Ship of Fools: Well, that was interesting wasn’t it?

Thread: Well, that was interesting wasn’t it? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029015

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit, but I’ve been busy both with work and of course with helping to return the Conservatives to Government.

But that’s over now so I thought I’d pop back to see what’s happening. Oooh, haven’t you lot been busy!

But enough of that, let’s get down to business… losers!

[Killing me]

Yep. The electorate has handed the left its collective arse on a plate. UKIP have been exposed as nothing. The Greens are a lone outpost of a bunch of Brighton hippies, as they were before.

The country has decided that it prefers us Conservative rather than anything espoused by the majority on here. So I thought I’d come to have a little gloat.

Are most of you feeling sad and rejected?

Good.

The Scottish have – in their own “speshul” way – decided they have a better understanding of economics than everyone else and gone for the SNP. But they can be safely ignored now. We can bring in some policies that shaft the Scotch, whilst ensuring England can rightly call the shots.

First thing though is for us to implement the Boundary Commission changes that the LibDems vetoed in the last Parliament in a fit of pique after the electorate decided they wanted to keep the current voting system.

That should improve matters if the Prime Minister decides to call an early general election due to the small majority.

Now we can start running the country properly, completely ignoring the left’s whinging and moaning. I look forward to reading your posts on here wailing about us and generally failing to realise that the electorate doesn’t want anything further left than Blair-ism and that most of you on here are out of touch with reality. Basically the electorate has told most of you on here that you can take your politics and fuck right off.

[Big Grin]

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit,

Don't be. And fuck off.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

The Tories are going to miss Clegg and Danny Alexander. Who will they wheel out when there's some bad news to be imparted?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Proverbs 16 verse 18:

'Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.' (Authorised Version, suitable for c(C)onservatives.....)

Five years is a long time, even in politics, and especially with a 'majority' the thickness of a fag paper.

Ian J.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit,
Don't be. And fuck off.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit,
Don't be. And fuck off.

And here was me thinking you've missed me.

Bless.

Any bad news we'll blame the last Labour government and blackmail by the LibDooms in coalition.

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :

Fuckin' Conservatives. When the revolution comes...

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

Damn. I KNEW there was something I forgot to do on my visit to England. Firebomb deano's house.

That's what I get for writing abbreviated notes to myself instead of spelling things out in full

Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :

Here I was last night, watching the elections in someone else's country finish, thinking "well fuck, guess this means turdwaffle's going to be popping back up from the septic tank again."

It's times like these that I hate being right.

Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
... We can bring in some policies that shaft the Scotch ...

[pedant alert]
No you can't.

Scotch, n is a distilled beverage best enjoyed in civilised company.

scotch, vt means to prevent something from being believed or being done.

If you want a word meaning the Scottish people, the term you're looking for is Scots.
[/pedant alert OFF]

Glad to be of help.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

Oh, Cuntychops knows that. He'll probably come out with Welch next just to annoy.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit, but I’ve been busy both with work and of course with helping to return the Conservatives to Government.

If your contributions on here are anything to go by, I'm sure Cameron's delighted to have the benefit of your support.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

Oh, conservatives love dumbshits on the rolls. Just look at my country. Hell, in my country they love having them run for office.

[ 08. May 2015, 15:12: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

You have all had a huge dissapointment in being rejected by the electorate, so I forgive you.

I am still going to gloat though.

Because you have been rejected. Losers.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

You are an idiot.

For one thing, I don't even have the vote in your country.

And for another, gloating is hardly a good reflection on your avowed party of choice.

Posted by Alyosha (# 18395) on :

How magnanimous Deano. Tea and scones?

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Oh shit, the WUM-meister is back.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

Y'see, old Fourth Form Deano here never grew up. It's just a game to him; a bit like St Peters coming in front of Paulo Pontine in the House Rugby tournament. Hence his puerile "ha ha losers!" routine.

He thinks we're humiliated and rejected. He's wrong. We're worried. Worried for ourselves, perhaps - not in my case, I'll be all right, but that's not my sole guiding principle. Worried for our friends. For vulnerable people we know. For the people who'll starve to death on sanctions for missing an appointment they didn't get informed about, for the disabled people having their lifeline benefits cut, for all the other people who'll be right royally shagged by deano's heroes in the Tory party.

It's not a game. And this isn't humiliation, it's sadness. Deep sadness. I'm told disability charities are already publishing the Samaritans' number on their websites? They know, and their client groups know, what's coming.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

Without the LibDems holding them back from some of their nasttier policies, we'll now see how wicked the Tories really are.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

But surely, the disabled are losers, aren't they?

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
You have all had a huge dissapointment in being rejected by the electorate, so I forgive you.

I am still going to gloat though.

Because you have been rejected. Losers.

This ranks really highly on the list of stupidest things you've written. And the bar is set high. You're going to sober up in a couple of days, possibly after making a pass at a minor Conservative official who mouths "who the hell is this guy?" To her assistant (who will shrug shoulders in response), and when you do come to your senses you will realise that equating Shipmates from all over the globe with candidates in a UK election makes no sense whatsoever.

Posted by Alyosha (# 18395) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Y'see, old Fourth Form Deano here never grew up. It's just a game to him; a bit like St Peters coming in front of Paulo Pontine in the House Rugby tournament. Hence his puerile "ha ha losers!" routine.

He thinks we're humiliated and rejected. He's wrong. We're worried. Worried for ourselves, perhaps - not in my case, I'll be all right, but that's not my sole guiding principle. Worried for our friends. For vulnerable people we know. For the people who'll starve to death on sanctions for missing an appointment they didn't get informed about, for the disabled people having their lifeline benefits cut, for all the other people who'll be right royally shagged by deano's heroes in the Tory party.

It's not a game. And this isn't humiliation, it's sadness. Deep sadness. I'm told disability charities are already publishing the Samaritans' number on their websites? They know, and their client groups know, what's coming.

He's afraid. It's the fear speaking and so he's acting as a kind of scapegoat to allow us to vent our frustrations. The only thing which will heal him is tea and scones (and none of those popular Tory pallid scones which we have been subjected too). We must give him proper scones or we are just as bad as our enemies. Evil must be defeated by scones.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

Everyone here feeding the troll shouldn't be surprised that he keeps coming back for seconds.

Posted by Alyosha (# 18395) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Everyone here feeding the troll shouldn't be surprised that he keeps coming back for seconds.

Only feeding tea and scones in order to bring us all to our right minds... (such as they were).

Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :

It's been only hours since victory was declared and already the DWP are looking to make life harder for disabled people. Not only that, but the snooper's charter might be back.

The Telegraph are also mooting about scrapping the NHS as we know it.

We warned of what the Tories might do, but sadly those warnings weren't heeded. We have 5 years to document every failing, every morally objectionable action that this government takes. These are the things should be written on a stone tablet (incidentally, I think Ed's stone was actually just so Dave couldn't stick it in his pocket and wave it about every now and then), then tied to Cameron, IDS, Osborne and May before being hurled off Westminster bridge in 2010.

I know, Deano, that you thrive on insults being hurled your way by your trolling. I shan't give you that satisfaction. Peace be with you.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
....

Satan's skunk has diarrhoea again?!

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

I'm off out now for a bit of a knees-up.

Looking forward to getting to the golf club tomorrow!

Posted by Yam-pk (# 12791) on :

Hope you die on a hospital trolley in agony after an 18 month wait for treatment you fucking Tory cunt...

Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yam-pk:
Hope you die on a hospital trolley in agony after an 18 month wait for treatment you fucking Tory cunt...

That's it, Yam-pk: nothing like a bit of hate-speech to demonstrate just how vile your opponent is, eh?

And I also think deano's a twazzock.

[ 08. May 2015, 19:48: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit, but I’ve been busy both with work and of course with helping to return the Conservatives to Government.

So it was just coincidence that you disappeared at the same time you had your very own Hell call? And there was I thinking you had decided to run away and hide rather than face up to it only to return when you thought we'd forgotten about it. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Figbash (# 9048) on :

I had written a very angry response to this, which was great fun, but then I realised that those of you responding to Deano's (quite valid) points with ad hominem attacks followed by lots of self-congratulation, are just not worth the energy I was wasting on you.

In brief: do try to do something for me: just try considering, if only for a moment, the possibility that actually the pitiful, out-of-contact, evil-minded bastards are not Tories and their supporters; they are you. Even if it isn't true, it' a bit arrogant to not at least consider the possibility, isn't it?

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

What's even stupider is to consider that any group, Tory or otherwise, has none within its ranks.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Without the LibDems holding them back from some of their nasttier policies, we'll now see how wicked the Tories really are.

I can't help thinking that this will be the proof of the pudding. In a few years time it might be apparent that without Clegg, Cable, Alexander and co, things would have been a damn sight worse.

A few Freedom of Information enquiries might be in order.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yam-pk:
Hope you die on a hospital trolley in agony after an 18 month wait for treatment you fucking Tory cunt...

Oh and here was me thinking the left preferred debate and pacifism to aggression and violence. Or indeed revolution and guns. Or riots and chairs through McDonalds windows.

I thought us Conservatives were the hate-filled lovers of death.

Seems not.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

Oooh, here's a though... we could re-legalise fox hunting! That would be cool.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by Yam-pk:
Hope you die on a hospital trolley in agony after an 18 month wait for treatment you fucking Tory cunt...
Oh and here was me thinking the left preferred debate and pacifism to aggression and violence. Or indeed revolution and guns. Or riots and chairs through McDonalds windows.

I thought us Conservatives were the hate-filled lovers of death.

Seems not.

Folks, if you wanted proof that all he wants is an angry reaction, this is it. He came to Hell, of all boards, and is now commenting on the Hellish reactions.

I'm actually considering closing the thread, on the grounds that the original post wasn't actually in the spirit of Hell. It wasn't a rant, it was a goad. I shall consult with my colleagues on the question.

orfeo
Hellhost

[ 09. May 2015, 01:16: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

There is Facebook troll at the church I attend. He completely fails to realise or take responsibility for the fact that the people he slags of on Facebook are the same ones he calls friends in real life.

Despite being challenged on this and the hurt he causes on numerous occasions by numerous people, he continues.

I don't like him very much. And I have pretty much given up on him. Occasionally he shows a glimmer of hope, but not often.

When I first joined the ship, I was often sarcastic and joined in with the hell culture at that time. It took time for me to realise that there are real honest to God people out there. And modify my posting.

Deano, remember you are talking to real people.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Deano, apart from anything else to which objection might be taken, your post of 10.08 contains 2 glaringly bad grammatical errors. Please try harder to write in correct English.

[ 09. May 2015, 03:35: Message edited by: Gee D ]

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

You lot realise you are, again, saving deano a fortune on Viagra? The balance is he's likely spending it replacing his y-fronts with the holes his tiny prick is wearing in them.

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

I think one of the facets of "One Nation" Conservatism may be in play here.

"We need to have you losers around so we can continue to enjoy pissing all over you and laugh with our friends about your feeble protests."

Plus this one of course.

"Such fun, pissing all over Clegg and co, after they'd been soooooo helpful. I tell you, there's one born every minute. Let's see if we can do a bit of condescending thankfulness and keep a straight face for long enough to preserve some semblance of credibility."

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

To return to the |OP:
Fuck off, deano. You and your selfish bastard mates will be OK but there are a lot of people whose lives are fucked up know whose live will get even more fucked up over the next five years.

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

I just use a different skewer, Albertus.

The provocative prefer direct insults of course; it shows them they've achieved their annoying purposes. Which is more or less what RuthW was saying.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

Of course, had the result been the opposite of what it was, none of you would have gloated or goaded me would you?

No. No siree. Not at all. It would have been empathetic, fair, unbiased and non-judgemental, because you all are, right?

I was only half right when I said 'losers'. I should have added the word 'bad' before it to be fully correct.

From some of the comments on here about peoples reactions to my parties stunning victory I'm put in mind of a Viz character called Suicidal Syd, who was always trying to "pop his cork" over the most trivial things.

Grammar Nazi's as well! Blimey, that really is the ultimate sign of frustration and impotence.

I'm just glad my taxes are unlikely to go up. That thought was probably responsible for the very cheerful mood at the golf club this morning.

[ 09. May 2015, 12:27: Message edited by: deano ]

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Of course, had the result been the opposite of what it was, none of you would have gloated or goaded me would you?

A lot of us who've been on the Ship a damn sight longer than you saw two Labour victories in General Elections and no, we didn't gloat or goad anyone.

[ 09. May 2015, 12:34: Message edited by: Spike ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Of course, had the result been the opposite of what it was, none of you would have gloated or goaded me would you?

No. No siree. Not at all. It would have been empathetic, fair, unbiased and non-judgemental, because you all are, right?

Why assume that anyone would have said anything to you at all? I think it highly likely that no-one here would have given you enough thought to gloat at you, and would you have even been here?

You didn't pick up this particular angle of my first response on this thread, but part of the point of it was to communicate that you don't actually matter nearly as much as you seem to think you do.

There are Shipmates who go missing and whose absence I would notice. You are assuredly not one of them. Your contributions to the Ship are of little value, and are primarily directed at getting a rise out of people - people whom you constantly caricature as some monolith bloc of socialists. We actually manage to have forms of political debate on the Ship without your presence, you know. Our beliefs are not uniform. We've even managed to have some Conservative voters present who, unlike you, have not come across as drunken arseholes.

You have in the past started a number of threads that have been deemed worthy of closure. The future of this one is still under consideration, but you should be aware that its nature as a goad has not gone unnoticed. Have a care, deano.

[ 09. May 2015, 12:45: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Of course, had the result been the opposite of what it was, none of you would have gloated or goaded me would you?

No. No siree. Not at all. It would have been empathetic, fair, unbiased and non-judgemental, because you all are, right?

Since none of us are bottom feeding slime like you, don't expect us to behave in the puerile and juvenile way you do.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yam-pk:
Hope you die on a hospital trolley in agony after an 18 month wait for treatment you fucking Tory cunt...

You walked straight into that one, didn't you, you berk.

Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

First thing though is for us to implement the Boundary Commission changes that the LibDems vetoed in the last Parliament in a fit of pique after the electorate decided they wanted to keep the current voting system.

That should improve matters if the Prime Minister decides to call an early general election due to the small majority.

So, you expect 2/3 of the house to vote for an early election, as required under the Fixed Term Parliament Act?

Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :

Oh Deano. Why did you forsake us during these last weeks? Where were you when you were most needed? Why did you leave so many shipmates in the dark on the saving ways of Conservatism? You might have convinced many of them to vote otherwise, and now they are smarting from the pain of choosing wrongly and standing on the wrong side of history. How unbearable it must be for you to come back and haunt their consciences with how things might have been and how they might now have been able to feel and present themselves had they followed your example.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Welcome back Deano.

You haven't got it quite right - the SNP is far to the left of the Labour party; but the SNP gains from Labour were predictable, although I'm slightly surprised they did so well against the LibDems as well.

The LibDem losses in the rest of the country could also have been predicted if people had actually bothered to find out who voted for them in 2010: but I guess they didn't so hence the surprise at only the 8 seats.

The few Labour gains were fairly predictable, but their losses should cause some soul-searching because unless they learn the lesson of why they lost in places like Bolton West and Gower they're likely to make the same mistakes and suffer the same fate in 2010.

So, after DC goes we can expect at least five years of Boris [Yipee]

Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
The Telegraph are also mooting about scrapping the NHS as we know it.

I might add that I've just waded my way through that totally fucked-up article. It says somewhere that the NHS is world-class on efficiency, but elsewhere there is "lower overall spending per head compared with other countries with universal health care systems, poorer staffing levels, fewer hospital beds or insufficient MRI and CT scanners."

That would suggest to me that the system is in fact very good, but that it is simply underfunded. The conclusion that the NHS in its current state is rather dubious.

It then goes on to claim that rival social health insurance models "are able to command rather higher levels of spending as a share of GDP than our NHS, forced as it is to compete with the demands of other public services for taxpayer funds."

This still means that money is the problem and that someone will to pay for improvements. Believe me, all of the rival social health insurance models quoted are hugely expensive, and certainly the one I currently use, the Swiss one, very effectively relieves the wealthy of the burden of paying much for it. It is not the government which decides to allocate more to health, it is our private health insurers who each October cheerfully announce a rise in insurance premiums typically amounting to 5% annually even in a pay-increase and inflation-free economy. We now pay £500 for a family of four for basic health insurance. That's every month. But if I earned 10x as much, I wouldn't pay more.
No wonder the conservative Swiss came quite close to replacing the current private model with a state-run insurance model (i.e. NHS-esque) in one of their famous referenda late last year. Meanwhile, the Terrorgaff is simply trying to sell you a model which will screw you further.

Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit, but I’ve been busy both with work and of course with helping to return the Conservatives to Government....waffle waffle waffle

When I was very young I was a conservative supporter, even before I could vote. It didn't take long to grow out of it, and by the time I could vote I was becoming liberal, at least in the political sense of the word. I know plenty of conservatives these days and they are mostly decent people, if somewhat hampered by excessive wealth and ignorance of their environment in some cases. Over the years - quite a lot of them - I've come to rather like that old idea about feeding the hungry, healing the sick, sheltering the homeless, comforting the oppressed, and so on, and I'll support political parties that think it's a good idea too. I have no idea what Deano really believes behind all his sniggering schoolboy bullshit, but I'd be surprised if many conservatives - including him - are really as thrawn and hateful as he wants us to believe he is.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Welcome back Deano.

You haven't got it quite right - the SNP is far to the left of the Labour party; but the SNP gains from Labour were predictable, although I'm slightly surprised they did so well against the LibDems as well.

The LibDem losses in the rest of the country could also have been predicted if people had actually bothered to find out who voted for them in 2010: but I guess they didn't so hence the surprise at only the 8 seats.

My view is that the LibDem support in 2010 was fickle and much of it was simply those who didn't have much time for Gordon Brown, weren't going to vote Conservative, but would accept a Labour government moderated by the LibDems. That backfired then and in now deserting the LibDems *and* Labour they have screwed themselves more royally than before.

quote:

So, after DC goes we can expect at least five years of Boris

I doubt it. DC has some gravitas. Boris has only 'ass'.

Posted by JoannaP (# 4493) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Without the LibDems holding them back from some of their nasttier policies, we'll now see how wicked the Tories really are.

Indeed. I have seen it suggested that Dave came up with some of his nastier ideas, such as repealing the Human Rights Act, so that he could make some easy concessions to the Lib Dems in the coalition talks. If so, that has backfired rather - or should I adjust my tinfoil hat?

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Nothing quite as nauseating as tory triumphalism personified [Projectile]

At least the OP'er had good sense to post it in Hell where it belongs.
I wonder how many in the Party delight in having deano as an ambassador.

All deliciously hypothetical of course, but I happen to think it would have been a very long time before the Tories had another sniff without 9/11 and the bankers crash.

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Posted by Piglet:

quote:

If you want a word meaning the Scottish people, the term you're looking for is Scots.
[/pedant alert OFF]

{pedant alert fully on} I think Scot is a derivative of Scoti meaning 'dark people', ie the Irish. But that's ok, it means you wouldn't have to change your name when you join the United Celtic Nations.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Sorry I haven’t been around for a bit, but I’ve been busy both with work and of course with helping to return the Conservatives to Government....waffle waffle waffle

When I was very young I was a conservative supporter, even before I could vote. It didn't take long to grow out of it, and by the time I could vote I was becoming liberal, at least in the political sense of the word. I know plenty of conservatives these days and they are mostly decent people, if somewhat hampered by excessive wealth and ignorance of their environment in some cases. Over the years - quite a lot of them - I've come to rather like that old idea about feeding the hungry, healing the sick, sheltering the homeless, comforting the oppressed, and so on, and I'll support political parties that think it's a good idea too. I have no idea what Deano really believes behind all his sniggering schoolboy bullshit, but I'd be surprised if many conservatives - including him - are really as thrawn and hateful as he wants us to believe he is.

