Political language. What helps, what doesnt ??

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Pale Rider

Veteran
In no way shape or form does intimidated require your use of that well known journalistic tic of pejorative quote marks.

Vile threats were made to her and her family. She was nothing other than well and truly intimidated; no qualification required.

Leaving aside the usual sniping at my posting style, that she had to be intimidated or 'intimidated' into withdrawing the remarks doesn't matter.

She ought to have withdrawn the remarks out of a sense of political nous and general intelligence, but it appears she possesses neither.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
Leaving aside the usual sniping at my posting style, that she had to be intimidated or 'intimidated' into withdrawing the remarks doesn't matter.

She ought to have withdrawn the remarks out of a sense of political nous and general intelligence, but it appears she possesses neither.
Seems odd you haven't been calling for the same of your own party for the last....god knows how many years.
Let me guess...the Tories it's just banter 🙄
 
Leaving aside the usual sniping at my posting style, that she had to be intimidated or 'intimidated' into withdrawing the remarks doesn't matter.

She ought to have withdrawn the remarks out of a sense of political nous and general intelligence, but it appears she possesses neither.

If the quote marks make no difference why did you use them?

Genuine interest rather than sniping although the use of the word had is telling.

More generally, scum might have been at the outer end of reasonable discourse but it was a specific reference to members of the Cabinet who have demonstrably expressed homophobic, misogynist or racist views. Some are Etonians too.

If it were pursued as defamation she'd have a solid defence for truth/justification.
 
Last edited:

Pale Rider

Veteran
Gammon Rider is victim blaming. Again.

Usual playing the man not the ball from Twatington.

Bleating about victim blaming is particularly dumb, even for you.

Seems odd you haven't been calling for the same of your own party for the last....god knows how many years.
Let me guess...the Tories it's just banter 🙄

Don't tell me, Boris wrote something horrid in the Spectator 25 years ago.

I reckon the term 'whataboutery' must have been coined for you, which is a claim to fame, of sorts.
 

Pale Rider

Veteran
That is exactly what you're doing.

More personal sniping garbage.

Ms Rayner made the type of remarks I'd expect to hear from some of the NACAs on here, yet she's supposed to be a deputy leader of a credible political party.

There's no getting away from the crass stupidity of that.

Some people reacted wholly inappropriately, but regrettably that's social media for you.

I would happily dispense some Daily Mail justice to them, but simply observing Rayner is ignorant is no more than a statement of fact.
 
OP
OP
mudsticks

mudsticks

Squire
I doubt they really give a s**t about what people call them, they keep winning the vote. 🤣

It really is the case that some people are quite proud of 'our' divisive ignorant and destructive government aren't they.??

Strange phenomenon, but it seems to be true


If I was the sort to say 'close the thread' It would probably have been after this post.

In late 2016 we had one gutter element of the press describing three UK judges as "Enemies of the people" in a shocking headline. An attack on the judiciary's independence that was belatedly answered by the then Lord Chancellor, Liz Truss, with a weak response in which she failed to condemn it.

Three months later the author of that headline, James Slack, was appointed the PM's official spokesman.

The current UK PM expressing his view on Covid mitigation as "Let the bodies pile high". His lack of concern of the effects of Brexit summed up in his phrase, "fark business". His description of Muslim women who wear a burka as looking like letterboxes or bank robbers. And who can forget his picaninnies, water-melon smiles, or tank-toppped bum boys.

The Home Office tweeting the message which they later had to delete only for the Home Secretary to later tweet on her own account the same message. In it, reference was made to human rights lawyers as "activist lawyers ... delaying and disrupting returns". Although that tweet and an associated video advert were withdrawn after being found to breach civil service standards, Patel repeated the phrase in a tweet (which is still live). Days after her tweet, a man entered the office of immigration solicitor in London brandishing a large knife and threatening to kill him. He carried out a violent, racist attack on staff, injuring one of them before being overcome.

Patel did nothing to tone down her attacks, in fact she went further by later targeting 'do-gooders' and 'lefty lawyers' at the Tory Party Conference. PM Johnson got in on the act too, stating that the criminal justice system was “being hamstrung by lefty human rights lawyers”.

The Tory government's inhumane and divisive rhetoric is shaping the violent and intolerant behaviour we are seeing played out on our streets.

The Tories are acutely aware of the inflammatory and provocative nature of their words and policies, which they use to drive forward their populist form of government.

They will reap what they sow.
 
I doubt they really give a s**t about what people call them, they keep winning the vote. 🤣
Correct. In recent years, apart from 11 years of new Labour and a coalition with a centre right Liberal Democrat party, the Tories do keep on winning general elections.

The vast majority of Tories live, think and breath capitalism. They don't give a shoot about anyone else apart from those who buy into their brand of capitalism. Just look at what happened recently with the vote to make water companies responsible for the raw sewage being dumped into the eco system. The Tories voted it down. These are water companies who were privatised by the Tories, who pay heir chief executive million pound salaries, who would rather pay individual shareholders thousands dividends than reinvesting the money we pay to them into proper infrastructure to fix problems like the raw sewage and leaks to mains water supplies.

The Tories voted against making these water companies invest in their own infrastructure. These are the same Tories who claim to be in favour of the environment, but they'd rather protect the privatisation of a monopolised utility. It's no coincidence that these water companies donate to the Tory party coffers, just like the building industry do. Look at the protection it gets them against new laws being made to protect the consumer, leaseholder and environment. They don't want extra laws protecting the pesky rights of others!

I'm not against capitalism, properly regulated in a mixed economy. But scummy governments (Tory) use a combination of divide and rule (miners strike, section 28, Windrush, austerity, culture war) and smoke and mirror lies to maintain their grip in power.

I know you love the Tories, Shep. And perhaps their have been Tories that haven't been so bad, but out of a government of self serving millionaires and billionaires please give me a list of positive attributes which will change my mind that the whole bally lot of them aren't Tory scum.
 
Last edited:

Pale Rider

Veteran
Usual playing the man, not the ball from Gail Rider.

:rolleyes:

As I've told you, if you have a poke at me you will likely get one back.

The answer is in your hands.

The current Cabinet are the scum of the earth.... scum in the sense that impurities always rise to the top.

Which puts you in the same category as Rayner and the twatter knackers who hurled abuse at her.

Not good company, in my view, but perhaps you are happy with it.
 
Top Bottom