The last line is my favourite
Margaret Thatcher
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
The last line is my favourite
What ? I used good, in relation to you using great.
You then said good didn't come into it and leaned towards her influence.
So are we now allowed to talk about how her policies weren't great?
Actually I've already done that.
Enjoy your thread.
What a surprise, the Guardian doesn't like an uber conservative PM, not let us go round in circles as I dig up an editorial from the Telegraph putting her on a pedestal, declaring her to be the second coming.
If this wasn't just a party political you'd argue against what they said and not who said it. Or what I said to be more precise, but that's when you decided to have your influence sideshow.
Another person getting confused - I said she was influential, you said what she was influential for wasn't good, I said good doesn't come into whether you are influential or not.
That means exactly what it says, if I was changing the yardstick I would have said so, if I said this was a reason for Thatcher being a great PM I would have said so.
I didn't say so.
So if influence doesn't relate to greatness why bring it up if not to confuse?
By saying that I saved us a few hours of deliberating over a left wing commentary of a right wing PM, followed by a deliberation of a right wing commentary of a right wing PM. It doesn't take a genius to see where that would go and how it would develop.
Plus you were leading the discussion point on her influence, so in reality it was your sideshow. I was responding to posts about Atlee, Lloyd George, Thatcher, my reasoning about PM, coming at me on a conveyor belt.
Income poverty:
Who do you think was PM when those lines go up very sharply?
Who do you think was PM when those lines go up very sharply?
Because that was the way that 'plot line' if you will was developing, you cannot have a fast moving thread without it meandering all over the place.
To be honest, I think all is relevant to her Greatness as a PM, it was you trying to say otherwise because it didn't quite fit the outcome you wanted.
You and the telgraph like her, me and the guardian don't. She divides, strongly, always has, not my idea of a great leader, something you think a great leader can do. Nowt new will be learned here.
That means nothing as an answer to my question. You sir are a bluffer.
Income poverty:
Who do you think was PM when those lines go up very sharply?
The fact that Thatcher knew perfectly well that is what her policies were causing and for saying as much is such a reason I consider her great, she was not afraid to do what was difficult and needed to be done that would cause great pain because it was in the national interest for future generations. The country was on a very slippery slope, we were known as the sick man of Europe because we were so far behind West Germany and France, and we would continue to be on such a slope if it wasn't for Thatcher throwing down the gauntlet. Where we would have ended up if we took the safe option nobody knows, but it wouldn't be as a well developed, G8 country that is for sure.
No pain no gain as they say Brian right? Well I'm off to bed, enjoy your laissez-faire dreams.
I was arguing that being remembered or influential isn't contingent or whether you are good or bad.
With regard to your second point, that is a very, very worthy point. Saying that you will find it very difficult to find any politician who has a meaningful stint in office and doesn't polarise the electorate to some extent. Take Churchill for instance, (Note to MikeUpNorth - this is an example to establish a point only) during the Second World War he faced three votes of confidence, there where national demonstrations by hundreds of thousands, there were strikes aplenty - WWII was entirely necessarily and history proved his handling of it to be correct which considering our position in 1940 was quite the accomplishment. So if you struggle to rally the nation and keep it together when invasion forces were waiting 20 miles from Dover, no PM ever will be able to whilst doing something commendable and necessary regardless of party affiliation.
You are going back an awful long way to the Earl Grey, if I had opened this up to the greatest PM of all time, his name would be on the short list, which would be a very short list.
Most of Britain's economic, civic and political development as we know it today was in the 19th century - when you compare a list of accomplishments of a notable 19th century PM versus a notable 20th century PM, the former set the standards.
Earl Grey wins because of the tea.
It is true that not many Prime Ministers have part of a national institution named after them, though our WWII leader to be fair does have a nodding dog bearing his name.
Vile, insipid, condescending, ignorant, evil creature.
If Arthur Scargill writes a biography of her anytime soon, he may use your words on the dust cover.
He would be very welcome.
Man feck Reagan.
It is interesting how similar Reagan and Thatcher's policies were, and also how weak domestic opposition was to them. For Reagan to carry 44 states and re-election with 49, whilst across the wave Thatcher got bigger vote shares that Blair would go on to get - it is difficult to work out who was worse out of Walter Mondale and Michael Foot.
I know SFA about Michael Foot, but I can recount an amusing story about Mondale from a mate who works at Columbia University in NY. His department did something or other that Mondale was involved in, and Mondale sent the department a thank you email. He IMed me:
That is no way to talk about Brian!
He IS a Chelsea fan...
That is brilliant, I wish he sent that to Mondale rather than you.
Probably safer for job security and all to send it to me.
I am quite surprised nobody has mentioned Herbert Asquith - you can talk about Clement Atlee as much as you like but it was Asquith who began building the welfare state and launched a suicide mission to change the constitution in order to make it happen, which resulted in the Parliament Act 1911, the primacy of the House of Commons ever since, and the first social protection this country has ever seen.
Passing the Parliament Act was a huge undertaking, overcoming the Lords during the Edwardian Era and political battles with the King in the process was no mean feat.
Passing the Parliament Act was a huge undertaking, overcoming the Lords during the Edwardian Era and political battles with the King in the process was no mean feat.
You talk about the future as if we are in a great place now, we are declining, we've suffered a collosal crash in the finance markets the consequnces of which are still unwinding and we can't compete with the growing economies in the east
Is she dead yet?
RIP?
RIP?
She lucked out, the computer and robotics bought huge productivity gains and she had north sea oil and privatisation to raise money with, she used it to pay for tax cuts and welfare, nothing invested which is why we are fecked now
Brian how old were you when the milk snatcher came to power?
Do you know what pobs was because MT taught me?
Do you know what pobs was because MT taught me?
William Pitt the Younger.
No?
Whenever I see a mention of her in a forum or on the news etc, I always think it may be the one...
or Arther Scargill
There should be a state Holiday when this woman finally dies.
Aye, the day the Reagan-Thatcher taint finally leaves the earth. Half way there 