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

Is Cameron a moron? Please

Mel wrote:Is Cameron a moron? Please

More like a OXIMORON Mel in the eyes of the majority of the UK.:yeahthat: 

Meanwhile, at the Palace...

 ( telegraph.com)

" May I call you 'Your Majesty'?"

" Yes, of course, Liz ,old girl..."

In the grand tradition of Cutting Edge; You couldn't make it up!

Downing Street demands apology after Jeremy Paxman calls David Cameron 'complete idiot'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/downing-street-demands-apology-after-jeremy-paxman-calls-david-cameron-complete-idiot-8931226.html

This is purely a warning attack on the BBC to make certain they tow the line in favour of the filthy Tories
along with the right wing press at the next election.

It might be appropriate to ask Grant Shapps or any of his Tory satraps about how much value they place upon the political contribution from Commercial Radio.

The moron strikes again; he now wants some North Korean-style indoctrination of children on the glories of the capitalist system that has done so much for him and his ilk but left 500,000 people in the UK reliant on food banks.
 
David Cameron calls for capitalism lessons in schools to celebrate profits in the classroom
 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-calls-capitalism-lessons-2760763

he PM said he wanted a “fundamental change” in attitudes to money making and called for a culture “that values that typically British, entrepreneurial, buccaneering spirit”
 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-calls-capitalism-lessons-2760763#ixzz2kQz9QLzM
 
 Bing Dictionary
buc·ca·neer
 
1.pirate: a pirate, especially one who preyed on Spanish colonies and shipping in the Caribbean in the 17th century
2.unscrupulous adventurer or businessperson: a ruthless or unscrupulous adventurer, businessperson, or politician
3.act like buccaneer: to be or behave like a buccaneer
 
The buccaneers were pirates who attacked Spanish shipping in the Caribbean Sea during the 17th century. The term buccaneer is now used generally as a synonym for pirate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buccaneer

Will the bastard Cameron never be satisfied, he only has to look to his left and right at PMQ's to know that the requested buccaneers are alive and stitching people up on a daily basis.

If you need to know where your buccaneers are ?, They are under your buccen-hat.

Probably a precursor for his NHS blueprint. "Them that die will be the lucky ones".

"David Cameron calls for capitalism lessons in schools"

Is that wise? It's only general ignorance about the tricks which Capitalists employ to separate the mugs from their money which has so far held back Consumers from bloody revolt.

Whatever advanced level Cameron has attained as a moron, I definitely want to see more posts which use the word 'satraps'.......   

Cameron is just a standard con-man who'd have got on quite well if he'd stayed with market-manipulation. In politics his obvious emptiness and ignorance show. This is so for all the fuhrers: none of them know how we live or what we think.

Penderyn wrote:Cameron is just a standard con-man ...

Firstly can we not use the term con-man here  . Politician is a much broader term that additionally encompasses expense fiddling, demagoguery etc...   Secondly I would challenge the use of the word standard.   He is after all the PM and therefore quite clearly a superior con-man politician .

bobby wrote:If you need to know where your buccaneers are ?, They are under your buccen-hat.

  I haven't heard that one for years. Made me smile.   No question, the oldies are the best

David Cameron, dressed white tie and tails, stands up at a banquet, attended by the rich and power full, and gives a speech about the needed for lasting austerity...

If this isn't an example of stupidity I don't know what is...

His audience are very unlikely to be affected by the austerity he says Britain needs, in fact many of them will have benefited from the low wages and high profits it has brought to so many companies....

David Cameron Says Austerity And 'Leaner State' Should Be 'Permanent'

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/11/12/david-cameron-austerity_n_4258733.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

astradt1 wrote:David Cameron, dressed white tie and tails, stands up at a banquet, attended by the rich and power full, and gives a speech about the needed for lasting austerity... If this isn't an example of stupidity I don't know what is... His audience are very unlikely to be affected by the austerity he says Britain needs, in fact many of them will have benefited from the low wages and high profits it has brought to so many companies....

With all due respect this is not really much of a point. The same is true in this picture.



The person seated on the right used to bang on about prudence ad nauseam.


Oh and lets not forget



If we want to take a balanced view which of these three started a war?  


Of course we will have all forgotten



for which we should all be truly thankful...

Can anyone name for us a politician who was not flawed ?

The key for me is whether the motive of the individual was deliberately to inflict misery...

Bellatori wrote.
I haven't heard that one for years. Made me smile.    No question, the oldies are the best

Perhaps I should spend more time showing how young I am instead of how old

Did Brown or Blair stand and say that we needed more austerity, and when I say we, I mean those of us who do not have a million or so stashed away some where?....

Blair may have taken us to war but who was pushing the issue?



But then again looking at the picture posted of Blair I noticed the US AntiChrist of Chaney. Is that who you meant?

All of us will by now have formed an opinion about the Coalition's imposition of "Austerity" since 2010, though the jury is still out upon whether or not it was necessary.

Everyone will understand that WW2 drained our nation's resources, and the years after 1945 were difficult indeed. In any discussion about Politicians it may be appropriate to compare 21st.C "austerity" with the 20th. C version. Whilst British citizens still carried a Ration Book, the Attlee government felt it appropriate to spend £100million on developing an independent atomic bomb.

The present administration is still concerned to maintain an independent Nuclear deterrent at Faslane, although the cost of that would pay for the entire National Health Service.

I can't quite see the relevance of Blair and Brown on a thread about the undoubted moronic qualities of Cameron.  
 
Once again, Cameron has managed to manipulate events so that Parliament has gone into recess on a Tuesday, thereby avoiding PMQs. Is he so frightened of Ed Miliband, or is it just that he needs more time to think up another bucketful of lies to spout?
 
Osborne's autumn statement has now been put off until Thursday 5 December - so that Cameron can be in China on Wednesday 4 December and miss yet another PMQs. What a gutless creep he is!

Ivan wrote:
"or is it just that he needs more time to think up another bucketful of lies to spout?"

Lets be honest, all he ever does is spout off the same old same old at every PMQ's or any other photo opportunity for that matter,  I'm sure he doesn't need any more time to remember something he has been repeating over and over since his first Wednesday whilst supposedly answering questions from the opposition.

bobby wrote:Ivan wrote:
"or is it just that he needs more time to think up another bucketful of lies to spout?"

Lets be honest, all he ever does is spout off the same old same old at every PMQ's or any other photo opportunity for that matter,  I'm sure he doesn't need any more time to remember something he has been repeating over and over since his first Wednesday whilst supposedly answering questions from the opposition.

To be honest bobby there is no need for PMQs Cameron NEVER answers a question antway he is too busy telling the country about the Labour parties affiliation to the Unions, or how they will spend money getting the public sector up and working for the good of the country.:yeahthat: 

In all honesty I cannot ever remember a PMQ where a question was ever properly answered by any PM. It seems to be a time for everyone to state there own position and make 'humorous' putdowns of the opponent. It has always struck me as a most ridiculous waste of time and energy. All the yahooing that accompanies it makes it seem like the chimpanzees tea party at London zoo.

Bellatori wrote:In all honesty I cannot ever remember a PMQ where a question was ever properly answered by any PM. It seems to be a time for everyone to state there own position and make 'humorous' putdowns of the opponent. It has always struck me as a most ridiculous waste of time and energy. All the yahooing that accompanies it makes it seem like the chimpanzees tea party at London zoo.

Aye, it's hardly a new phenomenon introduced by the current PM, is it?

Ivan wrote:I can't quite see the relevance of Blair and Brown on a thread about the undoubted moronic qualities of Cameron.  
 

Well it could be to give a sense of perspective... sort of look at the big picture hence my comment about politicians in general.

It could also be that by calling Cameron moronic we tend to underestimate him. People call Boris Johnson a buffoon and make exactly the same mistake. Name calling is designed to diminish someone but the actual result may not be what we expect. People underestimated John Major which allowed him to creep in from the undergrowth.

I was thinking about this the other day. I often wonder what Neil Kinnock would have been like as a PM. More to my leaning in politics than TB. We will never know!

oftenwrong wrote:...Whilst British citizens still carried a Ration Book, the Attlee government felt it appropriate to spend £100million on developing an independent atomic bomb...

Don't you think that is just a little unfair. Attlee had just seen the country survive a devastating war and then watched the Soviets roll over Eastern Europe. He and his colleagues must have been certain of a realistic and imminent threat and I feel they were right to do so. A dead or conquered population would not have much else to look forward to. The present circumstances are different. Where is the imminent threat that could require a nuclear response... the French? USA?  

ONE

"I often wonder what Neil Kinnock would have been like as a PM."

Prolix is the polite description, Bellatori, though he was popularly called The Welsh Windbag.

TWO

Where is the imminent threat that could require a nuclear response... the French? USA?

Successive British governments have spent trillions of pounds altogether on maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent. For one purpose only - to maintain our seat at the top table of the UN.

That's all.

I felt that Kinnock's I warn you... speech got to the very heart of all that was wrong with Thatcherism.

bell wrote "The person seated on the right used to bang on about prudence ad nauseam."

 
You refer to Brown rather unkindly and IMO incorrectly.
You have made it very clear in many of your posts that you are NOT in favour of any political party. You have had a go at Cameron, Clegg, and Blair and even Thatcher to some extent, all with reasonable cause.
When it comes to Brown, you tear him to pieces just as the Tory press media did so before the election. Give credit where credit is due if you can bring youself to look at the differece between Brown and this "profit and austerity is good" Cameron philosophy. That's Tory total ideology, greed, power and pander to their own kind at the bitter expense of the majority and especially the poor and the disabled.
How you can lump Brown into any kind of comparison really beats me.
If you wish to really ad nauseam then Cameron is guilty a thousand times over. The real difference is that Cameron lies and lies, keeps no promises and is hell bent along with the sheep Glegg who's wife has now been openly accused and is being sued over "extortionate solicitors fees £ 500 plus per hour.
Cameron and his buddy Duncan Smith have achieved what the Tories set out to do. Create cheap labour, suppress the working man, allow costs of everything to go through the roof, with no protection whatsoever for the public and to create wealth by stealth means, austerity cuts, cheap labour and more which simply transfers wealth from the bottom, now middle to the top.
 
