Needs a moment...to get into the news!

Now, I don't know if you follow UK politricks. But, the same stupidity that we have in our politics, they have here WITHOUT the seemingly blatant corrupt activity. (notice I say seemingly)

But, the conservative guy is David Cameron. Not from the old school conservative mold, but a guy who is money bags conservative of the new generation. Eton College...blah blah blah.....

He is set up against the former Chancellor of the Ex and current PM Gordon "Exciting as watching paint dry" Brown.

Now, I don't have a problem with Brown. In fact, it's one of those things where if he wins, I would not dance in the streets nor would I lead the protest on #10 Downing street for his swift execution either. However, the Brits may feel that they want a change from Blair and his second in command and Cameron may speak that language; even though personally I don't feel that it matters much.

Now, I am no huge fan of Cameron either...even though I am a conservative, Cameron does not speak the type of conservatism I want to hear. He seems borderline racist and a bit of a war-hawk. So to me, if this election came down to Iraq, which most Britons don't even care about to be totally honest, you would get the same man in Brown as you do with Cameron; allbeit Cameron may be a bit gung-ho and nuke someone before Brown would.

But for the sake of my sick fetish with watching these arseholes spit in each others face (literally if you watch the house of commons debates), I like a good political showdown....the ultimate high stakes face off. Brown seems to be winning the media battle, and he has his words lined up with every move he makes. Cameron on the other end, has not been able to get into the news as of late and to be quite honest, he has not been able to get into the news at all. The last two months have all been "no flash" just Gordon; this was the tag at the labour convention and prior to which, he had a string of "good news" rolling in. From his handling of the Glasgow bombing and the Fleet street scare, to his transition from Blair to his "bland" but decent convention speech, which he artfully danced around the Iraq and Railway workers pension issue; bastards would not let the tubes run free. It has all been Gordon and just now, after he has made a test run towards how the elections may look like, he has just now started to face some criticisms; EU treaty and his same old same old Blair type leadership.

But still, Cameron can't get into the news. And, when he does, it is allways bad news. From one of his MP's defecting and he did not know, Quentin Davies, to him not having much to say on policy either; which people are picking up on.

So, as it stands, if we had a snap election, Brown would win but by a slim margin. The only way Cameron would have stolen it if the snap election was called, which everyone seemed to think would have happened, is if Brown just simply did not show up for work.....seriously.

Anyways, don't know why I am sharing this today. I just felt like something to do.
:voodoo:

Needs a moment...to get into the news!
Now, I don't know if you follow UK politricks. But, the same stupidity that we have in our politics, they have here WITHOUT the seemingly blatant corrupt activity. (notice I say seemingly)
But, the conservative guy is David Cameron. Not from the old school conservative mold, but a guy who is money bags conservative of the new generation. Eton College...blah blah blah.....
He is set up against the former Chancellor of the Ex and current PM Gordon "Exciting as watching paint dry" Brown.
Now, I don't have a problem with Brown. In fact, it's one of those things where if he wins, I would not dance in the streets nor would I lead the protest on #10 Downing street for his swift execution either. However, the Brits may feel that they want a change from Blair and his second in command and Cameron may speak that language; even though personally I don't feel that it matters much.
Now, I am no huge fan of Cameron either...even though I am a conservative, Cameron does not speak the type of conservatism I want to hear. He seems borderline racist and a bit of a war-hawk. So to me, if this election came down to Iraq, which most Britons don't even care about to be totally honest, you would get the same man in Brown as you do with Cameron; allbeit Cameron may be a bit gung-ho and nuke someone before Brown would.
But for the sake of my sick fetish with watching these arseholes spit in each others face (literally if you watch the house of commons debates), I like a good political showdown....the ultimate high stakes face off. Brown seems to be winning the media battle, and he has his words lined up with every move he makes. Cameron on the other end, has not been able to get into the news as of late and to be quite honest, he has not been able to get into the news at all. The last two months have all been "no flash" just Gordon; this was the tag at the labour convention and prior to which, he had a string of "good news" rolling in. From his handling of the Glasgow bombing and the Fleet street scare, to his transition from Blair to his "bland" but decent convention speech, which he artfully danced around the Iraq and Railway workers pension issue; bastards would not let the tubes run free. It has all been Gordon and just now, after he has made a test run towards how the elections may look like, he has just now started to face some criticisms; EU treaty and his same old same old Blair type leadership.
But still, Cameron can't get into the news. And, when he does, it is allways bad news. From one of his MP's defecting and he did not know, Quentin Davies, to him not having much to say on policy either; which people are picking up on.
So, as it stands, if we had a snap election, Brown would win but by a slim margin. The only way Cameron would have stolen it if the snap election was called, which everyone seemed to think would have happened, is if Brown just simply did not show up for work.....seriously.
Anyways, don't know why I am sharing this today. I just felt like something to do.
:voodoo:

You ain trying to say you are conservative hey???

You ain trying to say you are conservative hey???


On a few issues....but Cameron is not the type of conservative I want. He is no Thatcher or Major; to say the very least.

He has no control over his party. He does not have his eye or heart on the average Brit. Nor is he aware of the key issues and does not speak to them, or at them at any time.

If I was a Brit, Cameron would not get my support. As bland and as similar as Gordon Brown is to Blair, plus Brown is a devout Christian....Cameron would not get my vote.

But, the Brits are Godless and proud to say so......so..... we will see.

On a few issues....but Cameron is not the type of conservative I want. He is no Thatcher or Major; to say the very least.
He has no control over his party. He does not have his eye or heart on the average Brit. Nor is he aware of the key issues and does not speak to them, or at them at any time.
If I was a Brit, Cameron would not get my support. As bland and as similar as Gordon Brown is to Blair, plus Brown is a devout Christian....Cameron would not get my vote.
But, the Brits are Godless and proud to say so......so..... we will see.

You know I can't figure you out, you support the PLP a socialist liberal party if there ever was one but you support conservatives on some issues elsewhere.

Anyway I agree with all of your points based on the little I know about English politics. You have hit the nail on the head.

You know I can't figure you out, you support the PLP a socialist liberal party if there ever was one but you support conservatives on some issues elsewhere.
Anyway I agree with all of your points based on the little I know about English politics. You have hit the nail on the head.


Errr.....wrong in so many ways.

1. I have never heard anyone say that the PLP is socialist aside from a few loonies who don't know what socialism is. People think that Mitchell at least is a socialist, but, he is one of the biggest "sensible" trade proponents in the house. From his support of CSME to the EU trade pact. So, what are we trying to say here Hobo?

2. Conservative vs. Liberal means three totally separate things, in three totally different countries; Britain, US and the Bahamas.

3. I support core values of conservatism; carefully watched states, low taxes and sound living. But, something I hate with the new conservatives like; war-mongering and in-equitable tax legislation that keep rich rich, and poor begging. There can be middle ground.....just that the way most liberals go about making things equitable, gives dis-incentives to people who actually want to do better. As an immigrant, I hate having to have to bust my tail end, while some person is up North, living off of top up benefits and having their government sponsored house, rented out so that they can go to Bingo or to the Pub.

On the other hand, I know we need taxes as the state can't run without em; regardless of what Hubert Ingraham told you about the omni-bus act and Free Trade.
LOL.....

But, I am conservative for different reasons with the US and Britain. Christian right and low taxes get me on the US side, and the Thatcher "hard work ethic" to these lazy bums, is what has me on the side of conservatism.... allthough that is changing as I have seen Blair at least TRY to work the third way. But, taxes and benefits still don't add up.

They "Brits" need a better way.....but...Cameron has not sounded "proper" in this regard.

Errr.....wrong in so many ways.
1. I have never heard anyone say that the PLP is socialist aside from a few loonies who don't know what socialism is. People think that Mitchell at least is a socialist, but, he is one of the biggest "sensible" trade proponents in the house. From his support of CSME to the EU trade pact. So, what are we trying to say here Hobo?

Well maybe I should have said socialist leaning, and they were, most that formed the first black government were educated in England at a time when it was very socialist leaning.
Fred and his support of CSME in particular and the EU in general were because of his admiration for the governments of those various countries whom for the most part are socialist leaning. Look at France and Germany.


2. Conservative vs. Liberal means three totally separate things, in three totally different countries; Britain, US and the Bahamas.

That’s a fair point.


3. I support core values of conservatism; carefully watched states, low taxes and sound living. But, something I hate with the new conservatives like; war-mongering and in-equitable tax legislation that keep rich rich, and poor begging.

I assume you are talking about the Bush admin., with the war mongering label which is an unfair label as I think you know based on your posts elsewhere. As to whether Bush is a real conservative that is surely up for discussion. I for one don’t think he is and in fact he calls himself a passionate conservative which is a bunch of crap.

I don’t know about the tax situation in England or Europe in any great detail but I know in the US that the wealthy pay most of the taxes so I don’t get your point there unless you are talking about the Bahamas in which case you will have to expand.


There can be middle ground.....just that the way most liberals go about making things equitable, gives dis-incentives to people who actually want to do better.

