Angela Rayner calls Tory MP "Scum"

[Pan Pan Pan]

bhstewie said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

Never thought that for a second (not sure what sane person would ever have any time for Ken Livingstone) but just wanted to point out that if someone is trying to make a point with regards to the number of children a politician has had, it would not be very accurate if it focused on the re productive abilities of just one politician, and that all such multi off spring politicians should be included. Strangely having multiple offspring is not something confined to the tories in the HoC.

I agree which is why I dragged Johnson into it.

People are very quick to mention Rayner being a single mother and her education etc. and I'm simply suggesting if you look at the man in charge of the country and his own record around parenting it doesn't look great.

There's a bit of a double-standard going on there in my opinion.

Quite probably, but that double standard seems to work in both directions, but some don't like to admit that..

[bitchstewie]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Quite probably, but that double standard seems to work in both directions, but some don't like to admit that..

No of course it does.

But if you saw some of the stuff that seems to have been deleted from this thread I think it's obvious some posters on here go beyond political policies.

Same vein as the Diane Abbott thread which had to be deleted because it got so vile.

I don't see that sort of thing happen with threads about male politicians though I'm happy to be corrected if it has.

Can't think why.

[Pan Pan Pan]

biggbn said:

bhstewie said:

El stovey said:

I respect her achievements but disagree with some of her views and think she shouldn’t should scum at people with different views especially in the HOC.

That’s what I think she should do, calm down and respect others views and not shout scum at other democratically elected MPs like her due to differing views.

I agree with that.

But there's a certain irony that the thread seems to have been pruned to remove a whole bunch of sexual comments from people who think that's fine but are apparently outraged by the word "scum" and who like to moan about "feckless breeders" but also don't like to recognise someone achieving far more than you perhaps might have expected them to.

Irony, breakfast of champions!!

Indeed, only a little while ago some lefty frothers were squealing about the use of the word `humbug' in the HoC. All this potty mouth going on, is getting quite depressing.

[768]

bhstewie said:

Quite.

I also think it's important to be able to disagree with many of those opinions but also still give some credit for the fact that she has got herself there.

With all respect to her from what I know of her background it would be easy for things to have turned out very different.

Instead she has a national voice (albeit not used too wisely this week ) and is deputy leader of a major political party.

What more do people on NP&E think she should do?

I don't think she should do anything, it's not on her that she's failed upwards through the unions and Labour. I wouldn't expect her to do anything other than revel in it.

But everyone else should look in despair at Labour and the wider political system putting her in as shadow education secretary, with no educational attainment. And then promoting her to the position she now uses to label the people she works with as scum.

If you think the Conservative party is stuffed full of inept people look no further than the bar they've had to beat.

[bitchstewie]

768 said:

I don't think she should do anything, it's not on her that she's failed upwards through the unions and Labour. I wouldn't expect her to do anything other than revel in it.

But everyone else should look in despair at Labour and the wider political system putting her in as shadow education secretary, with no educational attainment. And then promoting her to the position she now uses to label the people she works with as scum.

If you think the Conservative party is stuffed full of inept people look no further than the bar they've had to beat.

How do you think Gavin Williamson working out so far as Education Secretary?

If your argument is "The Conservative party are st because of who's in Labour" it's a bit of a poor one.

I mean I know it's pretty much Conservative Party policy to blame someone else for everything and god knows we've seen it these last few months but really

[768]

You can only beat what's in front of you. Your crush could tell you that.

[bitchstewie]

768 said:

You can only beat what's in front of you. Your crush could tell you that.

Are you 5 years old?

Actually scratch that it's pretty insulting to 5 year olds.

That's literally pathetic

[Red 4]

768 said:

But everyone else should look in despair at Labour and the wider political system putting her in as shadow education secretary, with no educational attainment. And then promoting her to the position she now uses to label the people she works with as scum.

I'm not sure what Rayner's academic qualifications have to with her ability or intelligence TBH.

She appears to have studied, initially, at The School of Hard Knocks and The University of Life. Are you saying she would be better at her job if she had a degree in, say, Interpretive Dance or The Life of John Lennon ? These are both real, proper degree courses apparently !

Some of the stupidest people I know are highly academically qualified - Post Doctorate in some cases - with zero common sense.

For the record I do think Rayner sometimes comes across as a bit thick but then don't all politicians at one time or another ?
I think she fits in well. If she spoke with an Etonian twang I'm sure some people would think she is Einstein.

[768]

Red 4 said:

768 said:

But everyone else should look in despair at Labour and the wider political system putting her in as shadow education secretary, with no educational attainment. And then promoting her to the position she now uses to label the people she works with as scum.

I'm not sure what Rayner's academic qualifications have to with her ability or intelligence TBH.

Ability and intelligence are not educational attainment. I happen to think an education is a very low bar for an education secretary.

[bitchstewie]

Red 4 said:

For the record I do think Rayner sometimes comes across as a bit thick but then don't all politicians at one time or another ?
I think she fits in well. If she spoke with an Etonian twang I'm sure some people would think she is Einstein.

Dunno what you mean.

[Red 4]

768 said:

Ability and intelligence are not educational attainment. I happen to think an education is a very low bar for an education secretary.

OK. So the policing minister needs to be an ex-cop ? The Secretary of State for Defence needs to be an ex-soldier ? Health - a Doctor ? This could go on and on.

Politicians are politicians. Don't expect ANY of them to necessarily have any experience of whatever department they represent.

[Red 4]

bhstewie said:

Red 4 said:

For the record I do think Rayner sometimes comes across as a bit thick but then don't all politicians at one time or another ?
I think she fits in well. If she spoke with an Etonian twang I'm sure some people would think she is Einstein.

Dunno what you mean.

Sounds like Boris has been on the coke. There's definitely something amiss with him.
The problem is that it's nothing new.

[Pan Pan Pan]

Red 4 said:

bhstewie said:

Red 4 said:

For the record I do think Rayner sometimes comes across as a bit thick but then don't all politicians at one time or another ?
I think she fits in well. If she spoke with an Etonian twang I'm sure some people would think she is Einstein.

Dunno what you mean.

Sounds like Boris has been on the coke. There's definitely something amiss with him.
The problem is that it's nothing new.

This is a game we could play until the cows come home, take some of Abbotts scintillating speeches in the HoC as an example.

[768]

Red 4 said:

768 said:

Ability and intelligence are not educational attainment. I happen to think an education is a very low bar for an education secretary.

OK. So the policing minister needs to be an ex-cop ? The Secretary of State for Defence needs to be an ex-soldier ? Health - a Doctor ? This could go on and on.

Politicians are politicians. Don't expect ANY of them to necessarily have any experience of whatever department they represent.

I'm not asking for a teacher with a doctorate. The defence secretary should be able to tell the difference between a plane and a ship, health should know which way round a plaster goes and if education could just show they once knew which way round a pencil goes I think we have a starting point.

[Unknown_User]

768 said:

Red 4 said:

768 said:

Ability and intelligence are not educational attainment. I happen to think an education is a very low bar for an education secretary.

OK. So the policing minister needs to be an ex-cop ? The Secretary of State for Defence needs to be an ex-soldier ? Health - a Doctor ? This could go on and on.

Politicians are politicians. Don't expect ANY of them to necessarily have any experience of whatever department they represent.

I'm not asking for a teacher with a doctorate. The defence secretary should be able to tell the difference between a plane and a ship, health should know which way round a plaster goes and if education could just show they once knew which way round a pencil goes I think we have a starting point.

And a Home Sec should understand counter-terrorism?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NL-zN63BBQ

"fundamental changes to tackle counter-terrorism............."

[Legacywr]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Glade said:

Wills2 said:

bhstewie said:

I bet we can all guess who won't be going hungry thanks to taxpayer subsidies.

I presume the mini steak and kidney pudding is for when a mini sirloin by itself couldn't possibly be enough.

I think the Tories got this horribly wrong.

The sight of MPs earning a publically funded 82k + exs whilst enjoying subsidised food at the tax payers expense, telling minimum wage workers who have been ordered by them to stop work that they won't fund £2-3 per meal over half term is piss poor.

Agree. They should scrap that subsidy. Pigs in the trough.

But they couldn't use that alone to fund the scheme.
10,320,811 school age students in the UK vs 650 MPs.

I think they could fund it, a step towards more universal benefit. Level the playing field for the kids.

Probably bring some unexpected consequences. Fat kids having two dinners. One at school, one at home etc

You do realize that the subsidy does not only apply tp MP`s but all the staff who work in the HoC, and the people who visit the HoC, are you saying it is `only' the MP`s who get it?

There is no need for subsidised food in this particular instance at all. They can all afford to pay, I would have thought, and, this particular subsidy is paid for by us!

[mdavids]

Childish... But funny

[bitchstewie]

Pan Pan Pan said:

This is a game we could play until the cows come home, take some of Abbotts scintillating speeches in the HoC as an example.

True.

Last time I looked she wasn't the Prime Minister (thankfully) was she?

[Red 4]

768 said:

Red 4 said:

768 said:

Ability and intelligence are not educational attainment. I happen to think an education is a very low bar for an education secretary.

OK. So the policing minister needs to be an ex-cop ? The Secretary of State for Defence needs to be an ex-soldier ? Health - a Doctor ? This could go on and on.

Politicians are politicians. Don't expect ANY of them to necessarily have any experience of whatever department they represent.

I'm not asking for a teacher with a doctorate. The defence secretary should be able to tell the difference between a plane and a ship, health should know which way round a plaster goes and if education could just show they once knew which way round a pencil goes I think we have a starting point.

OK, but that is very different to what you said earlier. I'm pretty sure Rayner knows what a school is.

She is feisty and I think her temperament got the better of her here.
It's an emotive subject though and maybe Rayner has seen more of the effects of child poverty than most.
I don't think many kids go hungry on their families' country estates - and even if they do, they know where the shotguns are kept.

[768]

Red 4 said:

OK, but that is very different to what you said earlier. I'm pretty sure Rayner knows what a school is.

She does, but she thinks it's where you have your first kid.