Is David Cameron a moron from the outer reaches of the universe? (Part 1)

by AwfulTruth Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:36 pm

First topic message reminder :

APOLOGIES TO ALL DAVID CAMERON FANS

I just wondered Suspect

since his Prime Minister's Questions talents are about as edifying as a troglodyte with caveman issues: like he knows how to answer a question without pummeling his opponent with his stone club?

I never witnessed such an appalling lack of discussion, or even general etiquette, skills than with this prime mover. If I had been paid a quid for every ad hominem (personal reference - sarcasm to you and I) that fell out of his plump mouth I would be rich.

Seriously, why does Cameron make such a fool of himself? He has already been censured for bullying the newby MP's, and for his habit of telling pork pies when the truth would have done nicely.

It is now the case that his own party is getting sick of his amateurish habits which, as he has been solemnly told, may even bring office of PM into disrepute.

What do you think of his PMQs performance? Basketball

by Mel Fri Sep 06, 2013 3:05 pm

We now see "raving Dave" upsetting "The Bear" Putin with his snide remarks. Arrogant and tactless, Mr dangerous may next be suggesting bombing Russia.
He is a threat to the world and to the British public. Pig-headed and full of his own importance makes him look very unprofessional in my book.

by Redflag Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:24 pm

Mel wrote:We now see "raving Dave" upsetting "The Bear" Putin with his snide remarks. Arrogant and tactless, Mr dangerous may next be suggesting bombing Russia.
He is a threat to the world and to the British public. Pig-headed and full of his own importance makes him look very unprofessional in my book.

You have nailed his character to a tee, Mel.

by **Ivan** Sat Oct 05, 2013 11:12 am

by oftenwrong Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:55 pm

Mid-term blues! All parties suffer it. Nothing to do with our magnificent policies, just sheer ingratitude of hoi-polloi who don't understand that it's for the greater good. (OUR good, of course - you're not thick are you?)

by Redflag Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:32 pm

oftenwrong wrote:Mid-term blues! All parties suffer it. Nothing to do with our magnificent policies, just sheer ingratitude of hoi-polloi who don't understand that it's for the greater good. (OUR good, of course - you're not thick are you?)

I think the UK public gave athe nasty party a wake up call with the DEMO last week and others that where going on today, with NHS having there 1% pay increase STOPPED I can see more protests and strikes on the horizon OW.

by Mel Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:24 pm

It's about time the public woke up with protests Red. Would the French put up with such oppression?

by Redflag Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:20 pm

I think if 18th century France is anything to go by Mel, NO the French would not have put up with what we here in the UK, and perhaps the solution is the same as what the French did, our own Bastille Day complete with the Guillotine might just do the trick.:yeahthat:

by Dan Fante Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:25 pm

I thought this was a rather good critique, from the Telegraph of all places, of Cameron's speeches:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10351508/Make-no-mistake-this-is-a-sketch.-Cue-applause.html

Make no mistake, this is a sketch. Cue applause
Today I’m going to write a sketch. A sketch in the style of David Cameron’s speech.
Because make no mistake: that sketch will be in the style of David Cameron’s speech.

Listing things. Listing some more things. Hawking truisms. Gesturing emptily. Looking knackered. Phoning it in. Talking in the sort of tone you might use when patiently giving directions to a tourist who looks a bit dim and speaks hardly a word of English.

And yes – lots of sentences beginning “And yes”.

Let’s be absolutely clear. This sketch will contain straw men. Straw men who say: “You shouldn’t do things that are good.” Straw men who say: “You should do things that are bad.”

But to those straw men I say: “No.” I say: “We shouldn’t do things that are bad.” I say: “We should do things that are good.” Because we are the party that believes good things are good – and that bad things are bad.

[Leave gap for lethargic applause.]

Of course, we know what Labour is saying. Labour is saying, “Insert misrepresentation of what Labour is saying here.”

And isn’t that just typical of the Left?

[Stare down lens of TV camera while jabbing finger crossly.]

This sketch will also contain jokes. And make no mistake: some of those jokes will be a bit weird. Especially the one that ends with me saying to Ed Miliband: “You keep your shirt on – and I’ll keep the lights on!” That one will just sound like a very odd chat-up line. There will also be a joke at the expense of Labour’s education spokesman Stephen Twigg where I misread the autocue and mess it up completely. Never mind. I’ll soldier on.

Just like our brave Armed Forces. [Leave gap for standing ovation.]

Despite those silly Lib Dems getting in the way all the time, we’ve achieved a lot of things in government. Here’s a list of them all. Except for gay marriage, that one seems to have slipped my mind for the moment.

The fact is this. We ran out of big shiny policies to announce earlier in the week. So instead, here’s something woolly about dreams. Something woolly about opportunity. Something woolly about our children and our grandchildren. And most important of all: a reminder that I married a woman. [Gaze damply at woman, to applause.]

Last week Ed Miliband gave a speech full of feeble sound bites. Well, two can play that game. See how you like this one. The land of hope is Tory. That sounds a bit like “Land of hope and glory”. No? Come on, you lot are supposed to lap that sort of thing right up. We were really pleased with that one back in the office.

Not to worry. Nearly finished now. Voice getting faster, voice getting louder, lots of repetition, end on the slogan!

Thank you.

[Parade wife round hall, smiling painfully.]

by boatlady Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:41 pm

Captures the style quite perfectly

by Dan Fante Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:44 pm

boatlady wrote:Captures the style quite perfectly

Aye, it's uncanny, isn't it?

by oftenwrong Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:09 pm

.... but no obligatory mention of the mess they inherited from the last Labour government.

by Redflag Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:18 pm

oftenwrong wrote:.... but no obligatory mention of the mess they inherited from the last Labour government.

I would hate to see the mess the Tories leave in 2015 OW, I do not envy the Labour party the job they will have to do to clean up after this shower of TURDS are finished.

by ghost whistler Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:07 am

Isn't it more likely they will not clear up anything and just continue from that point onwards? I can't see them reversing welfare reform. They might repeal the BT (which of course is a good thing), but that's only because it's so hated. I can't see them undoing, for example, the proposed changes the ESA appeals (ie removing them), or paying compensation to the people wrongly sanctioned for workfare.

by Mel Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:21 am

We shall have to wait and see before speculating about what may not be possible with the cost of reversing anything these Tory tyrants have done. The fact is that with a little help from Clegg thay have achieved their goal, the transfer of wealth from bottom, middle to the few at the top.

Having achieved that, the idea now is a scorched earth policy making it very difficult for any alternative government to be able to reverse policies and of course sell offs/privatisation. Almost impossible and the Tories know it.

by ghost whistler Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:35 am

Indeed, and that's what makes Miliband's supine opposition so depressing - he isn't doing anywhere near enough to oppose and muster opposition to this government. He must know that come 2015 it will be difficult once the earth has been salted.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:46 am

I seem to remember reading that the wealth of the richest 1% in the UK has grown substantially in the period since the 2008 crash. The increasing inequality between the richest few and the the rest is not a new trend though. It started under Thatcher and Blair and Brown did sweet FA to halt it.

by Mel Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:36 am

Some of what you have said is true Dan, however, under Blair and Brown the rich got richer yes and so did the poor, which left the divide the same.

by Mel Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:49 am

Hello Ghost,
Even if Miliband were to do enough to satisfy your need for "opposition", would it stop this Tory run awaty train, would the people rise up in massive numbers against Tory policies? No is the answer to that as we British are fickle and do nothing except moan about things and the weather. The French and other countries people do not sit back on their haunches and do nothing.

Note that Miliband is up against Cameron being shown on TV at every possible event. Miliband is not given the exposure he needs. Why do you think that is? To me it's as plain as a pike staff although the anti Labour Tory posters will make out that the BBC and others are not bias.
Miliband is giving Cameron a hard time at PM's Questions, the point is how many people bother to watch?

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:53 am

Mel wrote:Some of what you have said is true Dan, however, under Blair and Brown the rich got richer yes and so did the poor, which left the divide the same.

Mel, the divide increased hugely under Labour too. For what you say to be true it would have to mean that (to use an example) if the richest 1% increased their wealth by (for example) £100,000, then the poorest 25% say would also have to have increased their wealth by the same amount. Whereas the richest increased their wealth by far more than that figure and the poorest by nothing like that amount.

by Mel Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:04 pm

Never the less the poorer did become richer under Blair and Brown.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:13 pm

Mel wrote:Never the less the poorer did become richer under Blair and Brown.

Not the point you were making though. I've no idea if that's true either. You would hope so under a Labour government in any case.

by oftenwrong Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:19 pm

I was once administrator for a large block of flats, with a requirement to hold an Annual General Meeting.

Discussion following production of the Accounts rarely centred upon the really important, expensive things recorded because none of the Residents were familiar with a Balance Sheet or P&L.

They did, however understand Postage and Gardener's wages, so the meeting would spend forty minutes arguing over those.

All too often we throw the baby out with the bathwater by concentrating on detail to the detriment of fundamentals.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:27 pm

oftenwrong wrote:I was once administrator for a large block of flats, with a requirement to hold an Annual General Meeting.

Discussion following production of the Accounts rarely centred upon the really important, expensive things recorded because none of the Residents were familiar with a Balance Sheet or P&L.

They did, however understand Postage and Gardener's wages, so the meeting would spend forty minutes arguing over those.

All too often we throw the baby out with the bathwater by concentrating on detail to the detriment of fundamentals.

The fundamental point being that the increase in inequalities is neither a new phenomenon nor a one unique to the current shower in charge, therefore making it out to be be airbrushes New Labour's equally (at least) complicit role in this trend. Was that light enough on detail? Razz

by bobby Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:46 pm

In the mid eighty's a Friend of mine who at the time was a Bus Driver for London Transport decided to up sticks and move to Devon. The first thing he did was to sell his house, purchase a Caravan to live in whilst looking for a suitable home, then got a Job Driving Buses for the Red Bus Company in North Devon.
The job he ended up with paid £2.17p per hr and was officially only temporary employement untill he had been with them for two years.
Being only Temporary meant that he had no sick pay, no paid holidays, though I believe he could take holiday time unpaid, he had no job security in that the Company could get rid of him without notice or reason, there where no pay enhancements for overtime, unsociable hours, bank holidays or weekend working, each hour he worked he only recieved £2.17p and he wasn't allowed to join a Union. This was happening in Thatcher's Tory Britain. When Labour ousted the Tory Bastards in 1997 one of the first things Tony Blair did was to introduce the Social Chapter, which gave all employees full contractural employment rights, he also introduced the minimum wage to stop companies like Red Bus from exploiting the mass Tory created unemployment.
Under New Labour we enjoyed an unprecidented 10 years of growth and whilst we where growing every one had a larger slice of the cake, and yes the wealthy did take the lions share, but the less well off were actually better off.
People only complain when things are bad and the only people complaining at the time of New Labour were the Tories, I know many people who didn't share any interest in politics till after May 10 2010 when the Tories and their Coalition Partners in Crime where found to be the most dishonest Government we have ever had.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:53 pm

Following on from what you say Bobby, I think the rise of zero hours contracts is nothing short of a disgrace. It not only massages the unemployment figures but also allows companies to take the piss out of their employees. How on earth anyone is supposed to budget properly under those circumstances is beyond me. No wonder payday loans companies are thriving despite the claims about record levels of employment.

by Dan Fante Fri Oct 18, 2013 1:14 pm

On a lighter note:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/greggdd69/14-cardboard-boxes-that-look-like-david-cameron-5v0w

by Mel Fri Oct 18, 2013 1:56 pm

"I think the rise of zero hours contracts is nothing short of a disgrace. It not only massages the unemployment figures but also allows companies to take the piss out of their employees."

At last you say something I can concur with Dan. thumbsup

Unlike your goodself I am not going to be picky on what you have said, just for the sake of wishing to be contrary and contradictory.

by ghost whistler Fri Oct 18, 2013 4:19 pm

Apparently, because they ain't illegal, claimants can be compelled to apply for and accept, if offered, zero hour work. They won't be able to claim benefits/tax credits while thusly employed either. Disgusting.

by oftenwrong Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:56 pm

Change of administration, anyone? Laughing

by Redflag Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:13 pm

oftenwrong wrote:Change of administration, anyone?

Yes OW anytime they are ready to call a general election got my pen at the ready.

by **Ivan** Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:17 pm

Is David Cameron a moron from the outer reaches of the universe? (Part 1) - Page 20 BYFuiNLIEAEV2Q5

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BYFuiNLIEAEV2Q5.jpg

by Bellatori Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:40 pm

bobby wrote:... in 1997 one of the first things Tony Blair did was to introduce the Social Chapter, which gave all employees full contractual employment rights, he also introduced the minimum wage to stop companies like Red Bus from exploiting the mass Tory created unemployment...

I have no doubt that they meant well but it changed not a thing. As with zero hour contracts all that happened was that unscrupulous management changed their approach. This included companies that should have been standard bearers because they were government owned. Here I speak, not from some mate I knew, but from personal experience. From 1996 to 1999 I worked for BNFL as it was then. I was not employed by them but worked for an agency. I was paid for each hour I worked and they could dismiss me at 1 weeks notice. If I was off sick I was not paid. If I took a holiday I was not paid. When my father was terminally ill and I had to have time off to drive from Seascale to Horsham I was not paid. If I took a Bank holiday off I was not paid. Please remember this was a wholly state owned industry and I was in a room with 1 BNFL employee and six contractors, all of the latter working under the same conditions. Even the one weeks notice was a joke because they could simply pull your pass at which point you could not get on to site to work and so they would not pay you. This was still the case 10 years later.

I commend them for the principle but the practice turned out to be shite.

by oftenwrong Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:07 am

" I worked for BNFL as it was then. I was not employed by them but worked for an agency."

Rule Number One: Know your enemy.

by bobby Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:06 pm

Beautiful Tory said:
Here I speak, not from some mate I knew.

As a matter of interest, allow me to correct you as it seems you have now resorted to making things up. The friend I mentioned is still a friend so I still know him, he is now an employee of mine, so I know that what he tells me is the truth, so why are you trying to imply that your personal experience has any more credence than anything he has told me.

by Bellatori Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:11 pm

The still childish and immature bobby says

As a matter of interest, allow me to correct you as it seems you have now resorted to making things up. The friend I mentioned is still a friend so I still know him, he is now an employee of mine, so I know that what he tells me is the truth, so why are you trying to imply that your personal experience has any more credence than anything he has told me.

Funny you should say that. The Tories are very fond of telling us what it is like through the experience of others. You know, unemployment, hardship... those things they have heard about from sending out their relations employed as researchers. Until you experience it yourself it is merely something you recount. Try supporting your family for a month with NO money coming in (no benefits, no nothing) whilst you are 400 miles away being not paid for time off.

Nice to see you still know this employee of yours and that you still condescend to the rest of us on the left. I wonder why your comments made me think of this

by oftenwrong Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:39 pm

The opposing Armies each withdrew to their previously-prepared positions. This was not a retreat.

by Mel Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:40 pm

It's a pity more employers do not take a leaf out of bobby's book. He looks after his staff and they have become his friends and look after him. The country would be more prosperous and the workforce happier in that unlikely case. Production quantity and quality would prevail.
Good on yer bobby. thumbsup

by Mel Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:51 pm

"The still childish and immature booby says"

Now now Bell, that sort of comment is not desirable. Please refrain, as it is not necessary on the thread.

Thank you.

by oftenwrong Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm

Many British managers appear to be terrified of what their staff might do if they were not tightly controlled.

by Mel Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:58 pm

"Many British managers appear to be terrified of what their staff might do if they were not tightly controlled.."
That's because they have perhaps a poor diplomacy activation with their staff ow.

by Mel Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:59 pm

Is Cameron a moron? Please

by Sponsored content