I'm a Conservative. I've met lots of Conservatives. I've never met a Conservative like Deano.

In many ways he's like a left-wing person's idea of what a Conservative must be like (loud, brash, obnoxious views, suburban, self-employed, likes the military, plays golf). Has Deano been created so that people on this site can feel better about themselves?

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I've never met a Conservative like Deano.

I have. In fact I've met a few like that, but I'm happy to concede that they're not typical

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

I haven't met Conservatives like deano, but I have met a fair few people who are a lot like deano. I guess they are more like to vote Conservative than otherwise because they identify Labour and the LibDems with "do-gooders" which they cannot abide. None of them are politically active beyond voting at parliamentary elections (and at no others).

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

I was thinking more of activists, rather than just voters. I thought Deano claimed to be a Conservative activist?

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

I was referring to activists as well, but they are in the minority.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
....Grammar Nazi's as well!

Actually, old boy, I think you'll find it's Nazis- without the apostrophe.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Yes - in his thoughtless invective, his grammar continues to show no regard for the tender feelings of others.

Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I was thinking more of activists, rather than just voters. I thought Deano claimed to be a Conservative activist?

My mother-in-law stuffed envelopes for her local Conservatives for years, and wouldn't dream of voting any other way, but she's not the least bit like Deano.

Thank God. [Big Grin]

Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :

I can't remember if it was Saki or Evelyn Waugh who had a minor character in his book who claimed to be helping bring on the revolution by being beastly to the serving classes.

Is Deano a secret socialist trying to goad the apathetic into becoming leftists? It makes more sense than any alleged logic in his posts.

Such a sad, sad troll.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

It seems some of you are claiming that there are some reasonable Conservatives!

Now that isn't something you hear everyday on the Ship is it?

Conservatives that are reasonable, caring annd compassionate don't exist on the ship, we are all fascists.

I've said on many occaisions that I'm actually on the left of the Conservative party and actually supported Ken Clark in the last leadership election.

But the portside list to the ship never seems to recognise such subtleties so we all get painted as neocon-type Nazis. So I give the Ship what it seems to want. Enjoy it, getting rid of all that pent-up frustration is cathartic. You will feel better soon.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
It seems some of you are claiming that there are some reasonable Conservatives!

Now that isn't something you hear everyday on the Ship is it?

Conservatives that are reasonable, caring annd compassionate don't exist on the ship, we are all fascists.

I've said on many occaisions that I'm actually on the left of the Conservative party and actually supported Ken Clark in the last leadership election.

But the portside list to the ship never seems to recognise such subtleties so we all get painted as neocon-type Nazis. So I give the Ship what it seems to want. Enjoy it, getting rid of all that pent-up frustration is cathartic. You will feel better soon.

OK then, maybe you are to the left of the Conservative party, but it doesn't alter the fact that if we had a competition you would be voted Shit of the Ship.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Did anyone suggest reasonableness is a function of position on the political spectrum? There are reasonable and unreasonable Conservatives, reasonable and unreasonable Socialists, reasonable and unreasonable where-ever-the-hell-they-are-on-the-spectrum-today Labour members.

There's at least one complete and utter gobshite on the left of the Conservative Party.

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
It seems some of you are claiming that there are some reasonable Conservatives!

Now that isn't something you hear everyday on the Ship is it?

Conservatives that are reasonable, caring annd compassionate don't exist on the ship, we are all fascists.

I've said on many occaisions that I'm actually on the left of the Conservative party and actually supported Ken Clark in the last leadership election.

But the portside list to the ship never seems to recognise such subtleties so we all get painted as neocon-type Nazis. So I give the Ship what it seems to want. Enjoy it, getting rid of all that pent-up frustration is cathartic. You will feel better soon.

We have quite a few Tories on board, including a member of the Admin team. You seem to be deluding yourself that we don't like you because you're a Tory, but that's not the case. We don't dislike you because you're a Tory. We dislike you because you're a twat.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

There are numerous Conservatives and Tories (not quite the same thing) on the Ship who I would regard as reasonable and decent people. For example, Betjemaniac's Baldwinian Toryism is attractive if perhaps rather romantically nostalgic: Anglican't offers a robust and sometimes uncomfortably acute critique of the often prevailing left/liberal voices here; and Marvin, under that shell of sixth-form Randianism and his peculiar belief that a system that's good for the people who might be crapping on him is good for him too because one day he himself might be able to rise to be one of the crappers, has profoundly decent and generous instincts.
But deano is like none of these.

[ 10. May 2015, 14:05: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
It seems some of you are claiming that there are some reasonable Conservatives!

Now that isn't something you hear everyday on the Ship is it?

Conservatives that are reasonable, caring annd compassionate don't exist on the ship, we are all fascists.

I've said on many occaisions that I'm actually on the left of the Conservative party and actually supported Ken Clark in the last leadership election.

