HomeBlog
Comments
  • David Edwards June 18, 2012 at 6:21 am

    Wtf is the party formerly know as (and representative of) Labour playing at? From here it seems to be doing its best to guarantee a triumphalist Cameron second term.

  • DAVID A SHAW June 18, 2012 at 8:56 am

    I do not see much of an opposition from a progressive Labour party right now, all i hear are sops the coalitions evil policies, lets get this straight, people are sick of the right wing and their profiteering destruction of the nation. Their hatred of the vulnerable, and their ‘born to rule’ attitude. So why should a group within the Labour party who support this way of thinking be tolerated at all ? The blair years are over, and thanks to him the tories have had it easy in their dismantling of the welfare state. Real progress will only be made when those who think like tories go where they belong, for they have no place in a party of the people and for the people.

  • jeffery davies June 18, 2012 at 11:28 am

    go back to basic s labour listening to those on the right who i would suppose bring blair back get rid of them put in decent people who run us and the country the way it should be warned you could be out in the cold once again jeff3

  • Humanity2012 June 18, 2012 at 4:19 pm

    All Division on One Hand and No Choice on the Other a Lousy Consensus For No
    Choice which is why I can See the UK would be Better Off without Political Parties

    The Welfare State should of been Constitutionally Protected so the Toff ” Born to
    Rule ” Brigade could Not just of Railroaded through all their Rubbish without so
    much as a Bye Your Leave

    The ” Official Opposition ” by Not being a Real Opposition has Let Down the Poor
    and Vulnerable who are Oppressed by this Capitalist State and Society and Allowed
    in Effect a Dictatorship as Refelects the Current UK Political Situation

    Any Human Suffering with Regards to the Poor/Sick/Vulnerable/Disabled is
    too Much let Alone 2 Years 5 Years or 1.000 Years if the Con Dems go Un Challenged
    over Matters of Welfare Policy

  • Mike Caics June 18, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    If Mandelson is for it: then there are very good reasons to be against. This is the man who left and returned to the Labour Government so many times, it seemed as if Blair needed to install a set of revolving doors! Indeed, Peter Mandelson’s numerous “resignations” and “re-appointments” were a matter for the Prime Minister’s embarrassment. Progress are not a ‘think-tank’ or even a ‘policy committee’ – they are just another ‘front’ – dedicated to the eradication of anything which seems to be remotely ideologically ‘Socialist.’ If there is one principle the Labour Party has lost, it is the principle that the Labour Party was established and paid for by the “Workers” and, by extension, those who become Unemployed who are (as we now know) being returned to a state of 1930’s penury. Anything else Mandelson says, can be easily treated as Machiavellian ‘scheming..’

    There is equally, no place for disproportionately influential benefactors or their wealthy lackeys: no matter how much “support” they promise.

    Mandelson is as dangerous and treacherous now, as He ever was in Government.

    There is no place for the equivalent of the Russian “Dumas” in British Labour Politics – ‘parties within parties’ may work within more Dictatorial and prescriptive Organizations, but not here. Unless, of course, Mandelson’s intention is to create a form of New Labour “Tea Party?” The existing Shadow cabinet are already perceived as a being disgracefully aloof from the existing rank and file. Their New Labour ‘identity’ has little in common with the ordinary man and woman, struggling to live in Austerity Britain. Yet, the rich and powerful do NOT seem to be “In it” with us? Certainly Mandelson isn’t.. nor are any of his former Cabinet Friends.

    The REAL question we ALL must consider and answer is this: is the WHOLE of Politics and ALL its Political Organizations now tainted by wealth and influence so much – they need to be purged, distinctions (and possibly ‘battle-lines’ ) drawn again and policies created which acknowledge and assert the representative authority of the real workers?

    Does the Real Labour Party need to be rid of ALL the “Mandelsons?”

  • You must be logged in to comment. Log in
%d bloggers like this: