What on earth are you talking about? Blair hated the direction Smith as leader wanted to take Labour into the next GE. The only thing Blair was aligned to was John Smith's health where he predicted Smith's early death.The left's obsession with Blair means so many of you would rather a Tory government than an 'impure' Labour one. Smith and Blair were actually far closely aligned than Smith and Corbyn.
Oh my god you actual are Tony Blair aren't you.
I honestly don't think you've taken in anything I've said. Corbyn will talk to anyone. As an MP he had every right to talk to who he wanted to, it is true he shared some values and ideology with Sinn Fein but he wasn't negotiating Great Britain away. What Corbyn does is talk, he listens.He wasn’t just meeting organisations as a politician, he was often meeting with violent organisations whose aims he shared. Eg the Sinn Fein / IRA stuff from the 80s... he shared their goal of a United ireland. He wasn’t meeting all sides as any honest broker would, or even thr peaceful advocates of his position. The SDLP, who at the time were the peaceful advocates of a United ireland, are on record as saying Corbyn never spoke to them and that they regarded him as taking the side of Sinn Fein.
Name a Corbyn achievement.
One.
Thanks.
The left's obsession with Blair means so many of you would rather a Tory government than an 'impure' Labour one. Smith and Blair were actually far closely aligned than Smith and Corbyn. He would have been hated by the left too had he lived and went on to win. The hard left resent anyone who disrupts their ideal which seems to be perpetual Tory rule so they can complain about it. Only have to look at issues Wilson and Callaghan had with the hard left to know that this isn't an issue unique to Blair. Anyone who wins and is successful for Labour, the left resist.
They only laud Attlee because we're so many decades removed now that they can pretend he was one of theirs. Transplant Attlee into the modern party and the people who take their 'B-LIAR' placard with them wherever they go in case an emergency protest breaks out would have him top of their deselection list.
Blair and Iraq are convenient scapegoats to the fact that there's a long history of the left of the party hating whoever it is who delivers government for them. Smith may not have had Iraq but nor did Callaghan or Wilson and their battles with the same element of the party Corbyn supporters come from isn't expunged from history. Smith would have gone same way. Which is what always makes me laugh when people from the left cite Smith favourable as a 'what if'. The man who, if anything, was the forerunner to the 'neo-liberalism' Blair and Brown (to a lesser extent) heralded. But the poor bastard died so lets pretend the fact he was one of the architects to move Labour away from the left and towards the centre, didn't happen. And let's ignore the fact one of his protegees became one of the most important figures in the New Labour movement.
Look, the only thing that Smith had in common with Blair was being in Europe. Of course Corbyn is ambivalent. Trying to make out that Blair was closer to Smith is very awkward tbh. Blair wanted to centralise, Smith did not. I think that is a very strange similarity betweenSmith was much, much more closely aligned politically to Blair than Corbyn. It's utter bollocks to pretend otherwise. He might not have been as far to the right of the party as Blair but he was in that general direction. He was responsible for many of the changes that allowed new Labour to be born, both as leader and previously working under Kinnock.
Absurd to somehow claim him as the lost left-wing hope. He was a modernising moderate, far closely aligned with what became of the Labour party post his death than the Labour leadership now. The only reason people play the Smith card is because the poor git croaked it and over the years he's been incorrectly painted as something other than what he was, which was a centrist, moderniser. Not as right-wing as Blair but his side of the party have a more realistic claim to his legacy than anyone else.
The thing about Corbyn is you can draw draw the totally respectable conclusion from his history, that he speaks to a lot of violent and unpleasant people because he broadly shares their aims, although let be generous and assume not their methods. Or that he speaks to a lot of violent and unpleasant people because he’s a peacemaker, even though he rarely talks to all sides or has any real record of achievementas a peacemaker. Or that he doesn’t care who he speaks to or what they do, and just keeps bumbling into meetings with violent and unpleasant people by accident.
The thing about Corbyn is you can draw draw the totally respectable conclusion from his history, that he speaks to a lot of violent and unpleasant people because he broadly shares their aims, although let be generous and assume not their methods. Or that he speaks to a lot of violent and unpleasant people because he’s a peacemaker, even though he rarely talks to all sides or has any real record of achievementas a peacemaker. Or that he doesn’t care who he speaks to or what they do, and just keeps bumbling into meetings with violent and unpleasant people by accident.
His supporters don't care.
It's "Iraq" and that's it. Tories could win the next 5 elections as long as they get to say "Iraq" to anyone who suggests we should be doing better.
His supporters don't care.
It's "Iraq" and that's it. Tories could win the next 5 elections as long as they get to say "Iraq" to anyone who suggests we should be doing better.
It's the same faction that's opposed every Labour leader who's ever won an election. Winning isn't important, their aim is to control the party. It's why everyone seems completely relaxed about Brexit. Not even bothered he isn't opposing the govt. What's the point in opposing if you've no interest in winning?
You literally called it racist and 'nutcasist' earlier, you don't seem too relaxed about it.
Crikey, wumming in formation now.I,agree his supporters don’t care. They are the mirror image of the nutcase Trump,supporters on The Donald on reddit. Which isn’t a compliment by the way.
Oh yeah I'm bothered about it. But I'm also bothered that the leader of the party I'm a member of isn't opposing it.
I mean the hard left are relaxed about Brexit, or at least aren't bothered about the lack of opposition to it.
So let us use your logic and prescribe that the hard left, if not always actively supporting brexit (and therefore racist) they are against it, but passive (and therefore allowing the racism to continue) or you should retract a silly statement that belies debate and debases the conversation.
Can I suggest that if you are going to keep adding paragraphs to your posts that you show it as an edit? Please, it is etiquette on here I believe. Possibly.I've literally no idea what you're saying.
Much of the driving force behind Brexit is anti-immigrant racism and loopy economics. An opposition party should be opposing that. Not hold their hands up in surrender.
And maybe quote people, especially when you are making shit up in reply to other posters. Lovely.Okay
EDIT: I will
Are you by any chance an alter ego of @Muffled funk or @Hectic?Imagine if Labour was led by someone who actually opposed Brexit. Imagine if post 2016 we had a party that represented the (then) 48% and the majority of young people who overwhelmingly opposed Brexit, in a full-throated opposition this mess from day one.
As it is we've a govt who's hell-bent on delivering a hard Brexit and an opposition whose official line has pretty much been that to stop them is undemocratic. Anyone who has an issue with that is accused of a smear campaign.
Edit, oh and The Labour Party does oppose Brexit, Jeremy said so, he just doesn't happen to be vocal about it at present.
Are you by any chance an alter ego of @Muffled funk or @Hectic?
Everybody's Talking About Brexit. - Harry Nilsson Corbyn.Yeah, I mean it's not as if it's an important issue or anything that things like words would come in handy over.
But we're not the Tories, maybe we can't afford the risk of strep throat by actually saying stuff.
Labour aren't the Tories, maybe we didn't have the money for a staffer to watch his facebook page.
.
Edit, oh and The Labour Party does oppose Brexit, Jeremy said so, he just doesn't happen to be vocal about it at present.
I always think it's probably best if you Oscie stop posting shit when you have had too much alcohol. I've started to think it a lot just in the last page or so.And yet presumably some will still insist it's those bashing their heads against the brick wall who are the problem, not those who built the wall.
I've literally no idea what you're saying.
Much of the driving force behind Brexit is anti-immigrant racism and loopy economics. An opposition party should be opposing that. Not hold their hands up in surrender. I'm saying the reason why Labour opposition has been so poor on Brexit is because the primary focus is on maintaining Corbyn.
Brexit, NHS or any other shit this govt has messed up is of secondary interest to keeping control of the party and deselecting MPs. Hence why losing an election is hailed as a great result. At any other time of our history vs the 2017 govt led by Theresa May, celebrating that result would have been an embarrassment.
I always think it's probably best if you Oscie stop posting shit when you have had too much alcohol. I've started to think it a lot just in the last page or so.
Yawn.Not accepting that from someone who thinks it's perfectly acceptable for the leader of the opposition to be 'not vocal at present' on an issue as important as Brexit.
Yawn.
It's not hard to see why he tires of people that don't listen.
Do you have the ability to read the posts in between your own Oscie?He tires of people who don't listen to what you've admit he isn't saying about Brexit?
They're called the Lib Dems. Who knows, maybe your vote will be the one that has them polling double figure percentage points.Imagine if Labour was led by someone who actually opposed Brexit. Imagine if post 2016 we had a party that represented the (then) 48% and the majority of young people who overwhelmingly opposed Brexit, in a full-throated opposition this mess from day one.
As it is we've a govt who's hell-bent on delivering a hard Brexit and an opposition whose official line has pretty much been that to stop them is undemocratic. Anyone who has an issue with that is accused of a smear campaign.
Do you have the ability to read the posts in between your own Oscie?
The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he? The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he? The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he?I read the post you quoted my post in and replied to it as if it was a response to my post.
Labour have already voted in favour of Brexit, it happened last year. Labour are also opposed to remaining the single market and retaining freedom of movement. To say they're opposed to it any longer is clearly untrue.The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he? The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he? The Labour Party is opposed to Brexit. In a Parliamentary vote Labour will vote gain it or for a soft Brexit. Jeremy said so. Doesn't need to keep talking about it when no-one is listening does he?
I clicked my heels three times too. I don't know how much plainer it can be.
Edited.
I think you'll find that neither The Labour Party or the Labour Parliamentary Party have had an opportunity to vote on Brexit. The voting population are the only ones to have had a vote during the Referendum.Labour have already voted in favour of Brexit, it happened last year. Labour are also opposed to remaining the single market and retaining freedom of movement. To say they're opposed to it any longer is clearly untrue.
The white text on your post doesn't seem to be showing.I think you'll find that neither The Labour Party or the Labour Parliamentary Party have had an opportunity to vote on Brexit. The voting population are the only ones to have had a vote during the Referendum.
Labour were opposed to ignoring the result up until June 2017. Since then The Labour Party has stated that it will oppose a Hard Brexit at least and believes in Free Movement and the Single Market. Jeremy said so.
Well at least tell me again that Labour voted in favour of Brexit again. I enjoyed it so much the first time.The white text on your post doesn't seem to be showing.
Confused as to what you're getting at here. Guessing you're going to try and say that article 50 doesn't count as voting for Brexit...which is a view, I guess.Well at least tell me again that Labour voted in favour of Brexit again. I enjoyed it so much the first time.
@Ubik I wonder if you can guess where this is copied from?Confused as to what you're getting at here. Guessing you're going to try and say that article 50 doesn't count as voting for Brexit...which is a view, I guess.
Your statement on the single market was a flat out untruth, but there we go.
We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.
A Labour government will immediately guarantee existing rights for all EU nationals living in Britain and secure reciprocal rights for UK citizens who have chosen to make their lives in EU countries. EU nationals do not just contribute to our society: they are part of our society. And they should not be used as bargaining chips.
It is shameful that the Prime Minister rejected repeated attempts by Labour to resolve this issue before Article 50 was triggered. As a result three million EU nationals have suffered unnecessary uncertainty, as have the 1.2 million UK citizens living in the EU.
A Conservative Brexit will weaken workers’ rights, deregulate the economy, slash corporate taxes, sideline Parliament and democratic accountability, and cut Britain off from our closest allies and most important trading partners.
Labour recognises that leaving the EU with ‘no deal’ is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option and, if needs be, negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a ‘cliff-edge’ for the UK economy.
The issues that affect our continent now will continue to do so in the future – and Labour will continue to work constructively with the EU and other European nations on issues such as climate change, refugee crises and counter-terrorism.
Literally from last month - https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/jeremy-corbyn-single-market-hold-uk-back/@Ubik I wonder if you can guess where this is copied from?
and No, Article 50 was triggered by the Referendum result, announced by Theresa May, Labour didn't vote FOR Brexit.