But the portside list to the ship never seems to recognise such subtleties so we all get painted as neocon-type Nazis. So I give the Ship what it seems to want. Enjoy it, getting rid of all that pent-up frustration is cathartic. You will feel better soon.

The people I like aren't defined by their beliefs. They are defined by their attitude.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

So I'm thinking that the decent people on both sides of the debate want the same thing. They just disagree on the order of events. Some think that if you invest in people - education, care, housing, lives - you create a workforce that makes business strong. Others think that if you make business strong, it invests in people in the aforementioned ways, and you get the same outcome.

I guess this time around, enough people managed to persuade themselves that:
a) the second version *might* be true; and
b) if it isn't, they aren't in the immediate firing line

to vote the Conservatives back in.

I think very few people mean to hurt others.

Maybe we should talk about the results we can all celebrate ie South Thanet and Bradford West.

Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :

EM, I think that's one of the most sensible things I've read in ages.

[Overused]

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Of course, the problem with Thanet is that it now has overall council control by Ukip, with very few left who know how things are done, and a bunch of people with very little experience of running things running things. Hopefully they won't make too much mess before they go the way of the Brighton Greens.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
and Marvin, under that shell of sixth-form Randianism and his peculiar belief that a system that's good for the people who might be crapping on him is good for him too because one day he himself might be able to rise to be one of the crappers, has profoundly decent and generous instincts.

You're too kind, sir.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

I suppsoe it does sound a bit 'damning with faint praise', doesn't it? Didn't mean to. I don't know you IRL but from what I see of you on the Ship my bafflement at your views is only matched by my great respect for your tremendous personal decency. I mean, you give the impression sometimes of thinking that people are basically motivated by self-interest and then you mention in passing that you have carried some bit of litter three miles home because you couldn't find a bin- plus all the work you put it to help keep this place going.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

This.

[/qb][/QUOTE]We have quite a few Tories on board, including a member of the Admin team. You seem to be deluding yourself that we don't like you because you're a Tory, but that's not the case. We don't dislike you because you're a Tory. We dislike you because you're a twat. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

For the record, I quite like Ken Clark. I also like quite a number of Conservatives I've met from across the Tory spectrum.

I know there's a fair bit of unnuanced lefty/liberal do-gooder-ness on these Boards, but there are plenty of counter-balancing voices - L'Organist, for instance, even Matt Black too at times ...

Charitably, I suspect Deano either doesn't read people's posts properly or else likes to play up to a kind of 'Only Tory in the village' persona ... particularly here in Hell.

Less charitably ...

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Whoops ... some hellishly inept scripting from me back there ...

[Hot and Hormonal]

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

That's Comprehensive education for you, totally fails to teach vital life skills like how to do UBB code properly. Bring back Grammar Schools, beat UBB code skills into the brats. Then Britain will be great again.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
... ... ...

There are other punctuation marks, you know. Teilhard didn't wear them all out.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

No, but OliviaCA is giving Teilhard a run for his money.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
For the record, I quite like Ken Clark.

plenty of counter-balancing voices - L'Organist, for instance.

Everyone has their good Tory who says they can repair the waste cities and the desolations of the many generations.

For the record, it's better to put the voices all together on the same track: Ken Clark eternal funky with his organ.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Fair points.

Grammar and punctuation fascists should unite.

Mind you, George Orwell wanted to proscribe certain punctuation marks he believed to be redundant

Typical socialist. Restricting freedom of choice. People should be free to use what punctuation errors they choose and as many grammatical mistakes as deano does without it reflecting in any way on the impression it gives of their own ignorance.

While we're at it, this yet another reason to vote Tory as the lefties and do-gooders might one day tax grammar and punctuation.

Those who overuse ... will have to pay a fine of £150 rising to £250 or £300. The proceeds would go to repair the damage Gove has done to our education system or the havoc he is about to wreak on our justice system - or indeed anything else he touches.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Shouldn't the fine be in Euros? I mean, surely all this stupid views on punctuation emanate from Brussels and its bureaucracy? I mean, the Europeans even have accents on some of their letters - why can't they use plain old British script?

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
the Europeans even have accents on some of their letters - why can't they use plain old British script?

You'll find that Bòrd na Gàidhlig would explain that accents are also used in British languages. What you clearly mean to say is "plain old English script". You, you ... sasunnach!

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

Maen nhw'n cael eu defnyddio yn y Gymraeg, Hefyd / They're used in Welsh as well.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Which are the British languages. Not the language of people from the rest of the European continent (Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Normans, Danes ...)

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

Some versions of revised Cornish use them as well [Biased]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

I'm reasonably certain that the finer points of accents, diacritics, and other inflexions belongs in the place diametrically opposite Hell. Feel free to take it there.

DT
HH

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

But, we can presumably still call Baptist Trainfan all sorts of names in British languages for using "British" to mean "English"? It is almost up there in the "how to piss of the Scottish" league as American tourists declaring "We had a wonderful vacation in England, we saw Loch Ness and Edinboro castle ..."

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Quickly adding, of course, that that would only apply to some American tourists. Recognising that the majority of citizens of the United States are a) fully aware of the difference between Britain and England and b) are capable of pronouncing Edinburgh.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

...and perhaps some of them are even aware enough of the differences to want to wind up the Scots [Smile]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

Presumably you could. On a different thread.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
So I'm thinking that the decent people on both sides of the debate want the same thing. They just disagree on the order of events. Some think that if you invest in people - education, care, housing, lives - you create a workforce that makes business strong. Others think that if you make business strong, it invests in people in the aforementioned ways, and you get the same outcome.

I guess this time around, enough people managed to persuade themselves that:
a) the second version *might* be true; and
b) if it isn't, they aren't in the immediate firing line

to vote the Conservatives back in.

I think very few people mean to hurt others.

Maybe we should talk about the results we can all celebrate ie South Thanet and Bradford West.

And Wirral West.

Then there's an oppoortunity to speculate what some of them will do next ... House, Jungle or Strictly, Celebrity Masterchef or day time quiz shows ... [Snigger]

The hashtag #edballs4strictly seems to be gaining some traction on Twitter. Although it seems unlikely. But there are a few that I'd cheerfully nominate for a few minutes in a tub with a load of creepy crawlies being thrown over them.

Irritatingly, there's talk of kicking some of the MPs who lost their seats upstairs to the Lords so they can continue making a contribution and their talents aren't lost. Which proves that many people directly involved in the politcal process don't have a clue. If we'd wanted them involved, we'd have voted for them. We didn't, so they should be excluded from the honours process for a bit.

Tubbs

[ 13. May 2015, 11:59: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
...so they should be excluded from the honours process for a bit.

For " a bit" read permanently. Nothing sadder than a class warrior like Prescott campaigning to abolish the other place, then going into it. Traitor.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
...so they should be excluded from the honours process for a bit.
For " a bit" read permanently. Nothing sadder than a class warrior like Prescott campaigning to abolish the other place, then going into it. Traitor.

The ones being touted this time include McVey, Alexander and a few others. I've got no problem with someone getting a gong a few years after they've lost their seat. But almost immediately after an election?! No chance. That's just attempting to sneak someone back into policy making via the backdoor.

Prescott is another problem entirely!

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Peerages tend not to be treated as 'gongs' nowadays- there's pretty much always an expectation that new peers will be what used to be called 'working peers'.
But if you've lost somebody from Parliament who you think is valuable after an election, what's necessarily wrong - given for a moment that we have a House of Lords- with giving them a seat in the Lords so that they can continue to make a contribution? The job isn't the same as an MP's job, not least because the prospects for advancement are quite rightly much more limited. I wouldn't want the whole upper house (in whatever form) to be composed of 'rejects' from the Commons, but there's a place for a few people with experience who have been defeated at the polls.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Peerages tend not to be treated as 'gongs' nowadays- there's pretty much always an expectation that new peers will be what used to be called 'working peers'.
But if you've lost somebody from Parliament who you think is valuable after an election, what's necessarily wrong - given for a moment that we have a House of Lords- with giving them a seat in the Lords so that they can continue to make a contribution? The job isn't the same as an MP's job, not least because the prospects for advancement are quite rightly much more limited. I wouldn't want the whole upper house (in whatever form) to be composed of 'rejects' from the Commons, but there's a place for a few people with experience who have been defeated at the polls.

But not immediately or shortly after the election. There should be some sort of meaningful gap between an MP losing their seat and becoming a working peer. Say of between a year to five years. Let them go out and find a proper job outside the political bubble for a bit.

And frankly, having seen McVey's "contribution", I'm not convinced there is ever a place for someone with that kind of "experience". This is a woman who told a journalist that they were making too much about deaths and hardship resulting from benefit sanctions.

There have been at least 49 documented deaths. The only reason we know about those is due to Freedom of Information requests. The DWP wouldn't dream of supplying that kind of information.

When asked to provide updated figures, the DWP refused. The Information Commissioner has told them they have to but not until after the election. Can't think why.

Tubbs

[ 13. May 2015, 15:11: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
There should be some sort of meaningful gap between an MP losing their seat and becoming a working peer. Say of between a year to five years. Let them go out and find a proper job outside the political bubble for a bit.

In my country, those laid off from legislature don't get a real job where they have to make ends meet and worry about lay-off and work extra without pay at the boss's whim. They get a "rent my name for your "non-political" partisan think tank letterhead or lawyer office door, collect "billable hours" to eat lunch with moneybags and to work on planning the next election.

No real world for the ruling class.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
[QB] ...And frankly, having seen McVey's "contribution", I'm not convinced there is ever a place for someone with that kind of "experience". This is a woman who told a journalist that they were making too much about deaths and hardship resulting from benefit sanctions.
.../QB]

Oh certainly. She's an appalling person.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

Your coding's not much better.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
[QB] ...And frankly, having seen McVey's "contribution", I'm not convinced there is ever a place for someone with that kind of "experience". This is a woman who told a journalist that they were making too much about deaths and hardship resulting from benefit sanctions.
.../QB]
Oh certainly. She's an appalling person.

As she's one of the recently departed MP's that the Tories are considering making a "working peer", I believe my argument about allowing some kind of reasonable gap between leaving one House and entering another is well made. [Big Grin]

It's a shame about some of the others, but it does kind of show where the Tories are at that she's described as a "talent we cannot afford to lose".

Tubbs

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
but there's a place for a few people with experience who have been defeated at the polls.

MPs are voted out for two reasons. One is that the public sentiment has swung against their colour of politics, and it wouldn't seem unreasonable for them to make a fairly quick move to the Lords. The other is that they, personally, are evicted for some reason related to them as an individual rather than as a wearer of a particular coloured rosette, and following Exclamation Mark, it would be nice to never see those people again.

I think I agree with those who have been suggesting a period outside politics for those who are voted out (for whatever reason). Apart from anything else, it might give them some useful perspective.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
[QB] ...And frankly, having seen McVey's "contribution", I'm not convinced there is ever a place for someone with that kind of "experience". This is a woman who told a journalist that they were making too much about deaths and hardship resulting from benefit sanctions.
.../QB]
Oh certainly. She's an appalling person.
As she's one of the recently departed MP's that the Tories are considering making a "working peer", I believe my argument about allowing some kind of reasonable gap between leaving one House and entering another is well made. It's a shame about some of the others, but it does kind of show where the Tories are at that she's described as a "talent we cannot afford to lose".

Tubbs

So why not employ her as a spad? If they are that desperate for her input.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Maybe they could just go back to her constituency and get them to vote. "Do you want your former MP to be appointed to the Lords?" Oh, and probably set the level of support required by unions - 40% of the electorate voting in favour.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
So why not employ her as a spad?

It's totally non-PC, but calling her "special" seems right. Not to sure about the "adviser" bit though.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

I keep seeing the (slightly truncated) title of this thread on the Board's home page.

I keep reacting to it as a piece of false advertising for the thread.

Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :

OTOH putting some of these people in the Lords might be regarded as damage control. Much better than letting them prowl the streets of their former constituencies. Just a pity that having them in the Lords is almost as expensive as formally locking them away.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Deano seems to have abandoned this thread and gone over to the Purgatory election debate.

Which is a relief.

The sound of him wanking has to be one of the most unpleasant sounds it is possible to encounter online.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

I do wish you hadn't said that. You have put an image in my head which I really don't want to be there.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

By gum, that is succint, elegant and disgusting. I suppose WUMs have to wank in public to attract attention. Probably best to avert one's eyes (and ears).

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

But I'm thinking about you quetz... Yes... Yes... Oh yeee... Oh bugger!

Diane Abbott popped into my head on the vinegar strokes and knackered it.

Purgatory is okay but I just don't feel at home there, do you know what I mean? I find Hell to be "comfy". Like a well worn pair of slippers.

Anyway, I can't stay for long. A couple of us from the local Conservative Club have been lucky enough to get tickets to go and watch some poor people being evicted from sheltered housing.

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

Anyway, I can't stay for long. A couple of us from the local Conservative Club have been lucky enough to get tickets to go and watch some poor people being evicted from sheltered housing.

Typical sorry effete rottenführers manqué - can't even do your own oppressing. You have to hire lackeys.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Yeah. And I bet they're Romanian lackeys at that. [Big Grin]

[ 15. May 2015, 17:12: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Yeah. And I bet they're Romanian lackeys at that.

I thought they were Charles and Camilla.

Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :

Will someone please pass the brain-bleach? [Eek!]

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

I notice Deano claims to be an Anglican.

Reminds me of a guy being interviewed on the TV.

'Are you a Christian, Sir?'
'Good God, no! I'm an Anglican!'

I have a feeling Deano's not really a Conservative either.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Anselmina--

Which puts me in mind of the entry for "Christian" in Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary":

{In the PUBLIC DOMAIN.}

quote:
CHRISTIAN, n. One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. One who follows the teachings of Christ in so far as they are not inconsistent with a life of sin.

I dreamed I stood upon a hill, and, lo!
The godly multitudes walked to and fro
Beneath, in Sabbath garments fitly clad,
With pious mien, appropriately sad,
While all the church bells made a solemn din —
A fire-alarm to those who lived in sin.
Then saw I gazing thoughtfully below,
With tranquil face, upon that holy show
A tall, spare figure in a robe of white,
Whose eyes diffused a melancholy light.
"God keep you, stranger," I exclaimed. "You are
No doubt (your habit shows it) from afar;
And yet I entertain the hope that you,
Like these good people, are a Christian too."
He raised his eyes and with a look so stern
It made me with a thousand blushes burn
Replied — his manner with disdain was spiced:
"What! I a Christian? No, indeed! I'm Christ."
—G.J.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

So having linked the page, you then tell us what's on the entirety of the page.

Thanks for that...

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Actually, that's just one entry on a very long page--the full text of the book.

That particular site has links for each word entry. Otherwise, I would've used Project Gutenberg, which doesn't have word links.

Sorry if I misstepped.

Posted by Pulsator Organorum Ineptus (# 2515) on :

... or the apocryphal hospital admission form that, in the question about the patient's religion, carried the rider, "if C of E, please state whether you believe in God".

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0