looking sure of himself in a relaxed way. Brown was just too heavy and uncool for our modern age. Labour must find another younger, cooler leader to compete with Clegg and Cameron now. But I fear that Harman woman will get the gig.
Yes, I've noticed that too. Perhaps his aides are (behind closed doors and WITHOUT microphones) talking about it having been something else then, and we're all barking up the wrong proverb.
Quote: Badge @ April 28 2010, 11:44 PM BSTI do find it interesting though that in all the news programmes I've watched tonight, nobody has even mentioned the "f**king defence", as it must now be called.
Gordon and his cohorts have alluded to it, but they can't just come out and say that Gordon thought she was a sweary woman.
Quote: Timbo @ April 28 2010, 11:49 PM BSTGordon and his cohorts have alluded to it, but they can't just come out and say that Gordon thought she was a sweary woman.
Yes, but that doesn't mean the media can't comment on what his defence actually is. I think most people would agree that if he did think he'd been F-bombed then the "private" conversation wouldn't seem quite as bad. A bit like Prescott punching that geezer wasn't as bad as it might have been because he was reacting to being whacked in the ear by an egg. Of course people may or may not believe the defence but it seems strange that the media aren't even referring to it.
I'm just trying to work things out from the evidence in hand. Why did he think the meeting was a disaster, and why did he think she was "this bigoted woman", when to the casual observer neither was true? I'm tempted to believe the f**king defence, as it makes sense of his reaction.
What a f**king non event.
If Gordon Brown had sympathised with the woman's comments the papers' would have described him as a racist.
Is he not allowed his own thoughts?
And f**k the third estate lapping this up. I bet matliss and paxman phone the newsnight office when they get up at 2.00 in the afternoon and say; "What c**ts have we got in the studio tonight?"
Shame on anyone who makes capital out of this.
And f**k sky.
Quote: Badge @ April 28 2010, 11:59 PM BSTI'm tempted to believe the f**king defence, as it makes sense of his reaction.
Perhaps, but I think Gordon's personality also makes sense of his reaction.
Quote: Badge @ April 28 2010, 11:59 PM BSTWhy did he think the meeting was a disaster, and why did he think she was "this bigoted woman", when to the casual observer neither was true?
Think of how Labour's campaign has been going generally, and that this woman had challenged him quite heavily despite being brought over by one of his own aides - who are supposed to protect him from such. That'd feel like a disaster, "f**king" or not, if you were in his position.
Sure, there are other possible reasons, but the vast majority of the public are not even being told what his defence is (whether it's genuine or otherwise). That can't be right.
I can see that wide smug grin on Andrew Rawnsley's face already as he anticipates more interviews and column inches to help sell his book.
Brown is probably a nicer, more honest bloke than Blair, but he never had Blair's gift for communicating with people and just looking sure of himself in a relaxed way. Brown was just too heavy and uncool for our modern age. Labour must find another younger, cooler leader to compete with Clegg and Cameron now. But I fear that Harman woman will get the gig.[/quote]
Tony Blair didn't have a gift for communicating with people, he had a gift of lying every time he opened his mouth; a trait that is usually attributed to people who never say a thing out of place and always being able to say the right thing at the right time.
Gordon Brown's mishaps and forced smiles (when he is always clearly uncomfortable with the paparazzi) is more of a sign of his honesty than anything else; with Blair it's just dressage, no sincerity anywhere. Tony Blair has sold his soul to the devil and he is damned forever (to quote George Galloway). Brown had more in common with Robin Cook when it came to the war (do some research on their working relationship, the press never do).
I was about to vote for Labour because I thought Brown was a good guy, still think he is, but since Blair forced his way back in again I couldn't bring myself to do it.
I love the Tories analogy of the 'Big Society' meaning - let's take away the state and have everybody work for the govt for free - this is just the same as the state except not paying for the people that provide the essential services that they would do anyway and probably struggle to do without a paycheque. This is a bigger form of state, just like a previous person mentioned, enforced by a watered down dictatorship and it would cause the biggest gap between rich and poor Britain would ever see. As if 'essential services' became as simple as tightening your bootstraps. Under Cameron I foresee a Britain where the rich as seen as 'better people' than the poor and the ones working their ass off for free will be told to be 'socially responsible' because they are poor despite the fact that they are forced to do essential services with no support - keeping them in the gutter.
I'm not voting for Lib Dem, was considering it, but since he mentioned in siding with the Tories I have the feeling that his policies will become completely transparent all too soon. The Lib Dems have a history of doing that.
SNP, Scotland NEEDS to get the hell away from Westminster and become more like Norway.
Quote: Badge @ April 28 2010, 11:44 PM BSTnobody has even mentioned the "f**king defence", as it must now be called.
The trouble is, we already know he made all those gaffes getting the names wrong of the families of dead servicemen, and that was put down to him being half blind. If now we're asked to imagine he's half deaf as well, it all adds up to a picture of a half-sensed PM, blundering around half the time in a half-witted manner. I doubt the spin-doctors want that.
Quote: James Turner @ April 29 2010, 4:42 AM BSTTony Blair has sold his soul to the devil and he is damned forever (to quote George Galloway).
You are quotingn the man who gave Saddama a jumbo tin of Quality Street and has grovelling at the feet of every terrorist or fundamentalist who'd give him a vote or 2. Galloway entertains me but he is a lickspittle, hypocrite. (albiet one with surprisingly high principles on a limited number of subjects).
Quote: James Turner @ April 29 2010, 4:42 AM BSTI love the Tories analogy of the 'Big Society' meaning - let's take away the state and have everybody work for the govt for free -
This is perhaps their most stupid or just plain dishonest idea. There are millions of volunteers, and millions of carers already. All of whom save the state billions, many of whom are supported/organised by investors programs/CSV or in the case of carers benefits and individualised budgets.
You couldn't expand on the existing system much more.
It's just a completely dishonest device to cover big cuts further down the line.
Whilst blaming us poor sods for not volunteering enough.
I wonder just how many people would be foolish enough to fool for it?
Quote: sootyj @ April 29 2010, 7:42 AM BSTYou are quoting the man who gave Saddama a jumbo tin of Quality Street and has grovelling at the feet of every terrorist or fundamentalist who'd give him a vote or 2. Galloway entertains me but he is a lickspittle, hypocrite. (albiet one with surprisingly high principles on a limited number of subjects).
He is only sometimes a hypocrite in some of the things he may be wrong about which is not that often.
But he is always bang on about the things he is right about and not a hypocrite when it comes to these things. He also has more guts, tenacity and morality I've ever seen in any politician since Tony Benn despite how self-aggrandizing he seems to be at times.
I think watching him being self-aggrandizing is a small price to pay.
He could have got in serious trouble about his protests, it took a lot of guts.