 | John Major, Sleazier than Nu-Labour?The Conservatives are always reminded of the sleeze of the Major years. A quick glance at the the BBC news website comments which is inhabited by people called,"Leftcorrentandproud", actually I made that up but they are still there accusing the Tories of being worse than the current Labour Government. Even John Major thinks that enough is enough and has defended his record. But then I suppose he would and time has a habit of blurring the memory. Let's not forget this is the same John Major who shagged Edwina Currie, Eeeewww. I'm sure his Mrs hasn't forgotten!
I think initially most damaging was "Cash for Questions". It turned out that several MP's had taken money from Mohammed Al Fayed to ask questions in the House. It is of couse worth remembering that no Lordship titles were passed over and certainly no passports. The Major years were of couse full of sexual scandals with more than a few dropping their trousers for the ladies. Tim (bounder) Yeo, Michael Brown and Alan Amos all played their part with the hapless Davis Ashby dropping his trousers for another man and let's not forget the famous autoerotic death of Stephan Milligan. Didn't he die while having his head in a plastic bag and having an orange stuffed somewhere? Or did I just make up the orange bit, who knows? David Mellor of course gave us hours of entertainment with stories of his kiss-and-tell relationship with the "actress" Antonia de Sancha. This was of course made all the more delicious by her saying that they use to make love while he was dressed in the Chelsea FC kit and liked his toes being sucked (who doesn't)?. The scumster hypocrite Max Clifford actually almost deserved his paycheque for this one. It also seemed he liked the odd free holiday paid for by the PLO (sounds familiar) mind you he probably needed a rest after all that he'd been getting up too.
Possible the most damaging thing was I think Jonathan Aitken who lied on oath that he knew nothing about secret talks with a Saudi Prince. The Guardian called his bluff and he was rightly imprisoned for perjury.
So there we have it, not bad for a party who's motto was, "Back to Basics", but as bad as Nu-Labour? I know what I think, what about you? |
| Submitted by Ricardo, 17/12/07 @ 07:17
It's really not a case of 'are they as bad as New Labour?' It's the other way round. The Major administration was supposed to have set the benchmark for sleaze and idiocy and the ludicrous Blair was elected specifically with the remit of cleaning up politics. "I'm a preddy straight kinda guy," "we're gonna be whiter than white" he said. The time had come, he said, for transparent Government. It was the tool they used to get themselves into power. They were, so they told us, the ‘peoples party.’ Within minutes of getting into Downing Street, they hired legions of PR men to brainwash the prols and convince us that black was in fact white. It must be true, his Holiness Tony says so. Then he set about filling almost every important position in the country with his friends. Then the sleaze started. We had the Formula 1 incident, we had dodgy passports, we had Mandelson getting the boot (twice), we had Tony’s wife buying moody flats from a fraudster, we had Keith Vaz and the Hinduja brothers, we had Stephen Byres with the Railtrack shares, we had Tessa Jowel, we had David Blindgit. And THAT is just the tip of a stinking corrupt iceberg. By 2002 (just 5 years in for the whiter than white party) the papers were already asking if they were more corrupt than the Major Government. How could this have happened? To cap it all, we recently had the disgraceful spectacle of a British PM being questioned by the Police. Just think about that for a moment. To ask if the Tories were as bad as New Labour, is to get the question entirely ar*e-about-face. ANY corruption would have been unacceptable after their promises and flag waving in 1997, let alone record levels of abuse of the public trust. New Labour unfortunately think that they own the system and that the rules only apply to other people. All the time people still discuss the Major government (it wasn’t even relevant at the time) New Labour will continue to get away with it, and we’ll be stuck with them. Somebody once told me a country generally gets the government it deserves and I’m starting to think it’s an irrefutable truth. | Submitted by Dunelmus, 20/01/08 @ 15:13
Labour are clearly worse. The Tories had a few dirty old men shagging their secretaries, this is true. Labour have been guilty of much deeper corruption. They have outdone the Tories for sleaze - after all the euphemism 'Looking for badgers' means to go out and have homosexual sex with strangers. Labour have indulged in vote rigging and the infamous postal voting scandal that was described as being worse than a 'banana republic' by a senior judge. Labour have bought and sold peerages and let us not forget Mr Mandelson - who was allowed to leave 'with his head high' after being caught for fraud twice - then shipped to the gravy boat of the EU. Blunkett was so bad they made a musical about him - favours for one of his numerous mistresses and his party blame the 'rich toff media' for his downfall. Scandalous. Labour MPs are being caught out weekly as having dodgy finances - this all from a government dedicated to cleaning up politics - look at Blair, both he and his wife have made millions from his position - and he is a socialist! Ken Livingstone gets away with racism - the very insult he uses against any who disagrees with him. Labour MPs are questioned by police - yet dedicate their own members to ruthlessly scour Tories for any hint of indiscretion. Tories are sacked for slight offences - Patrick Mercer, whereas a Labour MP can just sit out calls for resignation. This government is stinking with corruption. | Contribute to the discussion | |  | Mervyn King hung out to dry by New LabourKnives are being sharpened for the stabbing of Mervyn King. You can hear the grinding if you listen hard enough, but has he done anything wrong?
You've got to look back a bit further to understand exactly what's going on here and the main part of the story starts in the U.S. Basically the U.S. housing market turned south due to various things like rising interest rates and over supply of housing stock. As we've seen in the UK in the past, and quite possible again soon is everybody thought the party would continue so they kept on lending to worse and worse borrowers affectionately know as Ninjas ( No income, no jobs). Of course they are the first to be hit when things deteriorate and couldn't pay the bills. The houses had to be sold resulting in house prices falling further and faster.
Banks don't just lend money any more, that's far to simple and boring so what they did was they packaged up all the debts and sold them on. The loans were cleverly dressed up to look like a safe investment while infact everyone who touched them up actually took a little bit of the value away as well. Basically they took a dog turd wrapped it in a few layers of gold paper and sold it as a gold brick. Who bought these turd bricks? Well that's the big question, nobody know where all the turd bricks are and so nobody trusts anybody. Lending rates between banks have moved up heavily with banks hoarding cash. This is where Northern Rock's problems started as rather than having lots of expensive branches and staff they decided to borrow large anounts of cash on the money markets. This is of course fine when they works and they have done for 20 odd years but a potential disaster when they don't. Northern Rock's strategy has made it the darling of the stock market for years as its costs were so low compared to other banks.
This is where the question of blame comes in. The City knew about this as the shares have been moving down heavily since their peak in Febuary, the FSA knew about it, or I hope they did as Gordon Brown's trusted banker and good friend is on the risk committee at the Northern Rock (That hasn't been publicised much). Everybody basically knew and the shareholders who didn't, well let's not shed too much of a tear for them as a large number got their shares for free and have had some decent dividends for years.
Mervyn has acted differently from other Central banks as he has refused and still has to give cheap money to the market, whatever you might read in the papers, which he says would mis-price risk. He is of couse right as if the taxpayer bails out everybody who does something irresponsible then what is the incentive for the banks to be cautious, infact wasn't it this very thing that encouraged the U.S. banks to lend to the Ninjas in the first place?
The unprecedented 100% all shiny guarantee New labour has given through a policy that is still being worked on as it contained so many shortfalls has sorted things out temporarily, but what if no buyer can be found? What happens if the property market collapses in the near future? Has the UK just turned itself into a player in the UK mortgage market? Short term fixes are fine but somebody will have to be blamed. Let's think who it might be for a minute, Gordon Brown, no way , his opinion poll standings have gone up, Alistair Darling, too new surely. What about the FSA who took over regulating banks from the Bank of England, "Sorry mate, it was like that when we got here". It's a interesting side thought that old Prudence himself Gordon Brown takes the short term view. I have a feeling that Mervyn King who realises that sometimes a bit of pain now can stop major pain later is going to cop it for this one while being principled and thinking longer term. Think of all this as eating a bit of rhubarb to keep your bowels moving a bit, I'm sure Mervyn does. |
| Submitted by Man in the Pub, 01/10/07 @ 11:48
How could anyone trust Alistair Darling with eyebrows like that. | Contribute to the discussion | |  | Gordon BrownIt's only right and proper that the first political bastard under scrutiny in the new political section should be the Prime Minister, the man elected to run the Country. Except he wasn’t elected at all, was he? Gordon likes nothing better than getting things done without bothering to consult the electorate and, true to form, he’s at it again.
This time though, it’s serious. New Labour always promised a referendum on the EU constitution, but not any more. Why not? Because it isn’t the ‘constitution’ any more, it’s the EU ‘treaty.’ Now I haven’t read it, but everybody that has says it’s almost identical, so Gordon, once again isn’t going to bother asking what you think because of a technicality. Even for the Labour party, this is deviousness on a huge scale.
He’s trying to sign you up to something that will control every aspect of your lives and is universally loathed, and he doesn’t give the slightest f*ck what you think about it. Could we really expect any more from a man that deliberately ruined the retirement of countless old folk just to balance his books?
We don’t care that you’ve changed the name, Gordon, it’s still the EU constitution. You are trying to paint yourself as a reformer too but I don’t care what you try to call yourself, we all know you’re the same kunt you always were. |
| Submitted by Tosser spotter, 04/09/07 @ 11:38
No I'm not talking about him, he's too much of a Kunt to warrant any of my time. | Submitted by Honest George, 04/09/07 @ 12:44
Us Dutchies f*cked it off no probs with a big up yours and f*ck off NEE. However,,,along with the French we were given the chance to do so through a referendum. REFERENDUM GORDON,,,R.E.F.E.R.E.N.D.U.M. Do you understand that concept you cock eyed Calidonian Doughnut? | Submitted by Man in the Pub, 04/09/07 @ 13:24
Errrr No, I don't | Submitted by Ricardo, 04/09/07 @ 13:40
F*ck you Gordon, you anus. | Submitted by Jack Johnson, 04/09/07 @ 13:59
Kunt Simple. Ready in minutes. Leave till Kuntish. Then kick. | Submitted by vitriol, 04/09/07 @ 14:46
It seems that no head of government will give us this vote; it wouldn't be because they wouldn't want to jeopardise their chance of joining the EU gravy train in that wonderful unelected position as a Euro MP or "special advisor" after their tenure as a hopeless PM would it? | Submitted by Dunelmus, 04/09/07 @ 15:37
Absolute kuntery in a basket. Pigs snuffling at the trough - having a party on the gravy boat. Kunt is not even a strong enough word. | Submitted by Webby, 06/09/07 @ 02:28
Isn't a treaty something that prevents two nations going to war (typically)? So, if we tell the EU to f*ck off and start growing bananas(!) that are bent at more than a five degree angle, are the Frogs going to bomb us???? | Submitted by Ricardo, 06/09/07 @ 03:49
Frogs bomb us? Hehehe, I'd love to see them try. All we'd need to do is send the TA down to the coast with water pistols and they'd be waving white flags all the way from Bologne to the Cote D'Azur within seconds. | Submitted by Honest George, 07/09/07 @ 02:08
I recon the french should start produceing frogs legs that are straight. They should put f*cking splints on them if they have they have to. My point is...If bananas and cucumbers have to be doctored and f*cked about with for transportation reasons then so should f*cking frogs legs which are notoriously bandy and don't fit very snuggly in to tin cans like sardines do. | Submitted by Man in the Pub, 07/09/07 @ 09:06
Wasn't some Euro MP jailed the other day for fiddling about 65 grand on expenses | Submitted by vitriol, 07/09/07 @ 15:11
You mean they actually pinned down a Euro MP for a criminal offence? Noooooo! *Paging Peter •Randy-Pandy• Mandelson• | Submitted by Constantasthenorthernstar, 09/09/07 @ 09:48
Gordon is a big fat Jock twat that has about as much charisma as a bar of carbolic. He will not give the promised referendum because he only ever said it to make himself look like a better bet than BLIAR. He is of course the same; he is just as devious, he is just as sure that he knows what's best for us poor proles and he is just as likely to f*ck the country up as the other twat. If this were any other country, there would be riots in the streets over the way we are treated. | Submitted by Man in the Pub, 12/09/07 @ 12:05
I think Brown is possibly much more devious and a smarter cookie than Bliar. A bit short on the charisma side, granted, but he has all the characteristics to make a good prime minister. All he needs to do now is to start smoking cigars and drink a bottle of brandy a day. | Submitted by Gong Farmer, 12/06/09 @ 16:37
Sorry, but this seems to be the most appropriate place to ask this question: In the same way that we refer to a group of lions as a 'pride' and a group of hyenas as a 'pack', what term is used to refer to a group of cunts? | Submitted by Guest, 12/06/09 @ 21:00
Sorry, but this seems to be the most appropriate place to ask this question: In the same way that we refer to a group of lions as a 'pride' and a group of hyenas as a 'pack', what term is used to refer to a group of cunts? | Submitted by Guest, 12/06/09 @ 21:42
Sorry, but this seems to be the most appropriate place to ask this question: In the same way that we refer to a group of lions as a 'pride' and a group of hyenas as a 'pack', what term is used to refer to a group of cunts? | Contribute to the discussion | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
