Yet another UKIP blunder
Discussion
Kermit power said:
I'm more staggered by the couple.
Does nobody else see the irony in this bloke buying himself a foreign mail order bride and then joining an anti immigration party?
UKIP are about having the right sort of immigration; so people can have pretty brides from Thailand, rather than having to marry frightening looking pig wrestlers from Eastern Europe. HTH.Does nobody else see the irony in this bloke buying himself a foreign mail order bride and then joining an anti immigration party?
As for Ting Tong, she was, in fact, a he IIRC.
FredClogs said:
What no big red button Guam? No cat memes?
Come on Guam, your people are relying on you...
You could always ask him why him and his fellow disciples ( the other usual suspects "the captains of industry" ) seem to spend all day and most of the night on here. Top tip - don't ask about their health.....or enquire if they don't have better things they could be doing - given just how important they obviously must be..... they don't like it much... ;-)Come on Guam, your people are relying on you...
I'd never heard the term 'ting tong' before - is it a long standing racist jibe? Did a jam manufacturer put them on a label once?
Not sure what is most depressing about this event - the UKIP MEP putting her foot in it, the Beeb for 'covertly' recording her after the camera is off, or the ott response following it.
Considering the impact - mail order bride upset but still backs UKIP - compared to, say, Cyril Smith's activities, it really is silly season still. Our local BBC regional news devoted a good five minutes to this last night, rustling up two live reporters on the streets of Ramsgate plus a live interview with a professor of Journalism (who seemed sober!!) who'se op'ed piece was laughingly one sided. And this was the first story.
Still, perhaps any publicity is still good publicity?
Not sure what is most depressing about this event - the UKIP MEP putting her foot in it, the Beeb for 'covertly' recording her after the camera is off, or the ott response following it.
Considering the impact - mail order bride upset but still backs UKIP - compared to, say, Cyril Smith's activities, it really is silly season still. Our local BBC regional news devoted a good five minutes to this last night, rustling up two live reporters on the streets of Ramsgate plus a live interview with a professor of Journalism (who seemed sober!!) who'se op'ed piece was laughingly one sided. And this was the first story.
Still, perhaps any publicity is still good publicity?
FredClogs said:
HonestIago said:
For me; less government, lower taxes, greater social mobility, less bureaucracy, lower crime tolerance and less wasting taxpayers' money on overseas wars/intervention/aid are the sort of policies I'd like the UK government to pursue.
Why?Here's the "less government" UKIP approach to, say, cycling:
UKIP manifesto said:
10.2 We believe that there needs to be a better balance of rights and responsibilities for pedal cyclists, with too much aggressive abuse of red lights, pedestrian crossings and a lack of basic safety and road courtesy.
10.6 UKIP would consult on the desirability of minimum third party liability insurance cover for cyclists - a simple annual flat rate registration ‘Cycledisc’, stuck to the bicycle frame, to cover damage to cars and others, which are currently unprotected. The Cycledisc should also carry clear identification details, which will help counter bicycle theft, and deter dangerous cyclist behaviour. We support provision of cycle parking at
reasonable charges.
10.7 UKIP believes that basic cycle and safety training should be made mandatory, and be funded in schools or via local authorities. UKIP supports the campaign work of national cycling organisations.
10.9 Local authorities should be given additional powers to enforce a ‘cyclists dismount’ or ‘no cycling’ regulation where there are safety concerns – such as on busy roundabouts, junctions or bus lanes, or where the road would be too narrowed by cycle lanes and cause
unacceptable delays to traffic
Correct me if I'm wrong - that sounds like more government, and more taxes not less. This approach is far from unique in their manifesto.10.6 UKIP would consult on the desirability of minimum third party liability insurance cover for cyclists - a simple annual flat rate registration ‘Cycledisc’, stuck to the bicycle frame, to cover damage to cars and others, which are currently unprotected. The Cycledisc should also carry clear identification details, which will help counter bicycle theft, and deter dangerous cyclist behaviour. We support provision of cycle parking at
reasonable charges.
10.7 UKIP believes that basic cycle and safety training should be made mandatory, and be funded in schools or via local authorities. UKIP supports the campaign work of national cycling organisations.
10.9 Local authorities should be given additional powers to enforce a ‘cyclists dismount’ or ‘no cycling’ regulation where there are safety concerns – such as on busy roundabouts, junctions or bus lanes, or where the road would be too narrowed by cycle lanes and cause
unacceptable delays to traffic
One thing I've noticed among just about everyone who says they want "less government" - put a problem they understand in front of them, I guarantee the first thing they reach for is more government and more taxes.
What they really mean is "I don't understand what government does or why, so it must be useless".
Having less government overall doesn't mean one can't bring in new initiatives/legislation in certain areas whilst minimising spending elsewhere. It's a rather petty point to make - everyone knows the budget is a balancing act (or not as in the case of the current and previous gov't).
HonestIago said:
Having less government overall doesn't mean one can't bring in new initiatives/legislation in certain areas whilst minimising spending elsewhere. It's a rather petty point to make - everyone knows the budget is a balancing act (or not as in the case of the current and previous gov't).
Entirely true. My beef with UKIP is threefold:(1) The policies are rubbish, which Farage seems happy enough to acknowledge - easily addressed by bringing in better and properly thought-through policies which are costed. If this happens, as promised, in September, then fair enough, they've sorted this issue.
(2) They attract morons - not to say that they don't have bright people too, but they seem to have more than their fair share of genuinely idiotic people as candidates. 'Fringe' would be a polite way of describing many of them. Vet the candidates more thoroughly (but then one wonders how selective they can actually be) and this problem is sorted.
(3) I absolutely despite Nigel Farage. Every time I see his stupid gurning face, purporting to speak for the people of Briatin, I have an irrational desire to punch him. And each utterance, frequently made up on the spur of the moment, makes me cringe. There's no sorting this one, I'm afraid; Farage=UKIP in the public's mind, so if he disappears, so will they.
The consistency of the BBC and PH responses amaze me, IMHO this is a storm in a tea cup all day long. What next sHall we ban little Britain, or is that still Acceptable. As I think it fair to say that TT having a modern Thai bride connotation was their direct making.
I think there many many more deserved things that require the press attention. However it is telling they'd rather get apopletic about some C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
I think there many many more deserved things that require the press attention. However it is telling they'd rather get apopletic about some C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
Digga said:
KIP are about having the right sort of immigration; so people can have pretty brides from Thailand, rather than having to marry frightening looking pig wrestlers from Eastern Europe. HTH.
As for Ting Tong, she was, in fact, a he IIRC.
Nah, that was Tong Ting wasn't it? From Tooting if I recall.As for Ting Tong, she was, in fact, a he IIRC.
HarryW said:
C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
It's funny you should describe her that way, as UKIP saw fit to select her as an MEP and she authored their welfare policy. In that imaginary world where UKIP gained some power in our Parliament, she would be in the cabinet. If their senior' front benchers' are C grade, it's hardly a great advert for the rest of them.
HarryW said:
The consistency of the BBC and PH responses amaze me, IMHO this is a storm in a tea cup all day long. What next sHall we ban little Britain, or is that still Acceptable. As I think it fair to say that TT having a modern Thai bride connotation was their direct making.
I think there many many more deserved things that require the press attention. However it is telling they'd rather get apopletic about some C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
She's a would-be politician trying to get elected. The party she represents is particularly interested in immigration, and has been accused by some of being racist. This sort of comment would seem to give support to that view.I think there many many more deserved things that require the press attention. However it is telling they'd rather get apopletic about some C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
What part of this isn't news?
longblackcoat said:
Entirely true. My beef with UKIP is threefold:
(1) The policies are rubbish, which Farage seems happy enough to acknowledge - easily addressed by bringing in better and properly thought-through policies which are costed. If this happens, as promised, in September, then fair enough, they've sorted this issue.
(2) They attract morons - not to say that they don't have bright people too, but they seem to have more than their fair share of genuinely idiotic people as candidates. 'Fringe' would be a polite way of describing many of them. Vet the candidates more thoroughly (but then one wonders how selective they can actually be) and this problem is sorted.
(3) I absolutely despite Nigel Farage. Every time I see his stupid gurning face, purporting to speak for the people of Briatin, I have an irrational desire to punch him. And each utterance, frequently made up on the spur of the moment, makes me cringe. There's no sorting this one, I'm afraid; Farage=UKIP in the public's mind, so if he disappears, so will they.
1. Point taken - hopefully their manifesto will go some way to easing these concerns(1) The policies are rubbish, which Farage seems happy enough to acknowledge - easily addressed by bringing in better and properly thought-through policies which are costed. If this happens, as promised, in September, then fair enough, they've sorted this issue.
(2) They attract morons - not to say that they don't have bright people too, but they seem to have more than their fair share of genuinely idiotic people as candidates. 'Fringe' would be a polite way of describing many of them. Vet the candidates more thoroughly (but then one wonders how selective they can actually be) and this problem is sorted.
(3) I absolutely despite Nigel Farage. Every time I see his stupid gurning face, purporting to speak for the people of Briatin, I have an irrational desire to punch him. And each utterance, frequently made up on the spur of the moment, makes me cringe. There's no sorting this one, I'm afraid; Farage=UKIP in the public's mind, so if he disappears, so will they.
2. A few members out of hundreds of their councilors/MEPs have done/said some stupid things. The only reason this is a big deal is the level of media scrutiny UKIP are under. The party as a whole are a decent, hard working bunch I would like to think.
3. IMO NF is pretty likeable compared to what else is on offer. I could say the exact same about Ed Milipede - he is utterly vile and has a real nerve to think he can speak for working class Britain (you know the people the Labour party is supposed to look out for?).
longblackcoat said:
HonestIago said:
Having less government overall doesn't mean one can't bring in new initiatives/legislation in certain areas whilst minimising spending elsewhere. It's a rather petty point to make - everyone knows the budget is a balancing act (or not as in the case of the current and previous gov't).
Entirely true. My beef with UKIP is threefold:(1) The policies are rubbish, which Farage seems happy enough to acknowledge - easily addressed by bringing in better and properly thought-through policies which are costed. If this happens, as promised, in September, then fair enough, they've sorted this issue.
(2) They attract morons - not to say that they don't have bright people too, but they seem to have more than their fair share of genuinely idiotic people as candidates. 'Fringe' would be a polite way of describing many of them. Vet the candidates more thoroughly (but then one wonders how selective they can actually be) and this problem is sorted.
(3) I absolutely despite Nigel Farage. Every time I see his stupid gurning face, purporting to speak for the people of Briatin, I have an irrational desire to punch him. And each utterance, frequently made up on the spur of the moment, makes me cringe. There's no sorting this one, I'm afraid; Farage=UKIP in the public's mind, so if he disappears, so will they.
HonestIago said:
Having less government overall doesn't mean one can't bring in new initiatives/legislation in certain areas whilst minimising spending elsewhere. It's a rather petty point to make - everyone knows the budget is a balancing act (or not as in the case of the current and previous gov't).
Given what we now know, that the main parties are, behind the scenes, sharing out the power and glory and gravy train and big-industry post-politics appointments, whilst presenting to us the sham of democratic choice, having 'someone' else to shake up the order is also a 'good thing' IMHO.tenpenceshort said:
HarryW said:
C grade bints stupid ill thought out and off the cuff casual remark though.
It's funny you should describe her that way, as UKIP saw fit to select her as an MEP and she authored their welfare policy. In that imaginary world where UKIP gained some power in our Parliament, she would be in the cabinet. If their senior' front benchers' are C grade, it's hardly a great advert for the rest of them.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff