Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media

[stethoscope]

Oh noes, it would mean the following (amongst others) would have to seek nomination in new/redrawn seats: Hilary Benn, Chuka Umunna, Tristram Hunt, Liam Byrne, and Alison McGovern. A catastrophe for the Labour party I tell you.

 

[existentialist]

What do you mean?

It reads like a Labour "Progress" group manifesto, just for a start. It certainly doesn't feel like one person's coherent opinion.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Yep and they'd be the first to demand that MPs behave honourably and unite behind the leader if a Blairite was in charge.

I recall the left voting against the leadership very often indeed with no consequences, and certainly no purges.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

It reads like a Labour "Progress" group manifesto, just for a start. It certainly doesn't feel like one person's coherent opinion.

Possible I suppose. I don't know.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I recall the left voting against the leadership very often indeed with no consequences, and certainly no purges.

No consequences...really? What do you think the structural marginalisation of the vast majority of the membership in relation to policy making and selection (at local as well as national level) was about? Could it have had something to do with undermining the left within the PLP?

Interestingly the one occasion the PLP loosened its grasp, the mass membership of the Labour Party in all it's constituent parts (except that of the numerically minuscule PLP), voted for a left candidate. Were they all wrong, and if so what is the point of them? Aren't they just holding the party back?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[killer b]

I recall the left voting against the leadership very often indeed with no consequences, and certainly no purges.

Plenty of threats of purges, and no places in cabinet though.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Plenty of threats of purges, and no places in cabinet though.

So nothing like what is threatened here, and certainly not on this scale.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

No consequences...really? What do you think the structural marginalisation of the vast majority of the membership in relation to policy making and selection (at local as well as national level) was about? Could it have had something to do with undermining the left within the PLP?

Interestingly the one occasion the PLP loosened its grasp, the mass membership of the Labour Party in all it's constituent parts (except that of the numerically minuscule PLP), voted for a left candidate. Were they all wrong, and if so what is the point of them? Aren't they just holding the party back?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Minor league compared to what is happening within a few weeks of Corbyn's election.

The Labour Party has been heading left since 1997. More and more of the members think politics is about them, rather than the electorate. Hence we have the Tories guaranteed power until well into the 2020s.

 

[Pickman's model]

Minor league compared to what is happening within a few weeks of Corbyn's election.

The Labour Party has been heading left since 1997. More and more of the members think politics is about them, rather than the electorate. Hence we have the Tories guaranteed power until well into the 2020s.

in the future don't make yourself look stupid by posting rubbish like this

 

[William of Walworth]

Simon Jenkins, of all people, comes out in support of Corbyn over Trident :

Renew Trident? It would make more sense to put Dads Army on the case



(Jenkins has argued in faviour of abolishing the UK's armed forces in the past mind you. Definitely a maverick, despite his usual wingnuttery n the right)

 

[MarkyMarrk]

That is wingnuttery. It's like everyone is ignoring Putin, and the fact that we have no idea who will be threatening us in 10 years.
Mutually assured destruction is the only thing that stopped mutual destruction during the cold war, so I heard someone convincingly argue the other day. It appears that if CND had their way in Britain and the US, we wouldn't be here.

 

[killer b]

So nothing like what is threatened here, and certainly not on this scale.

or in fact, worse than what's threatened here.
'Show trials' to axe MPs disloyal to Blair

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Things that didn't happen.

 

[killer b]

yes, just like the current rumblings about deselection haven't happened.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

yes, just like the current rumblings about deselection haven't happened.

So we can't criticise them because they haven't happened yet?
It's a bit different to something that was reported to be planned but didn't happen. Can you see the difference?
Or is it that you actually think that deselection is a good thing if MPs aren't loyal to Corbyn.

 

[nino_savatte]

That is wingnuttery. It's like everyone is ignoring Putin, and the fact that we have no idea who will be threatening us in 10 years.
Mutually assured destruction is the only thing that stopped mutual destruction during the cold war, so I heard someone convincingly argue the other day. It appears that if CND had their way in Britain and the US, we wouldn't be here.

Do you lie awake at night imagining who's going to attack/threaten us? As the replicant Leon says in Blade Runner "It's painful living in fear". Do you live in fear, MarkyMarrk?

Trident is a white elephant; a waste of money. It has no use value beyond its employment as virility symbol and magick amulet that allegedly wards off evil spirits.

People who spend their time obsessing over our independent (sic) nuclear deterrent (sic) remind me of the mutants in Beneath the Planet of the Apes, who worship a nuclear bomb.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Do you lie awake at night imagining who's going to attack/threaten us? As the replicant Leon says in Blade Runner "It's painful living in fear". Do you live in fear, MarkyMarrk?

Trident is a white elephant; a waste of money. It has no use value beyond its employment as virility symbol and magick amulet that allegedly wards off evil spirits.

I'm worried about who might attack us, and the threats from despots, yes. More importantly, I think politicians should be.
Our nuclear deterrent is a nuclear deterrent. That's a good thing. It has kept us safe in the past. It may continue to, and that's enough to keep it.

 

[killer b]

So we can't criticise them because they haven't happened yet?
It's a bit different to something that was reported to be planned but didn't happen. Can you see the difference?
Or is it that you actually think that deselection is a good thing if MPs aren't loyal to Corbyn.

I think MPs should be answerable to their local party.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm worried about who might attack us, and the threats from despots, yes. More importantly, I think politicians should be.
Our nuclear deterrent is a nuclear deterrent. That's a good thing. It has kept us safe in the past. It may continue to, and that's enough to keep it.

yeh. in the future don't make yourself look stupid by posting rubbish like this.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm worried about who might attack us, and the threats from despots, yes. More importantly, I think politicians should be.
Our nuclear deterrent is a nuclear deterrent. That's a good thing. It has kept us safe in the past. It may continue to, and that's enough to keep it.

Pathetic. You're exactly the sort of person our pro-nuke politicians love because you're quite happy to live in perpetual fear. Did it ever occur to you to question their motives?

 

[MarkyMarrk]

I think MPs should be answerable to their local party.

Whereas I think they should be answerable to the electorate. i.e. the 9 million who voted for them, not the few who just joined the Labour Party to ruin it.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

Pathetic. You're exactly the sort of person our pro-nuke politicians love because you're quite happy to live in perpetual fear. Did it ever occur to you to question their motives?

I have to say I'm not about to be convinced by someone with your style of argument. And no, I'm not a web liberal.
Perhaps you want to get rid of all the armed forces as well.

 

[nino_savatte]

I have to say I'm not about to be convinced by someone with your style of argument.

That's rich coming from someone who is wholly incapable of constructing an argument.

 

[Pickman's model]

Whereas I think they should be answerable to the electorate. i.e. the 9 million who voted for them, not the few who just joined the Labour Party to ruin it.

but the 9m people who voted labour don't vote to decide who should be the labour candidate. the selection of the candidate is a labour party internal matter. do you see this? it isn't a tricky concept. not for anyone else, anyway.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

That's rich coming from someone who is wholly incapable of constructing an argument.

Here we go. Exactly the same style as those who seek to make the Labour Party unelectable.

 

[nino_savatte]

Here we go. Exactly the same style as those who seek to make the Labour Party unelectable.

You're trolling...and I'm not a member of the Labour Party.

 

[Pickman's model]

Here we go. Exactly the same style as those who seek to make the Labour Party unelectable.

this is another example of the rubbish i was talking about.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

Simon Jenkins, of all people, comes out in support of Corbyn over Trident :

Renew Trident? It would make more sense to put Dads Army on the case



(Jenkins has argued in faviour of abolishing the UK's armed forces in the past mind you. Definitely a maverick, despite his usual wingnuttery n the right)

Jenkins is right about Trident, as is Corbyn, but most of the electorate are still wedded to the idea that we'd all be doomed without our 'independent' nuclear deterrent and they're never going to vote to remove it, at least not for a long time yet.

Which kind of answers Jenkins' question about why Benn, Falconer, Eagle etc have chosen to use Trident as their main platform to attack Corbyn.

 

[Andrew Hertford]

You're trolling...and I'm not a member of the Labour Party.

Thank god for that!

 

[nino_savatte]

Thank god for that!

I wouldn't join a party that allows the likes of you to become a member.