But do they really make things equitable. I know that is what their goal is but their actions usually result in the opposite.
Affirmative Action in the US, instituted by a conservative president by the way (Nixon) just resulted in hand out for jobs for minorities which meant that the people of color who got the jobs didn’t really get the jobs for ability but for some quota requirement, now even if you had the ability the feeling would be that well you just got the job because you were a minority, which if it was the case, was not fair to the guy who had the ability regardless of his color.
As to the disincentives well obviously on that point we agree

[/QUOTE]
On the other hand, I know we need taxes as the state can't run without em; regardless of what Hubert Ingraham told you about the omni-bus act and Free Trade.
[/QUOTE]
Of course I agree with you here but I don’t see how that ties in with what HI said about the bus and free trade.


LOL.....
But, I am conservative for different reasons with the US and Britain. Christian right and low taxes get me on the US side, and the Thatcher "hard work ethic" to these lazy bums, is what has me on the side of conservatism.... allthough that is changing as I have seen Blair at least TRY to work the third way. But, taxes and benefits still don't add up.
They "Brits" need a better way.....but...Cameron has not sounded "proper" in this regard.

Agreed but you know when Reagan and Thatcher were around the differences between the two countries in regards to conservatism was very little.

Well maybe I should have said socialist leaning, and they were, most that formed the first black government were educated in England at a time when it was very socialist leaning.
We are on the other side of the world ya know...Lyford Cay een there for nuttin man. LOL....But, I gat ya. But, the people who think they have socialism here in the UK, are very much in la la land. Especially to what they think is socialism. What is happening is, they "da gubment" tax and throws money out to allot of legit bums.

That is not socialism. That's robbery. Also, these governments in Europe, with the exception of maybe Sweden and Austria, never trully ever had control of their state corportations; they were allways in the hands of the free market. Ya see, with their long feudal past, their government and elite are basically the same thing. Which makes compettetive elections in most European established democracies null and void as you get six of one, and a half a dozen of the other, because, they all represent the same thing.

France and the UK are the small exception, but, all else are stone cold subsidized free market predators; the predators are the landed elite and aristocracy.

Fred and his support of CSME in particular and the EU in general were because of his admiration for the governments of those various countries whom for the most part are socialist leaning. Look at France and Germany.
I don't know about this. Unless you know what's in Fred's head, I can't speak for his liking for France and Germany. In any event, he should be the one to hate France in particular for still being the only active colonizer. Haiti is the way it is because they left em like that ya know!?!
:gi:
Such is the case with Angola, The Ivory Coast and a host of others. France can kiss my dog's fanny. And I mean that. However, Sarkozy represents some change, but, we will have to see how he handles Iran. Which seems to appear as if he has either lost the will, or, was simply just trying to sound tough. And, we have to see how his "market policies" actually work out. He is winning the war against the transit people, but, for how long? He has told the bosses at Suez and GDF "how he thinks things it has to be"....it worked. But, what if this was the plan all along as I see it as nothing more than a confusing merger, with the implications of tax subsidie written all over it.

But, we have to wait and see....


That’s a fair point..
Why thank you my red-friend. I try to be fair all the time.
:)

I assume you are talking about the Bush admin., with the war mongering label which is an unfair label as I think you know based on your posts elsewhere..
Yea. This is one of the reasons why I have not turned green; forget blue. However, Bush has made it bad and has made conservatism, a dirty word. I mean, conservatism was not about being hawkish on war. But, he let some real dudes, Wolfowitz and these people at the PNAC, use his political clout and the coservative party.

If you have not been watching, GOP officials are either resigining, or, not renewing their contract with the American people, or, are simply cracking under the lightest Democratic political pressure.

The GOP has turned on these neo-cons and rightfully so. They have made a mess geo-politically and now, we all have to suffer. For example, they are subsidizing this war, and it keeps money out of development aid for Americans and true tax relief, and that has an effect on our Tourism and FDI.

Ya see....the longer we are NOT getting the Iraqi oil fields to pump oil, and have it "secure" the longer this global pain will continue. It's the uncertainty of it all is what has most people. We just don't know what to expect.

As to whether Bush is a real conservative that is surely up for discussion. I for one don’t think he is and in fact he calls himself a passionate conservative which is a bunch of crap..
I mean, he has been spending money on social policies. But, he has raised the stakes as this war and his international commerce policy, which are related in some regards through his foreign policy, is eating away at the money and "relief" he has dished out.

American's don't have no money like dat no more ya know.....it's all a chain reaction to some of the policies put in place. The chief one is this damnIraq issue, which seems to have no political, economic and social end to it.

They just did not plan for the post-war effort. And, it is apparent they either don't want to, or, they don't know how, or, it is too far gone.

They simply need to "re-allign" this Iraq strategy, to take the coallition out of centre stage, and more to a position of strategic bases along the border. That's allot better than what they have now...but...I am not a military guy.


I don’t know about the tax situation in England or Europe in any great detail but I know in the US that the wealthy pay most of the taxes so I don’t get your point there unless you are talking about the Bahamas in which case you will have to expand..
Well. The rich people pay a larger proportion of the taxes. But, it is meaningless to them. Taxing Bill Gates 10%, hurts him allot less than taxing me 10%; plus it gets you allot more.

With that, the stress of the bills and taxes, hurts me allot more psychologically than it does Gates. Me running around like a chicken with my head cut off month's end, costs me money because I am bound to make a few errors which costs me time and resources. All Gates has to do is hire someone a few extra dollars, to do all of his taxes and pay all of his bills for him on time. He gives someone a job, and gets to focus on ripping us off with some new package that he had on the drawing board ten years ago, which he miraculously unveils just in time to see the warranty of the new package he sold you six months ago expire, or, become defective due to the virus an ex-employee of his put out on the web. By the way, he was fined a sum of over $300 mil by the EU.
:voodoo:


But do they really make things equitable. I know that is what their goal is but their actions usually result in the opposite. .
You can't be serious? LOL.....hell yea things can be better. I allways direct people to Anthony Giddens and his book "The Third Way"....it has inspired Clinton and Blair and it should inspire that fellah we have as PM. If he can read it all, which I doubt he can.
:eek:


Affirmative Action in the US, instituted by a conservative president by the way (Nixon) just resulted in hand out for jobs for minorities which meant that the people of color who got the jobs didn’t really get the jobs for ability but for some quota requirement, now even if you had the ability the feeling would be that well you just got the job because you were a minority, which if it was the case, was not fair to the guy who had the ability regardless of his color..
Yea. Conservatives have been at the middle of "truly" being fair about the race issue for quite a while now. It started with Lincoln and it has never stopped. This is why I thought Kanye West was out of order. Bush spends more on poor black people than anyone has ever did. But, it is just that he has not spent the money right, and in the right way, to make sure that the graphic nature of "get your tail end up and work", does not appear to be him being mean and cruel.

I keep telling people, that Jesse and Sharpton had better tell these people to get their tail ends up and work. They are what's wrong with the black population. It is their leadership which has these people confused and angry at the wrong things for the wrong reason.

I mean, they had a moment with the Jenna 6; but, it was just a moment and every now and then, through their experience, they lend some voice and credibility to what we truly face out there in regards to true institutional racism. But, tell these people to get their azzes up and work.
:hammer:

They don't do a good job of that.
:tdown:

As to the disincentives well obviously on that point we agree

Yea. But, there is a way to spend right. Just throwing money at Social Services, is not getting to the toor of the issue. Makes it worse, and in our case, ten times worse as not only there is no direction, but, the system is faulty in regards to how we need to be spending money in the first dern place.

So, we waste money more quickly.
:eek:


Of course I agree with you here but I don’t see how that ties in with what HI said about the bus and free trade..
Free Trade is about the reduction of tariffs. In case you did not know, we depend on customs revenue. Also, the omni-bus act, which is designed to create one single license for business persons, (not sure if it passed yet), is set to re-allign the taxes which was set in "ok" play by the PLP in 2006 when PC raised the service charges ACCROSS THE BOARD. But, it only did so for business persons and the other service charges, are still in play for us; like any other license fee or administrative fee for government services.

Now, this minimal fee accross the board for bahamian business men and women, who make a killing off of our cheap labour and in the long term for political the stability we provide for them, was a small price to pay. In fact, it was generous. But, worse off, is too talk about that, and not talk about the people who feel the extra $10-20 the most, is not right. Remeber my analogy of taxes with Gates and me.

Nah man. These fellah's een gat their heads on right. EVERYONE HAS TO PAY. Not just da rest a we, and da business people get off scott free. He should have NEVER done that. (if this bill has passed)
:tdown:

But, he was too busy "changing things"...making a mess in the process to boot. Which I have said many times.


Agreed but you know when Reagan and Thatcher were around the differences between the two countries in regards to conservatism was very little.

But the core principles remained the same. Just that Bush ran away with is, and Cameron, seems a bit too weak in his own party, for me to believe he has the right stuff to be the "sensible" conervative his professors called him back in the day.

go, brown ... give scotland free:) !!!

^- 6,600 Characters, 1,529 Words ... :D