The Politics Thread

[thebish]

Off to see the Iron Lady tonight, sharing DC's reservations about the propriety of using MT's dementia as a storytelling device in her own lifetime.

getting my coat as I suggest...

it's rated pg - unsuitable for miners...

(arf!)

[Bruce Rioja]

Very much looking forward to seeing it next Wednesday.

[Hoboh]

Just sobering up, we still in Europe?

[Lord Kangana]

F*ckinn hell hobo, its nearly 4 years since Lisbon.

[Hoboh]

F*ckinn hell hobo, its nearly 4 years since Lisbon.

And I will never forgive that tw*t Megson!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Off to see the Iron Lady tonight, sharing DC's reservations about the propriety of using MT's dementia as a storytelling device in her own lifetime.

getting my coat as I suggest...

it's rated pg - unsuitable for miners...

(arf!)

Well, Streep is absolutely magnificent, and it is a must-see for this reason alone.

But I did find the invented hallucinated conversations between an elderly lady alive today and her late husband hard to take.

There's obviously nothing shameful or undignified about dementia in itself and there's no reason not to portray this reality that affects lots of people in art. I just find it a but tasteless to use the dementia of a living person as a storytelling device to introduce, in convenient chronological sequence, of course, a series of bite-sized flashbacks as some sort of highlights reel of MT's career.

And if you're interested in the actual political events, you'll be pretty unsatisfied at the reduction of the Falklands to a 2-minute, Bond film style conversation around an illuminated map, or the plots against MT being covered in a few camp stares from Richard E Grant.

So yes, unmissable but disappointing.

A couple of (selective) quotes from reviews I endorse....

"Subsequently the script packs too much in, briefly touching every possible base from Brixton and Brighton to Goose Green and the miners' strike. Nothing is examined or analysed, little is illuminated in any revealing way, and because... everything is seen from her distorted perspective there is no countervailing moral, political, historical force or argument."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/jan ... CMP=twt_fd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Powerful as all this is, Streep’s five-star performance is trapped in an unsatisfying three-star film."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/arts/film ... 276265.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Prufrock]

The whole dementia thing whilst still alive is something I don't think is quite 'right' either. How does it treat her? The problem as I see it is that she is someone it is rare for people to have neutral feelings about, but I can't see Hollywood going all-out either way. Does it try for balance? Any attempt at actual balance will probably end up missing the mark for most of its audience, this side of the pond anyway!

Worst thing is, I've heard Robert Downey Jnr doesn't even make a cameo!

[Verbal]

With US politics so fractured as it is at the moment - some would say even at its poorest - there has never been a better time for independent candidates to come to the fore.

This guy, for instance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... FXXAuDK1Ao" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Hoboh]

With US politics so fractured as it is at the moment - some would say even at its poorest - there has never been a better time for independent candidates to come to the fore.

This guy, for instance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... FXXAuDK1Ao" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any gun toting androids in the mix? Be a change for the US to actually launch cruise at the oppo's before telling them they're coming!

[Prufrock]

Read this today, on welfare reform.

Interesting piece, clearly partisan, but seems armed with figures, and if its allegations are true, reflects the government in a very poor light.

[BWFC_Insane]

Read this today, on welfare reform.

Interesting piece, clearly partisan, but seems armed with figures, and if its allegations are true, reflects the government in a very poor light.

Government tells lies shocker.

Tory government cares only about the rich shocker.

Tory government would rather disabled people didn't exist shocker.

Any of these apply.

One thing I do know is that as a group of people you will struggle to find one less honest, capable or trustworthy than politicians having worked with them on and off for a while. And this goes across all parties. Obviously there are some good ones, but they all seem to get dragged down by the same traits eventually.

This particular government are the most disgusting I've known though, since Thatcher at least....

[Bruce Rioja]

BWFC I in one-eyed anti-Tory bollock-speaking bile shocker!

[bobo the clown]

This particular government are the most disgusting I've known though, since Thatcher at least....

Really ? ... Honestly ??

Not even with hindsight do you now see the con-trick of Blair, the biliousness of Brown ???

Really truly ????

[BWFC_Insane]

This particular government are the most disgusting I've known though, since Thatcher at least....

Really ? ... Honestly ??

Not even with hindsight do you now see the con-trick of Blair, the biliousness of Brown ???

Really truly ????

Both Blair and Brown had the aim of improving public services and trying to make society better.

They both had at heart some very good ideas...

I'd have either back in a heartbeat over the turds we have now...

[Prufrock]

I think BWFCi and Bobo have just summed up everything I dislike about politics. Partisanship. Get. Rid.

BWFCi has just suggested the Tory government only care about the rich. First of all there is no Tory government, but of those who are, I think most, argue you what you will with their methods, want good for the British people. Sure, it's arguable the ideas of many probably favour the rich, if that's your political persuasion (it's mine), but it isn't (immorally) conscious. Of the Tory party, you're talking a small minority of backbenchers and I don't know how many (I suspect a very small number of) peers who would be against the general ideas of the idea of state intervention in health, education and the like. They want the same outcomes, so question them on policy, not on them being evil (that is a fair topic for the irreverent angry thread, but surely not this), you give up the battleground far too cheaply. To suggest the Tory party would rather disabled people didn't exist is a magnificent display of I don't-know-what.

I, as a 'lefty liberal', am willing to go on record that I actually quite like Cameron. I think he means well. I thought he was piss poor in the EU veto, but otherwise I think he has been a good leader, his intention is good and he tries to get his government to work towards those intentions. I think a lot of government policy is wrong but I don't see how that means its leader is a bad person.

Equally, I don't know how Blair was a con-trick. He did very well to con the British public (individually often idiotic, collectively often right) three times. Domestically a fantastic politician. Foreign policy wise almost almost right. Except for one major exception. Possibly. Iraq is a matter for a different debate, but to call Blair a 'con-trick' is revisionism and one-issueism, or if neither, blind partisanship, of the top, top (Jamie) order.

I'm unsure how Brown being indigestible, or peevish, makes him more, or less, disgusting than Thatcher.

Please, it seems there is a very serious issue of disabled people feeling very unfairly treated. Can we discuss it in terms of facts, not calling the other lot's leader 'evil' or conniving?!

[thebish]

is it just me who thinks this - or does Alex Salmond need a fecking big slap?

[bobo the clown]

I think BWFCi and Bobo have just summed up everything I dislike about politics. Partisanship .....................

Bravo.

Correct & very much the reason I rarely intervene on here.

I honestly believe that people's political views are rarely changed and generally become more entrenched by debate and so see it as pretty futile.


I'll, again, withdraw. But only after agreeing with Bish (rare, I know) that Alex Salmond really does need a good slap.

[thebish]

I think BWFCi and Bobo have just summed up everything I dislike about politics. Partisanship .....................

Bravo.

Correct & very much the reason I rarely intervene on here.

you're always on here despite your protestations!!!

[BWFC_Insane]

I think BWFCi and Bobo have just summed up everything I dislike about politics. Partisanship. Get. Rid.

BWFCi has just suggested the Tory government only care about the rich. First of all there is no Tory government, but of those who are, I think most, argue you what you will with their methods, want good for the British people. Sure, it's arguable the ideas of many probably favour the rich, if that's your political persuasion (it's mine), but it isn't (immorally) conscious. Of the Tory party, you're talking a small minority of backbenchers and I don't know how many (I suspect a very small number of) peers who would be against the general ideas of the idea of state intervention in health, education and the like. They want the same outcomes, so question them on policy, not on them being evil (that is a fair topic for the irreverent angry thread, but surely not this), you give up the battleground far too cheaply. To suggest the Tory party would rather disabled people didn't exist is a magnificent display of I don't-know-what.

I, as a 'lefty liberal', am willing to go on record that I actually quite like Cameron. I think he means well. I thought he was piss poor in the EU veto, but otherwise I think he has been a good leader, his intention is good and he tries to get his government to work towards those intentions. I think a lot of government policy is wrong but I don't see how that means its leader is a bad person.

Equally, I don't know how Blair was a con-trick. He did very well to con the British public (individually often idiotic, collectively often right) three times. Domestically a fantastic politician. Foreign policy wise almost almost right. Except for one major exception. Possibly. Iraq is a matter for a different debate, but to call Blair a 'con-trick' is revisionism and one-issueism, or if neither, blind partisanship, of the top, top (Jamie) order.

I'm unsure how Brown being indigestible, or peevish, makes him more, or less, disgusting than Thatcher.

Please, it seems there is a very serious issue of disabled people feeling very unfairly treated. Can we discuss it in terms of facts, not calling the other lot's leader 'evil' or conniving?!

Thats incredibly naive IMHO. I don't think many politicians "mean well" beyond self preservation and not just in political terms.

Cameron, Blair would sell their own grandmothers for another 5 years and some juicy "consultancy" roles afterwards, probably with companies they have indirectly "awarded" some sort of contract to during their time in power, all very above board *cough cough*....

Best intentions? My arse.

Just so happened that Blair wanted to try and improve society through improving the NHS and Education system, something I agree with. He didn't do it out of the kindness of his own heart or any great principle, but to win votes, and set himself up for life, which he did very well.

Same with Cameron, except he wants to do it the opposite way by ripping the social infrastructure from the country, painting all our problems as being scrounging public sector workers, dividing society, punishing those least able to take the punishment and generally protecting his mates in the city, save for some token gestures. Your disabled example is one of many where this government have "lied" about consulting and listening. If they at least were lieing to do vaguely positive things I could get by. But they're not...

They have brainwashed the populous into thinking that whatever they do is ok, cos we have some national debt. As though it were a ticking timebomb, which it isn't. Having brainwashed the sheep into believing that they can pretty much do what they like, in the name of "deficit reduction". If there was even a carefully thought out strategy I'd give them some credit. But its just willy nilly ideological decisions.

As for evil, thats a very subjective word...

Personally and this is a personal opinion, I don't think there is much good about the bloke, but there is plenty of nastiness and conniving....

[Hoboh]

is it just me who thinks this - or does Alex Salmond need a fecking big slap?

No first minister Fish needs help to hold a referendum ASAP then we are rid of the leech!
Lets see how long the jocks will put up with the tax bill he will land them with and how they will enjoy passport control in the borders alongside all the levies we hopefully will introduce alongside pulling all military and navel bases out of his 3/4 lump of rock of a country!