FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Another Dianne Abbot balls up
Another Dianne Abbot balls up
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick." Possibly as it is cruel to mock the retarded members of society | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick." I feel she brings it upon herself though. | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick." that may be true but its not like she helps matters either.you only have to listen to some of the stuff she comes out with | |||
Classic. | |||
| |||
"I read how Johnson was asked about the minimum wage and did not know what it was set at. Neither Johnson not Hunt have any clue about real life in Britain. Both born with silver spoons, both raised to believe they were born to govern. Neither knows the price of a pint of milk. " I've no idea what the minimum wage is but I know what 2ltrs of milk costs | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick." Yes, you are possibly right but lets also remember this woman is the shadow home secretary. If and when Labour are elected she will be a senior official as being in charge of one of the Great Offices of State within Her Majesty's Government and Head of the Home Office. It is effectively the 3rd most important State position behind the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer. As Secretary of State for the Home Office the Home Secretary is responsible for the internal affairs of England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the United Kingdom. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales and matters of national security, as the Security Service (MI5) is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of? | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick. Yes, you are possibly right but lets also remember this woman is the shadow home secretary. If and when Labour are elected she will be a senior official as being in charge of one of the Great Offices of State within Her Majesty's Government and Head of the Home Office. It is effectively the 3rd most important State position behind the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer. As Secretary of State for the Home Office the Home Secretary is responsible for the internal affairs of England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the United Kingdom. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales and matters of national security, as the Security Service (MI5) is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of?" The thought of her holding that office is truly horrifying  | |||
| |||
| |||
"So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of?" "Constantly"? She's made a few mistakes, but so have an awful lot of politicians. She gets an undue amount of attention and criticism because she's seen as an easy target and people like to put her down. For one example, the Mail once ran a story about her making a 'blunder'. What was it? She said 'Labour' in an interview when she meant 'Conservative'. Truly a shocking incident with far reaching consequences. Do other politicians have 'journalists' going through their interviews picking for tiny, insignificant mistakes like that? | |||
| |||
"I have respect for her" She's takes all that abuse like water off a ducks back.A Hard woman that one.Give me Diane over all those filthy rich soft private school boys in politics who never did a hard days work ,who look down on the working class as plebs and oiks they wouldn't piss on. She is however shit at maths and awful at remembering stats when interviewed .,but if that's what's required then "rain man" for PM... | |||
| |||
"I have respect for her She's takes all that abuse like water off a ducks back.A Hard woman that one.Give me Diane over all those filthy rich soft private school boys in politics who never did a hard days work ,who look down on the working class as plebs and oiks they wouldn't piss on. She is however shit at maths and awful at remembering stats when interviewed .,but if that's what's required then "rain man" for PM..." You missed out her astounding racism and the fact that she sends her children to the filthy rich soft private schools. But it's OK when she does it yeah? 
She's a great figure of fun though and I hope she stays in politics for a long time. It's dunderheads like her that will ensure the commie nazi Labour party stay out of government | |||
"I read how Johnson was asked about the minimum wage and did not know what it was set at. Neither Johnson not Hunt have any clue about real life in Britain. Both born with silver spoons, both raised to believe they were born to govern. Neither knows the price of a pint of milk. " Why should a PM n o that sort of thing,it is like asking them of a large company to know the pay of the workers.A PM with that sort of knowledge is to small minded to see the big picture and run a country,IE Corbyn. | |||
| |||
| |||
"So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of? "Constantly"? She's made a few mistakes, but so have an awful lot of politicians. She gets an undue amount of attention and criticism because she's seen as an easy target and people like to put her down. For one example, the Mail once ran a story about her making a 'blunder'. What was it? She said 'Labour' in an interview when she meant 'Conservative'. Truly a shocking incident with far reaching consequences. Do other politicians have 'journalists' going through their interviews picking for tiny, insignificant mistakes like that? " What about her thinking it would cost £300k to recruit 10,000 police officers over 4 years ? | |||
"I read how Johnson was asked about the minimum wage and did not know what it was set at. Neither Johnson not Hunt have any clue about real life in Britain. Both born with silver spoons, both raised to believe they were born to govern. Neither knows the price of a pint of milk. Why should a PM n o that sort of thing,it is like asking them of a large company to know the pay of the workers.A PM with that sort of knowledge is to small minded to see the big picture and run a country,IE Corbyn." I bet the CEO of most FTSE 100 companies have a damned good idea of the salary structure of the companies they run. Arguing that having a grasp of detail is small minded is absolute twaddle. | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick. Yes, you are possibly right but lets also remember this woman is the shadow home secretary. If and when Labour are elected she will be a senior official as being in charge of one of the Great Offices of State within Her Majesty's Government and Head of the Home Office. It is effectively the 3rd most important State position behind the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer. As Secretary of State for the Home Office the Home Secretary is responsible for the internal affairs of England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the United Kingdom. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales and matters of national security, as the Security Service (MI5) is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of?" God help us all if labour get elected them.. 
She’s blocked me on Twitter lol doesn’t like constructive criticism..
| |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick. Yes, you are possibly right but lets also remember this woman is the shadow home secretary. If and when Labour are elected she will be a senior official as being in charge of one of the Great Offices of State within Her Majesty's Government and Head of the Home Office. It is effectively the 3rd most important State position behind the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer. As Secretary of State for the Home Office the Home Secretary is responsible for the internal affairs of England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the United Kingdom. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales and matters of national security, as the Security Service (MI5) is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of? God help us all if labour get elected them..
She’s blocked me on Twitter lol doesn’t like constructive criticism..
"She probably only blocked you because of brain overload. Perhaps her other 2 followers were asking difficult questions like 'what should I use to comb my hair?' and 'how's the weather in your constituency Di?'.... If your question was more complicated than that then she had every right to block you.... Nothing to do with silencing someone with a differing opinion... | |||
"Have you seen the video going viral. Dianne Abbbot calls up an interviewer for a slip up and says it's all about the details. And withing seconds shows she has no idea of the details outside of the small area she's been primed on? Probably not... Coz it wasnt her but Johnson... But also, I haven't seen the world go mad about it either... " Her and Boris are two sides to the same coin. Although Boris is genuinely stupid - she does does a REALLY good impression of a stupid person ..... all the time. I've often said the best use for the pair of them would be to stick them both in a flatshare and film an "Odd Couple" style sitcom out of their bumbling shennanigans. With Liam Fox as their swivel eyed conspiracy theorist madasasfuckingbrush neighbour. and hilarity ensues | |||
| |||
| |||
" people are scared of confident black women." I wonder why race / creed / colour has to be brought into it? | |||
"I am not keen on her approach however, she comes under attack all the time. I admire her tenasity, the woman has more courage than I and many women have. There are many more stupid men in politics than her, people are scared of confident black women." Couldn't care less that she's black, but she's definitely scary, simply because of the political position she is in. As for being confident, I'm not so sure its confidence so much or that she's too stupid to realise just how far out of her intellectual depth she actually is. | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick." If you objectively look at Abbot's career and achievements in politics, compared to other women in parliament, at this stage you simply have to consider this ongoing obsession specifically with her as racist. For me it's the Sherlock Holmes approach, in the end I exhausted all of the other options, and still it flows. It's just animal, sexist (,possibly subconscious but who cares) racism. When you look at a lot of these guys and their macho politics on this site, you find that some of them claim to be happily married too (sshhhh! they say). Tossers. (and mods I say that without pointing to anyone in particular). | |||
| |||
"Actually, can anyone specifically say what they DON'T like about her? Apart from that the world will end etc.. For a start, when Abbott made the police-related figure mistake on LBC she actually wasn't well (it was diagnosed later as onset diabetes - and she eventually took time off). Don't people remember? May called a snap General election, and Labour were sent into a frenzy. As the opposition party, they had to do all the work, while May felt she could just sit back and (erm..) lose most of her mandate. Badly prepped on LBC, Abbott fell into a known type of dyslexia of large number recall, which can happen to people who deal with both really large and small numbers when under pressure. It's why politicians in particular so often have notes. Abbott's problem was that she even tried to answer the question accurately, then was dismissive rather than trying to excuse getting it wrong (which is her getonwithit personality- and I personally can live with it). She was on a horribly right-wing radio show which milked it for all its worth. If Corbyn's early Labour had a better spin machine, Abbott and others would have stuck to more productive media outlets imo - yet look how close Labour came regardless of their many issues, including of time). The idea that an individual (or-otherwise) politician somehow creates policy on radio air is ludicrous. "Terrifying" indeed! As I've said above, I find people obsessed with Abbott as fundamentally racist. She has done nothing specific to warrant this level of vitriol. Look at the mistakes ALL other politicians constantly, constantly, constantly make. It's like they are born it. But some people will instantly forgive those who they support, and yet really hate some of those who they don't." I’m diabetic, what makes you think that “onset diabetes” would cause someone to make the statements she made. Are you suggesting that people with “onset diabetes” can’t be held responsible for the statements or decisions they make ? Maybe diabetes effects politicians differently. | |||
"I’m diabetic, what makes you think that “onset diabetes” would cause someone to make the statements she made. Are you suggesting that people with “onset diabetes” can’t be held responsible for the statements or decisions they make ? Maybe diabetes effects politicians differently. " Wow, what a lot of associations! All I am saying is that she was both ill and undiagnosed, so (apart from plodding on as she had to do) she had none of the treatment (and/or diet changes etc) that you will both be having now. Perhaps, to empathise a little, you can think back to when you first felt its symptoms and was untreated? So apart from the other things I've mentioned, all I am saying is that she wasn't - actually - very well. | |||
"I’m diabetic, what makes you think that “onset diabetes” would cause someone to make the statements she made. Are you suggesting that people with “onset diabetes” can’t be held responsible for the statements or decisions they make ? Maybe diabetes effects politicians differently. Wow, what a lot of associations! All I am saying is that she was both ill and undiagnosed, so (apart from plodding on as she had to do) she had none of the treatment (and/or diet changes etc) that you will both be having now. Perhaps, to empathise a little, you can think back to when you first felt its symptoms and was untreated? So apart from the other things I've mentioned, all I am saying is that she wasn't - actually - very well." Ok I understand that you’re trying to empathise with her due to her condition, I’m giving my opinion as someone who deals with type2 diabetes. I never considered myself “ not very well” after being diagnosed. I’ve got my own business, for me to succeed I need to know what I’m talking about. I’m just trying to explain that diabetes never effected my judgements business wise. If As I said maybe diabetes effects people in different ways | |||
| |||
"I’m diabetic, what makes you think that “onset diabetes” would cause someone to make the statements she made. Are you suggesting that people with “onset diabetes” can’t be held responsible for the statements or decisions they make ? Maybe diabetes effects politicians differently. Wow, what a lot of associations! All I am saying is that she was both ill and undiagnosed, so (apart from plodding on as she had to do) she had none of the treatment (and/or diet changes etc) that you will both be having now. Perhaps, to empathise a little, you can think back to when you first felt its symptoms and was untreated? So apart from the other things I've mentioned, all I am saying is that she wasn't - actually - very well. Ok I understand that you’re trying to empathise with her due to her condition, I’m giving my opinion as someone who deals with type2 diabetes. I never considered myself “ not very well” after being diagnosed. I’ve got my own business, for me to succeed I need to know what I’m talking about. I’m just trying to explain that diabetes never effected my judgements business wise. If As I said maybe diabetes effects people in different ways " But you can't compare, as you know that you have it! The LBS show happened before Abbott actually knew what was making her so ill, ie before she was diagnosed and could take action and have treatment on it. Diabetes will eventually kill you if left untreated. She simply didn't know she had it at the time. Yes you are right - when you know you have it, act on it and get treatment, you can live a perfectly normal life - as you yourself do. But when you don't know you have it yet - that is when most people are extremely ill with it. | |||
"I’m diabetic, what makes you think that “onset diabetes” would cause someone to make the statements she made. Are you suggesting that people with “onset diabetes” can’t be held responsible for the statements or decisions they make ? Maybe diabetes effects politicians differently. Wow, what a lot of associations! All I am saying is that she was both ill and undiagnosed, so (apart from plodding on as she had to do) she had none of the treatment (and/or diet changes etc) that you will both be having now. Perhaps, to empathise a little, you can think back to when you first felt its symptoms and was untreated? So apart from the other things I've mentioned, all I am saying is that she wasn't - actually - very well. Ok I understand that you’re trying to empathise with her due to her condition, I’m giving my opinion as someone who deals with type2 diabetes. I never considered myself “ not very well” after being diagnosed. I’ve got my own business, for me to succeed I need to know what I’m talking about. I’m just trying to explain that diabetes never effected my judgements business wise. If As I said maybe diabetes effects people in different ways But you can't compare, as you know that you have it! The LBS show happened before Abbott actually knew what was making her so ill, ie before she was diagnosed and could take action and have treatment on it. Diabetes will eventually kill you if left untreated. She simply didn't know she had it at the time. Yes you are right - when you know you have it, act on it and get treatment, you can live a perfectly normal life - as you yourself do. But when you don't know you have it yet - that is when most people are extremely ill with it." Of course I can compare, there was a time when I didn’t know I was diabetic. I don’t use my condition as an excuse for not doing my job properly. I find it offensive that she uses her condition as an excuse. Symptoms of type 2 diabetes include: * peeing more than usual, particularly at night * feeling thirsty all the time * feeling very tired * losing weight without trying to * itching around your penis or vagina, or repeatedly getting thrush * cuts or wounds taking longer to heal * blurred vision | |||
"Of course I can compare, there was a time when I didn’t know I was diabetic. I don’t use my condition as an excuse for not doing my job properly. I find it offensive that she uses her condition as an excuse. Symptoms of type 2 diabetes include: * peeing more than usual, particularly at night * feeling thirsty all the time * feeling very tired * losing weight without trying to * itching around your penis or vagina, or repeatedly getting thrush * cuts or wounds taking longer to heal * blurred vision " But she doesn't use it as an excuse!!! Then, pre-diagnosed, or now!!! She just got on with it. That was part of her problem!!! I used her illness as an excuse for her! Not her! Me. Abbott's illness was one of a number of the valid excuses she had, in my opinion. People just seem to have a problem with the woman, and seem to have a need to take offense at her. But what exactly has she done wrong??? It upsets me tremendously, it really does. My goodness I'm upset right now. Give her a little love mate. She's one's of the relatively few politicians who will genuinely care about you, I tell you. | |||
"Of course I can compare, there was a time when I didn’t know I was diabetic. I don’t use my condition as an excuse for not doing my job properly. I find it offensive that she uses her condition as an excuse. Symptoms of type 2 diabetes include: * peeing more than usual, particularly at night * feeling thirsty all the time * feeling very tired * losing weight without trying to * itching around your penis or vagina, or repeatedly getting thrush * cuts or wounds taking longer to heal * blurred vision But she doesn't use it as an excuse!!! Then, pre-diagnosed, or now!!! She just got on with it. That was part of her problem!!! I used her illness as an excuse for her! Not her! Me. Abbott's illness was one of a number of the valid excuses she had, in my opinion. People just seem to have a problem with the woman, and seem to have a need to take offense at her. But what exactly has she done wrong??? It upsets me tremendously, it really does. My goodness I'm upset right now. Give her a little love mate. She's one's of the relatively few politicians who will genuinely care about you, I tell you." the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol " She has always done that lol | |||
"I read how Johnson was asked about the minimum wage and did not know what it was set at. Neither Johnson not Hunt have any clue about real life in Britain. Both born with silver spoons, both raised to believe they were born to govern. Neither knows the price of a pint of milk. Why should a PM n o that sort of thing,it is like asking them of a large company to know the pay of the workers.A PM with that sort of knowledge is to small minded to see the big picture and run a country,IE Corbyn." Thatcher knew the cost of a pint of milk. Why shouldn't a PM know what the man on the street know? | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol" she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes " I think she zens out - really. At least you'll get an honest answer when she wakes. | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes I think she zens out - really. At least you'll get an honest answer when she wakes." An honest answer? Based on her police interview and another one (involving votes irrc) she makes it up. In the latter interview I think she even changed her own numbers within a couple of minutes. | |||
| |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes I think she zens out - really. At least you'll get an honest answer when she wakes." didnt she say she would respect the will of the ppl after the referendum but now wants another vote we’re the honesty in that | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes I think she zens out - really. At least you'll get an honest answer when she wakes. An honest answer? Based on her police interview and another one (involving votes irrc) she makes it up. In the latter interview I think she even changed her own numbers within a couple of minutes. " Well done basing your accusation of continual dishonesty on an example from a few years ago - nice! At the time of that 'police interview', Labour were suddenly mobilised to a snap election, and she actually wasn't well. Of course we've all heard the 'makes it up' line before, as so many politicians do lie to us (and some like Boris will go off into fantasy land for sure). But what does 'makes it up' mean anyway? And what does it mean for Abbott? That she makes *everything* up? That she has never known anything? That she thinks people actually won't notice if she goes around making things up? What do you think she does all day? Make things up instead of actually dealing with factual matters? Why would you make something up when you can much more easily deal with a fact? What is the point in that? It cracks me up. Abbott has had years of daily politics since the 'police' example, but you'd think she's been on holiday the whole time between the way some poeple go on. She was almost physically branded at that time, and that's what makes me so uncomfortable. | |||
"didnt she say she would respect the will of the ppl after the referendum but now wants another vote we’re the honesty in that " I voted Leave too (and still will), but it's been a nightmare. I've changed my mind on needing another referendum now (like Abbott and so many others). I used to call it done and dusted, but I've felt for a while that it's become guaranteed and the only way out for them now, and I think Leave can win it again too. If Leave win again, it's the only perfect result in fact. Yes, it will seem like a stitch-up if Remain win, but there is no easy solution to what was a really badly-run ref in the first place. It was only run the way it was because Cameron thought it couldn't be lost. So are you saying that I'm dishonest too? This is the thing. Haven't I just changed my mind by adapting to shitty circumstances? It not great having another, but we are going to have to as the political fractions will literally never stop arguing and stepping over each other unless the people direct them again. Not to say they can't balls it up again, but it will happen. Only a general election can stop it now, but it will come first. And Boris will be relieved whatever the result - it will take the responsibility entirely off him and back onto us. | |||
"the only thing iv got against the woman is the 30 second long blinks on question time boils my fucking piss lol She has always done that lol she tends to do it while trying to think of an answer to a question I normally make a brew and get back just as she opens her eyes I think she zens out - really. At least you'll get an honest answer when she wakes. An honest answer? Based on her police interview and another one (involving votes irrc) she makes it up. In the latter interview I think she even changed her own numbers within a couple of minutes. Well done basing your accusation of continual dishonesty on an example from a few years ago - nice! At the time of that 'police interview', Labour were suddenly mobilised to a snap election, and she actually wasn't well. Of course we've all heard the 'makes it up' line before, as so many politicians do lie to us (and some like Boris will go off into fantasy land for sure). But what does 'makes it up' mean anyway? And what does it mean for Abbott? That she makes *everything* up? That she has never known anything? That she thinks people actually won't notice if she goes around making things up? What do you think she does all day? Make things up instead of actually dealing with factual matters? Why would you make something up when you can much more easily deal with a fact? What is the point in that? It cracks me up. Abbott has had years of daily politics since the 'police' example, but you'd think she's been on holiday the whole time between the way some poeple go on. She was almost physically branded at that time, and that's what makes me so uncomfortable." I know many MPs do this. And that she gets branded more than most. It's why I started this post to show the hypocrisy of it. I'm in no way saying the subsequent treatment was right. However the net losses interview (needed to check) is what makes me uncomfortable. In a space of a few seconds she went from saying net losses of about 50 to saying it was 100 last time I looked. And now having googled there was also the Harris report she said she had read but couldn't name any of the 127 recommendations. Id forgotten about that. Maybe this all happened because of illness (according to wiki she was diagnosed as diabetic two years before all this but could have been something else or a case of miss managing it). Maybe she's so afraid of being castigated she chooses to try and blag rather than admit to being ill and not remembering details. It did all happen in a short space of time. But it comes across as dishonest. At least bojo when cornered said he hadn't read paragraph d... Even if he did then continue to say c was all that mattered (letters may be wrong). And I shudder writing that as I've defended his ineptness somehow. | |||
| |||
"I know many MPs do this. And that she gets branded more than most. It's why I started this post to show the hypocrisy of it. I'm in no way saying the subsequent treatment was right. However the net losses interview (needed to check) is what makes me uncomfortable. In a space of a few seconds she went from saying net losses of about 50 to saying it was 100 last time I looked. And now having googled there was also the Harris report she said she had read but couldn't name any of the 127 recommendations. Id forgotten about that. Maybe this all happened because of illness (according to wiki she was diagnosed as diabetic two years before all this but could have been something else or a case of miss managing it). Maybe she's so afraid of being castigated she chooses to try and blag rather than admit to being ill and not remembering details. It did all happen in a short space of time. But it comes across as dishonest. At least bojo when cornered said he hadn't read paragraph d... Even if he did then continue to say c was all that mattered (letters may be wrong). And I shudder writing that as I've defended his ineptness somehow. " --I have to say I found this thread title a little irresponsible, because you aught to know that people scarcely read anything properly or completely on the internet. And in most cases people just read the thread title of course - which is essentially a huge false slur against Abbott. But leaving that aside, I always thought the revelation of Type 2 was also the diagnosis - thanks for correcting me there. According to WP (I'm not a huge fan, though I do wish now I looked) "it became known that Abbott had been diagnosed as suffering from type 2 diabetes in 2015.[50][51] "During the election campaign, everything went crazy – and the diabetes was out of control, the blood sugar was out of control", she told The Guardian. Dealing with six or seven interviews in a row became problematic because she was not eating enough food which forced a break upon her. The condition is back under control.[50] Abbott returned to the role of Shadow Home Secretary on 18 June.[52]" RE your Boris example, Boris is much better at dealing with that kind of thing than Abbott is - of course he is. He's a master of bluster. He's an enormous paper shuffler and hair fluffer - everyone knows that. I've always thought that Abbott is far too unapologetic about everything. She's too much of a 'get on with it' person. But (as I said before) people have to consider what she does in between these few events which are years apart. And then look at all the other mishaps and mistakes that politicians constantly, constantly make. For some reason, Abbott has really been branded more than any other. That was always my point. It makes me tremendously uncomfortable. | |||
| |||
" IMO she is continually targeted because she is a black women. However that doesnt mean she is not culpable to some extent. In the same way her illness does not let her off for the bare faced lying. IMO she upped the 50 to 100 to save face. IMO she didn't read the Harris report. But none of that means the abuse she gets is justified. " I have to agree, whether it's partly subconscious or not, I can only explain the extent of it through racism. Even more than sexism I think, as too many other women in politics fuck up in their own ways. Most politicians get away with absolute murder because they are already on to their next cock-up, and a half-complicit media are forever catching them up. But somehow Abbott, hardly a huge culprit, has been held and branded along the way. It's just not nice at all. | |||
| |||
"Why is it that if you have an issue with somebody or someone who is black, asian, mixed race or simply not seen as being 'white' because you believe they are a proven liar an idiot or just a general asshole it is immediately assumed its a racist thing or racism of some description? And if its a woman then sexist or sexism as well. I think exactly the same things about Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson and Boris Johnson as I do of Diane Abbott. Am I going to be accused of sexism or racism for thinking or saying the same things about them? I have no doubt that Diane Abbott has been subjected to some vile racist and sexist abuse and it is totally wrong to subject anyone to that kind of behaviour but I object to being labelled as racist or sexist for saying I think somebody or someone is a liar, idiot or asshole simply because thats my opinion of them. In my world view, race, colour, creed and gender are all totally irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned there are only 2 kinds of people in this world. Assholes and Not Assholes and if I truly believe someone is an asshole then I reserve the right to call them that regardless of whatever other irrelevance they happen to be and not be called a racist or sexist or any other ist for doing so!" Straight up - do you think I am an asshole? Really - I mean it. You say it's either one or the other. I think you've taken the racist/sexist thing personally needlessly (which is a cliche in itself) - you've fallen for the general "why is it always?" cliche too. What do you know about me though? Did you know that I dislike positive discrimination, hate extreme feminism and - I like to throw this in - voted Leave too? I'm not your cliche, I simply see what I see. Then you kind-of contradict yourself by saying that you know that Abbott has no-doubt suffered lots of racial abuse (and she has, hugely, as you know). But this is my opinion, not the world's. As far as I can see (and I've given this a LOT of thought), the sheer level of vitriol towards Abbott is - as a whole - part of an ongoing animalistic, mob-culture, ganging-up form of racial abuse, and I object that my opinion should be seen as fitting into the "PC brigade" cliche. If you are not part of it, fine. Say so. It's not everyone. It's a hell of a lot though, and embarrassing as hell too. If people have something 'new to chew' on her then great, I'll discuss it. She's a politician, it will happen. But this goes back several years now. How about looking at what other politicians have done and said in between? So MUCH is forgiven and forgotten with them. From left-leaning firebrand women like Jo Phillips (who will shovel it back unlike Abbott) to arch-Tory Etonians like Boris himself. It's Abbott who gets it though, always. I just wish she said more in return. So those "why is it always.." people? How about showing more respect to people like me by NOT taking received offense over black/women concerns for a change? I usually take some time to relate my opinion, but it takes two seconds to piss on it with the 'PC brigade!' cliche. 2 seconds. But I am not your typical PC person. Thank you. | |||
"Why is it that if you have an issue with somebody or someone who is black, asian, mixed race or simply not seen as being 'white' because you believe they are a proven liar an idiot or just a general asshole it is immediately assumed its a racist thing or racism of some description? And if its a woman then sexist or sexism as well. I think exactly the same things about Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson and Boris Johnson as I do of Diane Abbott. Am I going to be accused of sexism or racism for thinking or saying the same things about them? I have no doubt that Diane Abbott has been subjected to some vile racist and sexist abuse and it is totally wrong to subject anyone to that kind of behaviour but I object to being labelled as racist or sexist for saying I think somebody or someone is a liar, idiot or asshole simply because thats my opinion of them. In my world view, race, colour, creed and gender are all totally irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned there are only 2 kinds of people in this world. Assholes and Not Assholes and if I truly believe someone is an asshole then I reserve the right to call them that regardless of whatever other irrelevance they happen to be and not be called a racist or sexist or any other ist for doing so!" You may be an equal opportunity hater. But look at the vitriol in this thread. How many other politicians get it? After all this thread started as saying Boris didn't get the same level of attack for showing equally dishonest and negligent traits. Does she deserve stick.imo yes. Would I be worried if she had a top job. Atm yes. Does she deserve the level of abuse and Targetting? Imo no. How many other MP's would be *deserving* of the mojito story... | |||
"Why is it that if you have an issue with somebody or someone who is black, asian, mixed race or simply not seen as being 'white' because you believe they are a proven liar an idiot or just a general asshole it is immediately assumed its a racist thing or racism of some description? And if its a woman then sexist or sexism as well. I think exactly the same things about Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson and Boris Johnson as I do of Diane Abbott. Am I going to be accused of sexism or racism for thinking or saying the same things about them? I have no doubt that Diane Abbott has been subjected to some vile racist and sexist abuse and it is totally wrong to subject anyone to that kind of behaviour but I object to being labelled as racist or sexist for saying I think somebody or someone is a liar, idiot or asshole simply because thats my opinion of them. In my world view, race, colour, creed and gender are all totally irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned there are only 2 kinds of people in this world. Assholes and Not Assholes and if I truly believe someone is an asshole then I reserve the right to call them that regardless of whatever other irrelevance they happen to be and not be called a racist or sexist or any other ist for doing so! Straight up - do you think I am an asshole? Really - I mean it. You say it's either one or the other. I think you've taken the racist/sexist thing personally needlessly (which is a cliche in itself) - you've fallen for the general "why is it always?" cliche too. What do you know about me though? Did you know that I dislike positive discrimination, hate extreme feminism and - I like to throw this in - voted Leave too? I'm not your cliche, I simply see what I see. Then you kind-of contradict yourself by saying that you know that Abbott has no-doubt suffered lots of racial abuse (and she has, hugely, as you know). But this is my opinion, not the world's. As far as I can see (and I've given this a LOT of thought), the sheer level of vitriol towards Abbott is - as a whole - part of an ongoing animalistic, mob-culture, ganging-up form of racial abuse, and I object that my opinion should be seen as fitting into the "PC brigade" cliche. If you are not part of it, fine. Say so. It's not everyone. It's a hell of a lot though, and embarrassing as hell too. If people have something 'new to chew' on her then great, I'll discuss it. She's a politician, it will happen. But this goes back several years now. How about looking at what other politicians have done and said in between? So MUCH is forgiven and forgotten with them. From left-leaning firebrand women like Jo Phillips (who will shovel it back unlike Abbott) to arch-Tory Etonians like Boris himself. It's Abbott who gets it though, always. I just wish she said more in return. So those "why is it always.." people? How about showing more respect to people like me by NOT taking received offense over black/women concerns for a change? I usually take some time to relate my opinion, but it takes two seconds to piss on it with the 'PC brigade!' cliche. 2 seconds. But I am not your typical PC person. Thank you." I dont recall saying I thought you were an asshole...you may be you may not be I dont know you to say either way...I simply said as far as im concerned people either are or aren't assholes and nothing else either creed colour race or gender have any relevance. Obviously I cant say which people are in which category if I know nothing about them. As for contradicting myself I dont think I did...I said I reserve the right to believe Diane Abbot, Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson and Boris Johnson are all liars idiots and therefore in my opinion assholes regardless of their race creed colour or gender. How is then saying that I believe Diane Abbott has been subjected to vile racist and sexual abuse and that I dont think anbody is deserving of or should be subject to that contradicting myself? As for taking received offence I'm not sure how saying that I object to being called either sexist, racist or both simply because I think someone who happens to be either female or non white is in my opinion an asshole is taking any sort of offence? I'm honest enough to admit that even though I'm mixed race (Eurasion) simply because of my age I have probably been at some points both sexist and racist but as with most decent people I have tried and continue to try to make sure I dont ever repeat those mistakes. I have no objection on being 'called out' on something I am guilty of I simply dont like being accused of something I'm not guilty of merely because of the race colour creed or gender of the person I call an asshole. | |||
"Why is it that if you have an issue with somebody or someone who is black, asian, mixed race or simply not seen as being 'white' because you believe they are a proven liar an idiot or just a general asshole it is immediately assumed its a racist thing or racism of some description? And if its a woman then sexist or sexism as well. I think exactly the same things about Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson and Boris Johnson as I do of Diane Abbott. Am I going to be accused of sexism or racism for thinking or saying the same things about them? I have no doubt that Diane Abbott has been subjected to some vile racist and sexist abuse and it is totally wrong to subject anyone to that kind of behaviour but I object to being labelled as racist or sexist for saying I think somebody or someone is a liar, idiot or asshole simply because thats my opinion of them. In my world view, race, colour, creed and gender are all totally irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned there are only 2 kinds of people in this world. Assholes and Not Assholes and if I truly believe someone is an asshole then I reserve the right to call them that regardless of whatever other irrelevance they happen to be and not be called a racist or sexist or any other ist for doing so! You may be an equal opportunity hater. But look at the vitriol in this thread. How many other politicians get it? After all this thread started as saying Boris didn't get the same level of attack for showing equally dishonest and negligent traits. Does she deserve stick.imo yes. Would I be worried if she had a top job. Atm yes. Does she deserve the level of abuse and Targetting? Imo no. How many other MP's would be *deserving* of the mojito story... " I believe that as I previously stated that Boris Johnson, together with Jeremy Corbyn, Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May, Jo Swinson are also in my opinion assholes I have covered this. I cant say about what other people say or dont say I can only say what I think. Personally I think they are all equally deserving of the stick you mention but definitely not the abuse. | |||
| |||
"What exactly has dianne done this week to put her foot in it??? Anything??? I think we should have a thread like this every month. While dianne is being abused no doubt someone else is having a day off from the racist bullshit... "Nada. It was Boris. But that was ignored... To get on with Abbott bating. | |||
"I have no objection on being 'called out' on something I am guilty of I simply dont like being accused of something I'm not guilty of merely because of the race colour creed or gender of the person I call an asshole. " I've given enough away about myself I think.. so I was just asking you straight.. we know that you think that Dianne Abbott is an asshole... fine I thought, do you think I am one too? I accept that I may have missed your point regarding your comment "either people are assholes or not" in terms of you only meaning that race has nothing to do with it. But I think that was some poor expression on your part... and I think that expression does matter. But reading again I'm not so sure anyway - you do seem to see people in that stark sense. If anything you may be little guilty via that kind of simplification. I don't normally like to call out race or sexism in life because a) it can actually be just a cliche, and b) I always know what's coming... the "why is it always" line. But what happens when it is actually true? Implicitly, explicitly it doesn't matter. Sometimes these things are there. The "Why is is always?" line just makes people afraid of calling it out imo. It feels like a kind of linguistic controlling it that sense. | |||
"I have no objection on being 'called out' on something I am guilty of I simply dont like being accused of something I'm not guilty of merely because of the race colour creed or gender of the person I call an asshole. I've given enough away about myself I think.. so I was just asking you straight.. we know that you think that Dianne Abbott is an asshole... fine I thought, do you think I am one too? I accept that I may have missed your point regarding your comment "either people are assholes or not" in terms of you only meaning that race has nothing to do with it. But I think that was some poor expression on your part... and I think that expression does matter. But reading again I'm not so sure anyway - you do seem to see people in that stark sense. If anything you may be little guilty via that kind of simplification. I don't normally like to call out race or sexism in life because a) it can actually be just a cliche, and b) I always know what's coming... the "why is it always" line. But what happens when it is actually true? Implicitly, explicitly it doesn't matter. Sometimes these things are there. The "Why is is always?" line just makes people afraid of calling it out imo. It feels like a kind of linguistic controlling it that sense." I can see your point and I think I see where you are coming from and maybe my world view is a little simplistic for a lot if not most people. But the point is that it is my view. And in a democracy people are entitled to their views. Even people I view as total assholes ie: racists, sexists,homophobes etc. I believe it was Churchill who said: I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it, and I understand he was trying to say that in a democratic society people have a right to their own views. However we have hopefully gone beyond that nowadays. I think what I would say is: I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to think it, but I will also defend to the death the rights of people not to be hurt by you being allowed to voice those opinions in any way. If I thought my simplistic views were racist, sexist, religionist (even though there isnt such a word) homophobic or hurtful then I certainly wouldn't voice them. People should be able to believe what they want in the privacy of their own hearts (thats between them and their god, gods or conscience) what people arent entitled to do is hurt other people. I dont mind offence so much because I think that encourages debate but hurting others is an absolute no no. I dont actually know if this is an example of me being an asshole in others views but if so then thats fine because they are entitled to their opinions. So if this post offends anyone then we can debate what and why you found something offensive and hopefully come to a conclusion where we agree that either one of us or possibly both of us are wrong, if someone can convince me that I am wrong then I will gladly retract it. If this post has genuinely hurt someone if they tell me why then I will not only retract it but offer my sincere apologies as well. | |||
"I think this woman gets more than enough stick. Yes, you are possibly right but lets also remember this woman is the shadow home secretary. If and when Labour are elected she will be a senior official as being in charge of one of the Great Offices of State within Her Majesty's Government and Head of the Home Office. It is effectively the 3rd most important State position behind the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer. As Secretary of State for the Home Office the Home Secretary is responsible for the internal affairs of England and Wales, and for immigration and citizenship for the United Kingdom. The remit of the Home Office also includes policing in England and Wales and matters of national security, as the Security Service (MI5) is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. So surely she should be held up to scrutinity when she constantly proves she cant even answer simple questions regarding the responsibilities she would be in charge of?" Key words “If” and “when” lol | |||