Those that are unable to see all that happening in front of their eyes need to get real.
In this case at the next election is for someone with your unsatisfied  political outlook, is perhaps to think clearly and vote for the devil you knew rather than the real devil you have come to know know at present.
 
Regards,
Mel

Dan Fante wrote:I felt that Kinnock's I warn you... speech got to the very heart of all that was wrong with Thatcherism.

Very effective, but I thought the main object of Kinnock's vituperation in that "I warn you .." speech was Labour's Militant movement. (Degsie in Liverpool sending taxis round to sack council employees, etc.)

This was the Kinnock speech:-
 
"If Margaret Thatcher is re-elected as prime minister on Thursday, I warn you. I warn you that you will have pain – when healing and relief depend upon payment. I warn you that you will have ignorance – when talents are untended and wits are wasted, when learning is a privilege and not a right. I warn you that you will have poverty – when pensions slip and benefits are whittled away by a government that won’t pay in an economy that can't pay. I warn you that you will be cold – when fuel charges are used as a tax system that the rich don't notice and the poor can't afford.

I warn you that you must not expect work – when many cannot spend, more will not be able to earn. When they don't earn, they don't spend. When they don't spend, work dies. I warn you not to go into the streets alone after dark or into the streets in large crowds of protest in the light. I warn you that you will be quiet – when the curfew of fear and the gibbet of unemployment make you obedient. I warn you that you will have defence of a sort – with a risk and at a price that passes all understanding. I warn you that you will be home-bound – when fares and transport bills kill leisure and lock you up. I warn you that you will borrow less – when credit, loans, mortgages and easy payments are refused to people on your melting income.

If Margaret Thatcher wins on Thursday, I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. I warn you not to get old."
 
Getting back on topic, I think Jeremy Paxman was quite right to call Cameron "a complete moron" for proposing that we "celebrate" the outbreak of the First World War.  
 
It was also somewhat moronic of Cameron to meet with Obama and talk publicly of "Britain and America standing side by side against the Nazis in 1940", especially as the USA didn't join in the Second World War until December 1941.
  
 
Dennis Skinner once quipped that Osborne "had been educated beyond his intelligence". That remark would apply equally well to Cameron.

Ivan wrote:Dennis Skinner once quipped that Osborne "had been educated beyond his intelligence". That remark would apply equally well to Cameron.

 
 
Ivan I do not understand how can yu educate someone that does not have a Brain in there head, I have always thought of him as the CHANCER OF EXCHEQUER :yeahthat:

"Dennis Skinner once quipped that Osborne "had been educated beyond his intelligence". That remark would apply equally well to Cameron."

Plebs just don't seem to understand that as long as Mumy and Daddy can afford to have you educated privately, you have been born to rule.

oftenwrong wrote:Prolix is the polite description, Bellatori, though he was popularly called The Welsh Windbag.

It was a very unkind epithet and not really deserved. He would have been a better PM that what we actually ended up with. Sometime I will write a post about John Major. My father new him well as they both worked for Standard Chartered. I rather liked him (Neil) and he was certainly closer to what I would describe as 'true' Labour, that is to say Attlee and his progenitors than those that followed on after.

Mel wrote:...You refer to Brown rather unkindly and IMO incorrectly...

We are clearly going to disagree here. Fair enough. I felt and still do that he was not up to the job as PM and he was not that good a chancellor either given the way he ran the current account deficit. The fact that when I looked at the ratings of PMs the economists/historians etc only thought that Eden and Hume were worse, IMHO says it all.

You are right when you say I cannot see a party I can associate with. I used to vote Liberal when they were to the left of Labour now it seems to me that we are in the same boat as the USA. They have a right of center party, the Democrats , and an extreme right party, the Republicans. How are we different? I said somewhere else that Attlee and his predecessors would have shown Ed Miliband the door and told him to get a job and really find out what it was like to be working class.

There you have it, the self-confessed undecided voter.
What could be more honest? The answer may be found in the biblical serpent.

Bellatori wrote:I said somewhere else that Attlee and his predecessors would have shown Ed Miliband the door and told him to get a job and really find out what it was like to be working class.

 
But I doubt bellatori that Attlee could have said that about Ed Miliband's parents they were true socialists, and will say that some of that must have rubbed off on both Ed & David so maybe there is a lot more to Ed than he is willing to show at the moment.  Reason the Daily Fail printing the lies about Ed's father hating the UK.:yeahthat:

Bellatori revealing the outrageous truth that he decides who to vote for based on current policy rather than simply pledging blind allegiance