Angela Rayner calls Tory MP "Scum"
Discussion
CardinalBlue said:
Gecko1978 said:
She calls a point of order an state he was innacurate an asks him to withdraw she did not apologies at all she is hard left to the core and think as f@ck
Normally when calling someone ‘thick’ it helps if someone can spell it. Deathmole said:
I'm with her, imagine voting down a bill that was attempting to help fund meals for hungry children.....
Scum indeed.
You may not realise, but poorer families in the UK get both child benefit and child tax credits to ensure that they have enough money to feed their children.Scum indeed.
Sadly there is a class of people who still choose to let their children go hungry, and their cheerleaders like you who will blame the government not the feckless families for this.
Murph7355 said:
She is thick as mince.
She is one of a number of people Starmer continues to humour. If he is serious about getting Labour into power, she is also another of those he will need to bin off.
That's always been my take on it. He'd be stupid to have just binned her off immediately as he probably would've liked to have done, lest he risk a massive Momentum backlash. We've got a few years yet until the next election, plenty of time for her to fShe is one of a number of people Starmer continues to humour. If he is serious about getting Labour into power, she is also another of those he will need to bin off.
k up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive. ''a worthless or contemptible person or group of people.''
The real question is, which one?
Now lets take contemptible person, which is usually used with liar, so contemptible liar, someone who arousing an attitude of moral indignation.
So who shows a moral indignation??
''Be indignant that you are being accused, saying that you would never do such a thing and that it is shocking that anyone would think you might act in the way being suggested.''
The Tory Gov is rubbing millions up the wrong way whilst looking down on people with indignation, it really isn't a far reach.
The real question is, which one?
Now lets take contemptible person, which is usually used with liar, so contemptible liar, someone who arousing an attitude of moral indignation.
So who shows a moral indignation??
''Be indignant that you are being accused, saying that you would never do such a thing and that it is shocking that anyone would think you might act in the way being suggested.''
The Tory Gov is rubbing millions up the wrong way whilst looking down on people with indignation, it really isn't a far reach.
PurpleTurtle said:
That's always been my take on it. He'd be stupid to have just binned her off immediately as he probably would've liked to have done, lest he risk a massive Momentum backlash. We've got a few years yet until the next election, plenty of time for her to fk up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive.
Stuff all that - this is PH and I always use Tesco Momentum in my cars. k up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive. 
DMN said:
Angela Rayner is correct, lets be honest.
Perhaps but our politicians should be better than trampy playground insults. If anyone needed to step up a few levels on being a professional politician it was her. She reminds me of a dog tethered to a bollard outside a tesco barking at everyone who walks past. PurpleTurtle said:
That's always been my take on it. He'd be stupid to have just binned her off immediately as he probably would've liked to have done, lest he risk a massive Momentum backlash. We've got a few years yet until the next election, plenty of time for her to fk up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive.
He cant bin her off or sideline her. Deputy leader of the Labour party is an elected position. Crayons is to Starmer as John Prescott was to Blair. This wont be the last fk up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive. k up from her, should be fun to watch Starmer try & deal with it 
Edited by Wombat3 on Thursday 22 October 09:08
Murph7355 said:
She is thick as mince.
She is one of a number of people Starmer continues to humour. If he is serious about getting Labour into power, she is also another of those he will need to bin off.
Unfortunately for him, the Labour Party does not work like that. She was elected into her high office - well done Len.She is one of a number of people Starmer continues to humour. If he is serious about getting Labour into power, she is also another of those he will need to bin off.
The general standard of MPs on both sides of the house is now pretty low. But look elsewhere and there seems to have been a general decline. The clue might be the fact that Boris was better off as a backbench journalist rather than PM.
How many folk will vote Biden just to depose Trump. Neither are Statesmen of great standing, and Pelosi hardly seems well suited as an unbiased speaker of their house.
Wombat3 said:
PurpleTurtle said:
That's always been my take on it. He'd be stupid to have just binned her off immediately as he probably would've liked to have done, lest he risk a massive Momentum backlash. We've got a few years yet until the next election, plenty of time for her to fk up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive.
He cant bin her off or sideline her. Deputy leader of the Labour party is an elected position. Crayons is to Starmer as John Prescott was to Blair. This wont be the last fk up of her own accord and be quietly sidelined in a reshuffle to be replaced with someone a tad less abrasive. k up from her, should be fun to watch Starmer try & deal with it I thought she’d be one of the ones to go soonish but not straight away. Her speeches as shadow education minister about assimilating private schools into the state sector and seizing their assets were just batty and once it was apparent how unpopular they were, she had to be told to shut up about it. Labour immediately became the party that would seize your assets. Which is never a vote winner when most people are a bit aspiring.
Starmer called her his good friend the other week when she was in PMQs though, so he doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to get rid of her.
Deathmole said:
I'm with her, imagine voting down a bill that was attempting to help fund meals for hungry children.....
Scum indeed.
How does it work?Scum indeed.
How do these kids get the meals?
Do the schools open so they can go in and eat?
Or is money given to the families?
I can't see that a family that is so poor they can't afford food will do anything more than put that money in the pot and it will just get gobbled up with life.
Evanivitch said:
fastraxx said:
You act professionally.
Prime Minister not exactly leading by example on that front though, is he?Getting rid of Team Corbyn was a very good start but they need to build on it if they're ever to get back into power to actually fix any of the things they're complaining about. I'm neither staunchly one way or the other, but a good, competent opposition (whoever is in power) is to the benefit of the country. Not a bunch of name-callers with no solutions.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Spot on. There is a certain element of activist (of any affiliation) that is so angry, and so convinced they are right, that they use insults, slurs and rudeness to demonstrate their passion and zeal. Witness Chris Bryant's attitude on Talk Radio the other day, and now Crayons Rayner.Angela Rayner is one of those: "look how committed I am, how much I care - others play nicely, but I'm a warrior for social justice, comrades!"
Her supporters will love it - more "Tory Scum" banners and placards are being churned out as we speak.
Deathmole said:
I'm with her, imagine voting down a bill that was attempting to help fund meals for hungry children.....
Scum indeed.
Why are so many parents choosing to not provide for the kids they were happy to give birth to?Scum indeed.
I'm sick of all this "it's child poverty though innit" brigade.
If you can't get off your backside and feed your own kids it's a pretty poor show.
You shouldn't need the government to bail you out just because you can't be arsed.
Zoon said:
You shouldn't need the government to bail you out just because you can't be arsed.
Very true.But.....
The wife is a teacher (a very rare non lefty one) in a village near Cambridge where you might think hungry kids would not be an issue. She constantly tells me that you'd be surprised how many children come in to school having not had any breakfast nor get a proper dinner.
The school lunch is effectively their only meal of the day.
It's easy to say that the parents should not be so rubbish, or that they already get a boat load of benefits but unfortunately, people are irresponsible and it's the child that ends up suffering. And it definitely isn't the child's fault.
The discussion on what to do though is really difficult. Do we really want a system with state supported children from the outset? Does this result in the society that we want in the future? What is actually the best way to solve this problem?
I'm personally not sure that it is by giving more money to the feckless but it is hard to come up with a much better alternative when you are dealing with people who can't or won't even give their child some weetabix in the morning and a tin of beans of an evening .
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff