What? Because it is. I mean, liking flowers isn't a policy either but liking flowers doesn't mean you can't have policies.
I give up.
*insert derogatory comment about Leeds*
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
I give up.
*insert derogatory comment about Leeds*
I thought he was great.
The DUP's Ian Paisley on BBC Fivelive:
"McDonnell was given an ultimatum by colleagues in the shadow cabinet; if he didn't apologise tonight there were going to be calls for his resignation."
"McDonnell was given an ultimatum by colleagues in the shadow cabinet; if he didn't apologise tonight there were going to be calls for his resignation."
Don't you think it's just brilliant that politicians both need to debate and defend whether or not a man sung a song and why he did or didn't. What a world we live in.
He didn't deny long held beliefs, he denied those matters such as NATO were a part of the platform they ran on in the leadership election. Maybe they compromised some of their views or have changed their position for whatever reason, but the assertions being made by Liz Truss about what a Corbyn led government would do were speculation based on previous positions, quotes or what have you and not on the actual policies that formed the Corbyn leadership campaign. After all you never have it 100% your own way in politics and it's entirely likely that issues such as leaving NATO would not be pressed by a Corbyn government. McDonnell was right to clarify that point.
Corbyn's u-turn on leaving NATO is meaningless, considering that he has little if any intention to stand by the organisation in a time of crisis. Barely a fortnight ago, he stated that he could not think of any circumstances in which British forces ought to be deployed overseas.
“Any? I am sure there are some. But I can’t think of them at the moment.”
Maybe, just maybe, he may not ally with Russia too?
Maybe, just maybe, he may not ally with Russia too?
Where have I or the writer of the article said he can't or doesn't have policies?
The singing, what he wears, whether he kneels before the queen, or what colour poppy he wears are completely irrelevant.
They are all the kind of things that seem like a good idea when you are a teenager sticking it to the man, but in reality are just completely small minded petty irrelevances for both the person doing it and the people picking up on it.
Every time I hear about something like this (whoever is doing it) it just underlines that the people concerned should really grow up and be defined by what they actually DO and not trivial nonsense like this.
Not signing the national anthem or having to the one that wears a white poppy is just as cringeworthy as the overly patriotic chest beating and posturing of those that go around plastered in union jacks and calling for the Middle East to be glassed.
I'm a Corbynite for sure.
I'm not playing any more.
Hm.
Those non-voters better bloody vote.
Those non-voters better bloody vote.
I quite like him, far better than Ed anyway. But I can't see him being PM, especially not with nonsense like trying to remove the benefits cap.
As we know, Labour's biggest problem is convincing people they can actually run the country, mainly the economy. I don't see that happening anytime soon, sadly.
As we know, Labour's biggest problem is convincing people they can actually run the country, mainly the economy. I don't see that happening anytime soon, sadly.
Full article:
As he’s been leader for five days now, the press are calming down a bit. By tomorrow headlines will only say things like, “Cor-Bin Laden will force pets to be Muslim”, followed by an interview with 89-year-old Vera, who says: “It’s not fair because my hamster’s scared of burqas. That’s the last time I’ll vote Labour.”
The Telegraph will be even more measured, reporting: “Corbyn plans to introduce women-only gravity. Men will be left to float through space, making it harder to arrive on time for work, costing Britain £40bn.”
This could go alongside the genuine report in The Times on Monday, that Jeremy Corbyn’s neighbours “often see him riding a Chairman Mao-style bicycle”. A less thorough reporter might only mention that he rides a bicycle. Luckily this one knew the country where lots of bicycles are ridden is China, which was once ruled by Chairman Mao, which means Corbyn is planning to force us all to work in rice fields and eat dogs.
One problem with this excitement is that it’s hard to increase the hysteria when they’ve gone so wild in the first week, but they’ll rise to the challenge. By November, we’ll be told he’s forced Mary Berry to eat an Arctic roll full of blackbird sick as revenge for selling her book about scones via corporate tax-avoiders Amazon.
Then Panorama will reveal Corbyn appeared at a conference with Satan, who he described as an “old pal”; the evidence is a dream their informant had after falling asleep in a cowshed after drinking a bottle and a half of Sambuca.
You could tell how chaotic his leadership would be from the start, when he gave some important jobs in his party to people he agrees with. This provoked outrage. If he was being inclusive, instead of appointing John McDonnell as shadow chancellor, he’d have given the job to Jeremy Clarkson.
The other complaint about his Shadow Cabinet was the low number of women appointed, only 16 out of 31 rather than the half he promised.
The Sun complained of an “equality blunder”, and you can understand their frustration as they’ve always been uncompromising with their feminist demands, devoting every day’s Page 3 to poems by Mexican women’s rights campaigners, no matter how strong the protests to stop.
He didn’t even give a job to Yvette Cooper, on the grounds that she’d said she wouldn’t take it. But if he really cared about women’s equality, he’d have said “you’ll do whatever job I bloody well give you, love”, and the problem would be solved.
But none of us can have guessed the unspeakable horror to come next, when he didn’t sing the national anthem at a Battle of Britain memorial, ruining the efforts of everyone who fought in the Second World War. Commentators told us: “Those pilots did more than anyone to stop Hitler, and now Jeremy Corbyn has literally opened the cockpit of every Spitfire and smeared dog mess on the seats.”
It’s no wonder people called phone-in shows to make comments such as “I’ve taught myself to snore the national anthem, so I don’t insult the pilots during my sleep.”
It’s understandable for people to see it as an insult when someone didn’t sing “God Save the Queen” at the memorial, because the Queen played a major part in the battle, as a wing commander who shot down five enemy aircraft over Folkestone.
Even so, it’s hard to see how the national anthem is the song that most directly commemorates the RAF, so one suggestion to avoid a similar incident in future is to sing a different song at each memorial. Next year it could be “The Omen” by The Prodigy. Anyone not joining in by screaming “The writing’s on the wall” in St Paul’s cathedral will be arrested for treason.
Once again it was The Sun that seemed most furious about this lack of respect for dead servicemen. But if Corbyn gets his way it won’t even be possible to insult the armed forces, because, according to The Sun, he’ll “abolish the army”.
It didn’t make clear how he’d do that, especially when he appears at Prime Ministers’ Questions seeming mild and reasonable, reading out questions sent in from around the country. Most people seem to feel this was a healthy change, though it may be even better if he puts all the questions in a bucket and draws them out at random.
This would strengthen our democracy further. “Prime Minister, Tina from Exeter asks, who would win in a fight between Godzilla and a giant tarantula?” At first, Cameron would insist the mutant spider had no chance against a seasoned monster with wide experience of destruction, and his front bench would yell “hear hear hear” as usual.
But eventually a calmer atmosphere would prevail, and Parliament would become a forum for reasonable debate. That’s when Corbyn will strike to abolish the army.
He’ll introduce a similar system, so instead of weapons, our soldiers will march to the front line of a battle, and call out to the enemy: “Alan from Doncaster has asked what are you going to do about all the fires in the city you’ve just demolished.” Then in 50 years’ time, when there’s a memorial for all our troops that are captured, he won’t even sing at it. That’s how much of a danger he is.
The Telegraph will be even more measured, reporting: “Corbyn plans to introduce women-only gravity. Men will be left to float through space, making it harder to arrive on time for work, costing Britain £40bn.”
This could go alongside the genuine report in The Times on Monday, that Jeremy Corbyn’s neighbours “often see him riding a Chairman Mao-style bicycle”. A less thorough reporter might only mention that he rides a bicycle. Luckily this one knew the country where lots of bicycles are ridden is China, which was once ruled by Chairman Mao, which means Corbyn is planning to force us all to work in rice fields and eat dogs.
One problem with this excitement is that it’s hard to increase the hysteria when they’ve gone so wild in the first week, but they’ll rise to the challenge. By November, we’ll be told he’s forced Mary Berry to eat an Arctic roll full of blackbird sick as revenge for selling her book about scones via corporate tax-avoiders Amazon.
Then Panorama will reveal Corbyn appeared at a conference with Satan, who he described as an “old pal”; the evidence is a dream their informant had after falling asleep in a cowshed after drinking a bottle and a half of Sambuca.
You could tell how chaotic his leadership would be from the start, when he gave some important jobs in his party to people he agrees with. This provoked outrage. If he was being inclusive, instead of appointing John McDonnell as shadow chancellor, he’d have given the job to Jeremy Clarkson.
The other complaint about his Shadow Cabinet was the low number of women appointed, only 16 out of 31 rather than the half he promised.
The Sun complained of an “equality blunder”, and you can understand their frustration as they’ve always been uncompromising with their feminist demands, devoting every day’s Page 3 to poems by Mexican women’s rights campaigners, no matter how strong the protests to stop.
He didn’t even give a job to Yvette Cooper, on the grounds that she’d said she wouldn’t take it. But if he really cared about women’s equality, he’d have said “you’ll do whatever job I bloody well give you, love”, and the problem would be solved.
But none of us can have guessed the unspeakable horror to come next, when he didn’t sing the national anthem at a Battle of Britain memorial, ruining the efforts of everyone who fought in the Second World War. Commentators told us: “Those pilots did more than anyone to stop Hitler, and now Jeremy Corbyn has literally opened the cockpit of every Spitfire and smeared dog mess on the seats.”
It’s no wonder people called phone-in shows to make comments such as “I’ve taught myself to snore the national anthem, so I don’t insult the pilots during my sleep.”
It’s understandable for people to see it as an insult when someone didn’t sing “God Save the Queen” at the memorial, because the Queen played a major part in the battle, as a wing commander who shot down five enemy aircraft over Folkestone.
Even so, it’s hard to see how the national anthem is the song that most directly commemorates the RAF, so one suggestion to avoid a similar incident in future is to sing a different song at each memorial. Next year it could be “The Omen” by The Prodigy. Anyone not joining in by screaming “The writing’s on the wall” in St Paul’s cathedral will be arrested for treason.
Once again it was The Sun that seemed most furious about this lack of respect for dead servicemen. But if Corbyn gets his way it won’t even be possible to insult the armed forces, because, according to The Sun, he’ll “abolish the army”.
It didn’t make clear how he’d do that, especially when he appears at Prime Ministers’ Questions seeming mild and reasonable, reading out questions sent in from around the country. Most people seem to feel this was a healthy change, though it may be even better if he puts all the questions in a bucket and draws them out at random.
This would strengthen our democracy further. “Prime Minister, Tina from Exeter asks, who would win in a fight between Godzilla and a giant tarantula?” At first, Cameron would insist the mutant spider had no chance against a seasoned monster with wide experience of destruction, and his front bench would yell “hear hear hear” as usual.
But eventually a calmer atmosphere would prevail, and Parliament would become a forum for reasonable debate. That’s when Corbyn will strike to abolish the army.
He’ll introduce a similar system, so instead of weapons, our soldiers will march to the front line of a battle, and call out to the enemy: “Alan from Doncaster has asked what are you going to do about all the fires in the city you’ve just demolished.” Then in 50 years’ time, when there’s a memorial for all our troops that are captured, he won’t even sing at it. That’s how much of a danger he is.
Mark Steel, I presume?
I don't generally pay much attention to politics but I am amused at this apparent smear campaign from the press on Corbyn.
If he is so unelectable as PM then what are they so worried about?
If he is so unelectable as PM then what are they so worried about?
Because the job of a political journalist is to write stories on politics that sell newspapers.
They are not worried. Corbyn is comedy gold, a relic with no charisma and a farcical choice as the leader of the opposition. He is daft story after daft story from his past. Of course the papers will print that, it is not a smear as you would like to imagine, it is simply good copy.
Last edited:
The Labour establishment is pissing me off at the moment. All these MPs giving their comments to the press etc.
If Corbyn carries on getting this treatment from his own party and ends up being forced out because of it, there's a good chance I will never vote Labour again.
If Corbyn carries on getting this treatment from his own party and ends up being forced out because of it, there's a good chance I will never vote Labour again.
You're either naive or being wilfully disingenuous.
It's like school ain't it... it's easier to tolerate bullying when you don't like the person being bullied either. Doesn't make it any less wrong.
That the public are not fully aware of his stance on say immigration, nuclear weapons, fiscal responsibility, taxation, or women only carriages on trains.
So it's their public duty as journalists to tell us?
Ah yes, they are just doing their public duty of lying and distorting the facts.
Yeah, I've learnt a lot about his policies from reading articles like 'The Rumpy Pumpy Red who'll ruin our Lives'.
Here is a journalist doing his public duty:
In fairness if they are saying he is pro immigration, anti Trident, anti austerity, his policies would require higher tax receipts and he is considering women only carriages on public transport I don't think they are lying.
Comrade corbyn vows to control immigration, maintain an independent nuclear deterrent, cut the deficit quickly. Reduce the size of the state services in order to be able cut cut taxes and listen to the British transport police commissioned academic report stating women only carriages would be a retrograde step would be the press lying
Well in fairness they aren't just limiting themselves to the statements in your first paragraph now are they?
Yeah, I bet the Tories are shit scared that 20% of Labour voters are now likelier to vote Tory. Terrified that the first major public appearance of the shadow chancellor was dominated by him having to apologise for saying he wanted to assassinate Thatcher ("as a joke!") and that the IRA should be honoured.
No... But as I say they are not lying about his policies
They may be presenting only part of the story and picking parts that fit in with their narrative... But that's not lying
This man does not need smearing. He will not be taken seriously as a politician in this country. Against the backdrop of modern politics he comes with more baggage than Kim Kardashian. Newspapers trash any politician if they have the ammo to do so.
More fool you for believing that the Corbyn was a worthwhile candidate in modern British politics. Say hello to long term Tory rule.
Those points seem fair enough. But how can anyone defend the recent press coverage? It's been an absolute joke...
They are lying about his policies though.
Really... He has not announced many official policies has he?
They are speculating... And considering I see many corbyn supporters classifying the guardian amongst the right wing press then let's face it it makes you question are the guardian suddenly turning into the daily mail... Or might they actually be concerned that his previously stated positions if turned into official policy are likely to make the party unelectable
It isn't just the press coverage. He fails at every single standard of the game. He just won't be taken seriously. He needs to smarten himself up for a start. We are a G7 nation, one of the most powerful in the world. Do you think average Joe will trust a guy who looks like a geography teacher that wants to sit down and make friends with Putin?!!? Most people are very politically shallow, as was evidenced in that BBC focus group a few days back. In my opinion ideologues simply fail to understand people.
Okay fine, the press has done nothing wrong. feck it.
But is the treatment of Corbyn significantly removed from the norm? Would you argue that a comparable political figures, Farage for instance, has escaped a similar examination?
The new Labour regime must set out its policies and defend them; thus far Corbyn has shied away from most interviews, whilst McDonnell could offer little more than sound bites during his QT appearance.
It is like Corbyn doesn't have enough baggage to sink a ship. What on earth were his supporters expecting?
At the very least, you'd hope those within the party weren't actively screwing him over. I can understand why the tories might attack him, or why the right wing newspapers might want to smear him. But what the actual feck are Labour MP's up to?