Boris's conference speech
Discussion
What a performance! 
The left leaning media in this country have a shock coming in the run up to the election. I am sure that they think they can still turn it back for Nu Labour, (The BBC especially)
You only had to look at Paxmans ridiculous questioning viz the EU referendum.. I got the Tory position the first time it was answered, but Paxman and most other BBC reporters were trying to make out that it was confusing and somehow the Tories fault that the UK had ratified under labour without the promissed referendum!
You just know that some simple folk out there will fall for this crap. Expect Winky's star to rise a little over the coming months. Its to be hoped that the Conservatives can maintain a 10+ point lead, otherwise, given the inbuilt bias from the ways the constituency boundaries are drawn, Winky will win again
The left leaning media in this country have a shock coming in the run up to the election. I am sure that they think they can still turn it back for Nu Labour, (The BBC especially)
You only had to look at Paxmans ridiculous questioning viz the EU referendum.. I got the Tory position the first time it was answered, but Paxman and most other BBC reporters were trying to make out that it was confusing and somehow the Tories fault that the UK had ratified under labour without the promissed referendum!
You just know that some simple folk out there will fall for this crap. Expect Winky's star to rise a little over the coming months. Its to be hoped that the Conservatives can maintain a 10+ point lead, otherwise, given the inbuilt bias from the ways the constituency boundaries are drawn, Winky will win again
I've found pretty much all of the speeches so far pretty good, not just Boris or Hague. But then again, how hard can it be for someone with a persona to fill a fifteen minute slot with a gag or two, a bit of policy, knock the opposition, and rouse the faithful to a bit of applause etc?
Stu R said:
brilliant show by Boris on newsnight 
Indeed, Boris is just fantastic, i love his wordsmith ability. For those that missed Newsnight heres a link to that interview. I thought Paxman came across bright and clear as a Labour lickspittle quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw
This is from the Telegraph;
"Last night’s Newsnight saw Old Malvernian millionaire interrogator Jeremy Paxman clashing with Old Etonian millionare Mayor of London Boris Johnson. But according to Paul Waugh the most exciting bits of the interview weren’t included:
“In what insiders described as “fantastic political theatre”, Mr Johnson clashed repeatedly with his interviewer over his stance on an EU referendum, on his membership of Oxford University’s Bullingdon Club and on David Cameron’s public image.”
Mr Johnson raised the issue of Paxman’s pay, saying: “You are paid elephantine sums by the taxpayer.”
Paxman replied: “If only that were true. You don’t know [what I earn]. I should stop making assertions.”
In unscreened exchanges, Mr Johnson pointed out that Londoners could see how much he earned as Mayor but licence-fee payers were not allowed similar transparency. At one point, Mr Johnson said: “Why don’t you get a proper job?”
When asked about drunken antics in his Oxford days, the Mayor replied: “Ask me a serious question…”
Splendid stuff and I quite agree with those “Mayoral Aides” (?ie Boris) who are urging that the full interview be put up online.
What interests me especially is the question of Paxo’s alleged £1 million salary. It interests me first as a nosey b
d. It interests me second as a licence-fee payer. But most of all it interests me ideologically.
They can be terribly grand BBC presenter types – the Paxos and Dimblebys – when quizzed about their personal lives. The salary issue, especially, they seem to think is tantamount to asking the Queen whether or not she goes to the loo. And up to a point I agree with them. A BBC political interviewer’s private life, in so far as it does not bear on his public role as frank and fearless interrogator of slippery MPs, is none of our ruddy business.
Where it is our business, though, is in cases like the Paxo/Bozza clash above. The ideological undercurrent to Paxo’s line of questioning (he may not share it but tough: that’s his karmic price for working for the pinko BBC) goes like this: “You are a toffy public school boy. David Cameron is a toffy public school boy. You were both in the Buller. You both earn way, WAY more than the national average. How can throwbacks like you possibly be fit to run modern Britain?”
This tack is outrageous and deserves to be challenged at every turn, as vigorously as possible. (Can you imagine a similar line of questioning being adopted if Boris’s and Dave’s “crimes” were to be, say, black or female or homosexual or physically handicapped?) Boris was quite right to make his response personal, for an ex public schoolboy on a million a year (or whatever Paxo earns) by asking such a question lays himself open to a charge of hypocrisy.
No more do Boris Johnson’s or David Cameron’s class, background and income rule them out of being great, effective and morally decent politicians than Paxo’s class, background and income rule him out of being a first rate interviewer.
If Paxo wishes to be impertinent (and disingenuous) on this score, then he should damned well expect some impertinence back.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...
Too damn right! How can some of these media types berate the likes of Johnson and Cameron when they themselves earn, and are worth huge amounts!
"Last night’s Newsnight saw Old Malvernian millionaire interrogator Jeremy Paxman clashing with Old Etonian millionare Mayor of London Boris Johnson. But according to Paul Waugh the most exciting bits of the interview weren’t included:
“In what insiders described as “fantastic political theatre”, Mr Johnson clashed repeatedly with his interviewer over his stance on an EU referendum, on his membership of Oxford University’s Bullingdon Club and on David Cameron’s public image.”
Mr Johnson raised the issue of Paxman’s pay, saying: “You are paid elephantine sums by the taxpayer.”
Paxman replied: “If only that were true. You don’t know [what I earn]. I should stop making assertions.”
In unscreened exchanges, Mr Johnson pointed out that Londoners could see how much he earned as Mayor but licence-fee payers were not allowed similar transparency. At one point, Mr Johnson said: “Why don’t you get a proper job?”
When asked about drunken antics in his Oxford days, the Mayor replied: “Ask me a serious question…”
Splendid stuff and I quite agree with those “Mayoral Aides” (?ie Boris) who are urging that the full interview be put up online.
What interests me especially is the question of Paxo’s alleged £1 million salary. It interests me first as a nosey b
d. It interests me second as a licence-fee payer. But most of all it interests me ideologically.They can be terribly grand BBC presenter types – the Paxos and Dimblebys – when quizzed about their personal lives. The salary issue, especially, they seem to think is tantamount to asking the Queen whether or not she goes to the loo. And up to a point I agree with them. A BBC political interviewer’s private life, in so far as it does not bear on his public role as frank and fearless interrogator of slippery MPs, is none of our ruddy business.
Where it is our business, though, is in cases like the Paxo/Bozza clash above. The ideological undercurrent to Paxo’s line of questioning (he may not share it but tough: that’s his karmic price for working for the pinko BBC) goes like this: “You are a toffy public school boy. David Cameron is a toffy public school boy. You were both in the Buller. You both earn way, WAY more than the national average. How can throwbacks like you possibly be fit to run modern Britain?”
This tack is outrageous and deserves to be challenged at every turn, as vigorously as possible. (Can you imagine a similar line of questioning being adopted if Boris’s and Dave’s “crimes” were to be, say, black or female or homosexual or physically handicapped?) Boris was quite right to make his response personal, for an ex public schoolboy on a million a year (or whatever Paxo earns) by asking such a question lays himself open to a charge of hypocrisy.
No more do Boris Johnson’s or David Cameron’s class, background and income rule them out of being great, effective and morally decent politicians than Paxo’s class, background and income rule him out of being a first rate interviewer.
If Paxo wishes to be impertinent (and disingenuous) on this score, then he should damned well expect some impertinence back.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...
Too damn right! How can some of these media types berate the likes of Johnson and Cameron when they themselves earn, and are worth huge amounts!
chris watton said:
This is from the Telegraph;
"Last night’s Newsnight saw Old Malvernian millionaire interrogator Jeremy Paxman clashing with Old Etonian millionare Mayor of London Boris Johnson. But according to Paul Waugh the most exciting bits of the interview weren’t included:
“In what insiders described as “fantastic political theatre”, Mr Johnson clashed repeatedly with his interviewer over his stance on an EU referendum, on his membership of Oxford University’s Bullingdon Club and on David Cameron’s public image.”
Mr Johnson raised the issue of Paxman’s pay, saying: “You are paid elephantine sums by the taxpayer.”
Paxman replied: “If only that were true. You don’t know [what I earn]. I should stop making assertions.”
In unscreened exchanges, Mr Johnson pointed out that Londoners could see how much he earned as Mayor but licence-fee payers were not allowed similar transparency. At one point, Mr Johnson said: “Why don’t you get a proper job?”
When asked about drunken antics in his Oxford days, the Mayor replied: “Ask me a serious question…”
Splendid stuff and I quite agree with those “Mayoral Aides” (?ie Boris) who are urging that the full interview be put up online.
What interests me especially is the question of Paxo’s alleged £1 million salary. It interests me first as a nosey bd. It interests me second as a licence-fee payer. But most of all it interests me ideologically.
They can be terribly grand BBC presenter types – the Paxos and Dimblebys – when quizzed about their personal lives. The salary issue, especially, they seem to think is tantamount to asking the Queen whether or not she goes to the loo. And up to a point I agree with them. A BBC political interviewer’s private life, in so far as it does not bear on his public role as frank and fearless interrogator of slippery MPs, is none of our ruddy business.
Where it is our business, though, is in cases like the Paxo/Bozza clash above. The ideological undercurrent to Paxo’s line of questioning (he may not share it but tough: that’s his karmic price for working for the pinko BBC) goes like this: “You are a toffy public school boy. David Cameron is a toffy public school boy. You were both in the Buller. You both earn way, WAY more than the national average. How can throwbacks like you possibly be fit to run modern Britain?”
This tack is outrageous and deserves to be challenged at every turn, as vigorously as possible. (Can you imagine a similar line of questioning being adopted if Boris’s and Dave’s “crimes” were to be, say, black or female or homosexual or physically handicapped?) Boris was quite right to make his response personal, for an ex public schoolboy on a million a year (or whatever Paxo earns) by asking such a question lays himself open to a charge of hypocrisy.
No more do Boris Johnson’s or David Cameron’s class, background and income rule them out of being great, effective and morally decent politicians than Paxo’s class, background and income rule him out of being a first rate interviewer.
If Paxo wishes to be impertinent (and disingenuous) on this score, then he should damned well expect some impertinence back.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...
Too damn right! How can some of these media types berate the likes of Johnson and Cameron when they themselves earn, and are worth huge amounts!
Superb stuff relayed there; Boris will often if not always give better than he gets - and I agree with your position 100%."Last night’s Newsnight saw Old Malvernian millionaire interrogator Jeremy Paxman clashing with Old Etonian millionare Mayor of London Boris Johnson. But according to Paul Waugh the most exciting bits of the interview weren’t included:
“In what insiders described as “fantastic political theatre”, Mr Johnson clashed repeatedly with his interviewer over his stance on an EU referendum, on his membership of Oxford University’s Bullingdon Club and on David Cameron’s public image.”
Mr Johnson raised the issue of Paxman’s pay, saying: “You are paid elephantine sums by the taxpayer.”
Paxman replied: “If only that were true. You don’t know [what I earn]. I should stop making assertions.”
In unscreened exchanges, Mr Johnson pointed out that Londoners could see how much he earned as Mayor but licence-fee payers were not allowed similar transparency. At one point, Mr Johnson said: “Why don’t you get a proper job?”
When asked about drunken antics in his Oxford days, the Mayor replied: “Ask me a serious question…”
Splendid stuff and I quite agree with those “Mayoral Aides” (?ie Boris) who are urging that the full interview be put up online.
What interests me especially is the question of Paxo’s alleged £1 million salary. It interests me first as a nosey b
d. It interests me second as a licence-fee payer. But most of all it interests me ideologically.They can be terribly grand BBC presenter types – the Paxos and Dimblebys – when quizzed about their personal lives. The salary issue, especially, they seem to think is tantamount to asking the Queen whether or not she goes to the loo. And up to a point I agree with them. A BBC political interviewer’s private life, in so far as it does not bear on his public role as frank and fearless interrogator of slippery MPs, is none of our ruddy business.
Where it is our business, though, is in cases like the Paxo/Bozza clash above. The ideological undercurrent to Paxo’s line of questioning (he may not share it but tough: that’s his karmic price for working for the pinko BBC) goes like this: “You are a toffy public school boy. David Cameron is a toffy public school boy. You were both in the Buller. You both earn way, WAY more than the national average. How can throwbacks like you possibly be fit to run modern Britain?”
This tack is outrageous and deserves to be challenged at every turn, as vigorously as possible. (Can you imagine a similar line of questioning being adopted if Boris’s and Dave’s “crimes” were to be, say, black or female or homosexual or physically handicapped?) Boris was quite right to make his response personal, for an ex public schoolboy on a million a year (or whatever Paxo earns) by asking such a question lays himself open to a charge of hypocrisy.
No more do Boris Johnson’s or David Cameron’s class, background and income rule them out of being great, effective and morally decent politicians than Paxo’s class, background and income rule him out of being a first rate interviewer.
If Paxo wishes to be impertinent (and disingenuous) on this score, then he should damned well expect some impertinence back.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/...
Too damn right! How can some of these media types berate the likes of Johnson and Cameron when they themselves earn, and are worth huge amounts!
rich1231 said:
The difference in language used on the BBC website between summaries of the Labour and Tory conferences is pretty stark. I think the BBC editors should be ashamed at the blatant bias in their content.
And some Labour Minister thinks the BBC is biased against Labour:bbc said:
Bradshaw in 'bias' attack on BBC
Mr Bradshaw has been unhappy with the BBC's coverage:
Culture Secretary Ben Bradshaw has accused the BBC of bias, describing coverage of shadow chancellor George Osborne's speech as "feeble".
Mr Bradshaw, a former BBC journalist, said he objected to interviews with two senior Tory figures on the Radio 4 programme Today.
An interview with Mr Osborne - in which he defended his proposed spending cuts - was "biased" he claimed.
Mr Bradshaw recently called for the way the BBC is governed to be overhauled.
'Feeble'
During Wednesday's Today programme, Mr Osborne was asked to justify his plans for £7bn worth of annual savings cuts and faced claims that some of the proposals were "half-baked".
It concluded with a discussion of Mr Osborne's conference speech with Michael Brown, a former Tory MP who now writes for the Independent newspaper.
Mr Brown said he believed the Tory leadership had "stolen a march" on Labour about being "genuinely honest" over the economic challenges facing the country.
The shadow chancellor had "come of age" during the conference, he added.
Mr Bradshaw wrote on the social networking site Twitter: "Another wholly feeble and biased Today programme rounded off with a fawning interview with a Tory pundit."
He has also attacked a previous Today interview with shadow schools secretary Michael Gove as "disgracefully feeble".
Mr Bradshaw has suggested the BBC Trust - which scrutinises BBC strategy and represents the interest of the licence fee payers - was "unsustainable" in the long run.
Mr Bradshaw has been unhappy with the BBC's coverage:
Culture Secretary Ben Bradshaw has accused the BBC of bias, describing coverage of shadow chancellor George Osborne's speech as "feeble".
Mr Bradshaw, a former BBC journalist, said he objected to interviews with two senior Tory figures on the Radio 4 programme Today.
An interview with Mr Osborne - in which he defended his proposed spending cuts - was "biased" he claimed.
Mr Bradshaw recently called for the way the BBC is governed to be overhauled.
'Feeble'
During Wednesday's Today programme, Mr Osborne was asked to justify his plans for £7bn worth of annual savings cuts and faced claims that some of the proposals were "half-baked".
It concluded with a discussion of Mr Osborne's conference speech with Michael Brown, a former Tory MP who now writes for the Independent newspaper.
Mr Brown said he believed the Tory leadership had "stolen a march" on Labour about being "genuinely honest" over the economic challenges facing the country.
The shadow chancellor had "come of age" during the conference, he added.
Mr Bradshaw wrote on the social networking site Twitter: "Another wholly feeble and biased Today programme rounded off with a fawning interview with a Tory pundit."
He has also attacked a previous Today interview with shadow schools secretary Michael Gove as "disgracefully feeble".
Mr Bradshaw has suggested the BBC Trust - which scrutinises BBC strategy and represents the interest of the licence fee payers - was "unsustainable" in the long run.
I've asked my MP what he proposes to do about it once in powerSkinnyBoy said:
Stu R said:
brilliant show by Boris on newsnight
Indeed, Boris is just fantastic, i love his wordsmith ability. For those that missed Newsnight heres a link to that interview. I thought Paxman came across bright and clear as a Labour lickspittle quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw
coanda said:
SkinnyBoy said:
Stu R said:
brilliant show by Boris on newsnight
Indeed, Boris is just fantastic, i love his wordsmith ability. For those that missed Newsnight heres a link to that interview. I thought Paxman came across bright and clear as a Labour lickspittle quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw
loltolhurst said:
coanda said:
SkinnyBoy said:
Stu R said:
brilliant show by Boris on newsnight
Indeed, Boris is just fantastic, i love his wordsmith ability. For those that missed Newsnight heres a link to that interview. I thought Paxman came across bright and clear as a Labour lickspittle quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw
turbobloke said:
loltolhurst said:
coanda said:
SkinnyBoy said:
Stu R said:
brilliant show by Boris on newsnight
Indeed, Boris is just fantastic, i love his wordsmith ability. For those that missed Newsnight heres a link to that interview. I thought Paxman came across bright and clear as a Labour lickspittle quite well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgThJK8xfKw
makes paxman look like the overpaid nob he isGassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff