Ten years ago if you had asked me who the most destructive PM of the 20th centiry was I would have said Maggie Thatcher. Now it's just got to be Tony. can you believe the hubris of this man?
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/tonyblai ... 69,00.html
Let's just hope the EU tell him to F*^k off. He's a proven liar and hypocrite with possibly dangerous notions that god is talking to him.
I'll be president of Europe if you give me the power - Blair
I'll be president of Europe if you give me the power - Blair
As an EU citizen I would not be favour of Tony Blair being commission president, he has made too many bad decisions over his career, particularly Iraq, in which he was either spectacularly wrong, or lying incredibly well about his belief he was "doing the right thing" as he keeps saying. He does have many qualities that are needed in any leader, but I question his judgment in certain areas. It would be good to see a British commission president, but I don't think Blair would be the right one.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
I'll be president of Europe if you give me the power - Blair
posted by galbally
He does have many qualities that are needed in any leader, but I question his judgment in certain areas.
What qualities? How can anyone possibly trust him? The thing that really annoys is not so much tony as the simple fact that no one in the labour party was prepared to stand up and tell him to get stuffed apart from Robin Cook. If he had lived there might have been a real battle for leadership of the labour party. As it is membership is falling rapidly as the once faithful vote with their feet.
He does have many qualities that are needed in any leader, but I question his judgment in certain areas.
What qualities? How can anyone possibly trust him? The thing that really annoys is not so much tony as the simple fact that no one in the labour party was prepared to stand up and tell him to get stuffed apart from Robin Cook. If he had lived there might have been a real battle for leadership of the labour party. As it is membership is falling rapidly as the once faithful vote with their feet.
I'll be president of Europe if you give me the power - Blair
gmc;769674 wrote: posted by galbally
What qualities? How can anyone possibly trust him? The thing that really annoys is not so much tony as the simple fact that no one in the labour party was prepared to stand up and tell him to get stuffed apart from Robin Cook. If he had lived there might have been a real battle for leadership of the labour party. As it is membership is falling rapidly as the once faithful vote with their feet.
Well, Leadership would be one. Compared to say Gordon Brown who is a committee man, Blair was a leader with a capital L, though often misguided in his ideas, he was never afraid to state them quite plainly. Though he is a good example of a strong leader, who did wonders for his party in the short term, but may have damaged it beyond all repair in the long term. Then again, given the state the British Labour Party got itself into in the 1980s, it could be claimed that Blair was just being realistic when he realized that hard left-wing socialism was a dead letter in Britain after Micheal Foot and the 1983 general election, he wasn't the only Labour person who thought this way.
He was definitely someone more suited to a presidential system, rather than a parliamentary one. But then don't forget he did leave the job on his own choice after winning 3 general elections, he wasn't sacked, and he did get a standing ovation from his fellow MPs at his valedictory speech after 10 years in the hardest job in Britain, (remarkable when you consider how many people had so many misgivings about him). Again I will say that I really think the Iraq war,and the lies that were told to railroad Britain into it, was a shameful episode in British and Labour party history (though I think the Tories were all for it as well) not everything on his record is bad, ask anyone in Northern Ireland, (or the Republic) and they will tell you he was hugely influential in securing a peace in the North, thats quite an achievement whatever way you look at it.
What qualities? How can anyone possibly trust him? The thing that really annoys is not so much tony as the simple fact that no one in the labour party was prepared to stand up and tell him to get stuffed apart from Robin Cook. If he had lived there might have been a real battle for leadership of the labour party. As it is membership is falling rapidly as the once faithful vote with their feet.
Well, Leadership would be one. Compared to say Gordon Brown who is a committee man, Blair was a leader with a capital L, though often misguided in his ideas, he was never afraid to state them quite plainly. Though he is a good example of a strong leader, who did wonders for his party in the short term, but may have damaged it beyond all repair in the long term. Then again, given the state the British Labour Party got itself into in the 1980s, it could be claimed that Blair was just being realistic when he realized that hard left-wing socialism was a dead letter in Britain after Micheal Foot and the 1983 general election, he wasn't the only Labour person who thought this way.
He was definitely someone more suited to a presidential system, rather than a parliamentary one. But then don't forget he did leave the job on his own choice after winning 3 general elections, he wasn't sacked, and he did get a standing ovation from his fellow MPs at his valedictory speech after 10 years in the hardest job in Britain, (remarkable when you consider how many people had so many misgivings about him). Again I will say that I really think the Iraq war,and the lies that were told to railroad Britain into it, was a shameful episode in British and Labour party history (though I think the Tories were all for it as well) not everything on his record is bad, ask anyone in Northern Ireland, (or the Republic) and they will tell you he was hugely influential in securing a peace in the North, thats quite an achievement whatever way you look at it.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
I'll be president of Europe if you give me the power - Blair
Galbally;769795 wrote: Well, Leadership would be one. Compared to say Gordon Brown who is a committee man, Blair was a leader with a capital L, though often misguided in his ideas, he was never afraid to state them quite plainly. Though he is a good example of a strong leader, who did wonders for his party in the short term, but may have damaged it beyond all repair in the long term. Then again, given the state the British Labour Party got itself into in the 1980s, it could be claimed that Blair was just being realistic when he realized that hard left-wing socialism was a dead letter in Britain after Micheal Foot and the 1983 general election, he wasn't the only Labour person who thought this way.
He was definitely someone more suited to a presidential system, rather than a parliamentary one. But then don't forget he did leave the job on his own choice after winning 3 general elections, he wasn't sacked, and he did get a standing ovation from his fellow MPs at his valedictory speech after 10 years in the hardest job in Britain, (remarkable when you consider how many people had so many misgivings about him). Again I will say that I really think the Iraq war,and the lies that were told to railroad Britain into it, was a shameful episode in British and Labour party history (though I think the Tories were all for it as well) not everything on his record is bad, ask anyone in Northern Ireland, (or the Republic) and they will tell you he was hugely influential in securing a peace in the North, thats quite an achievement whatever way you look at it.
Good leadership doesn't mean you get your own way all the time and no one should argue with you. he had the same flaw as Maggie Thatcher-anyone that didn't toe the line was sidelined and got nowhere in government so he was surrounded by a bunch of toadies that did what they were told. he also relied on unelected advisers listening to them more than to his own MP's. He was control freak. We don't have presidential system of government, the PM is simply first amongst equals, and god forbid we ever should. Parliament is sovereign and it is the job of MP's to hold the cabinet to account. except our MP's seem to have forgotten that.
I would agree with you about Iraq. it's almost like the emperor's new clothes with all the MP's terrified so state the obvious. he should have been called to account as soon as it became clear what had happened. Maybe it was shock and disbelief that a PM could lie like that. I watched the debate and still can't believe they voted in favour of it. Gordon Brown was part of it all and he can hardly avoid responsibility either.
If he hadn't resigned and stretched things out by saying he was goping to he would have been forced out imo. Even the dimmest back benchers were beginning to realise he was losing them support. He got a standing ovation but it was probably relief they hadn't had ton take action.
Yes hard left-wing socialism has had it's day, has had for years but the basic urge for social justice is still very much there. Three things lost labour support in scotland the NHS, the tossers that were running the country for labour and the war in iraq. (not to mention disbanding all the scottish regiments at a time when they were involved in conflict, recruitment is down 70%). In fifty years labour have never failed to get the majority of seats in scotland-it was a standing joke that a monkey in a red suit would get elected.
GB didn't have an election IMO because he was scared labour would lose it. there is a very strong possibility he will lose his seat at the next election. I would like to think so. His constituency was the home of Adam Smith who was arguably not only the father of capitalism but also had many viewpoints we would regard nowadays as socialist as well. I think sight of GB and alan greenspan and GB bowing to his memory would have given him a good laugh.
True i would agree with you on Ireland but in part some of that was due to the cutting of funding for the IRA from america.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 76,00.html
Although I cannot claim to know much about it. Happily I have always been on the periphery of sectarianism- I know plenty orangemen- but have always kept away from it and always will. Ironic isn't it? end terrorism in one country but export it all over the planet.
In the short term he might have helped his party but like Maggie destroyed the tories he has destroyed labour as a viable party at least for a while.
He was definitely someone more suited to a presidential system, rather than a parliamentary one. But then don't forget he did leave the job on his own choice after winning 3 general elections, he wasn't sacked, and he did get a standing ovation from his fellow MPs at his valedictory speech after 10 years in the hardest job in Britain, (remarkable when you consider how many people had so many misgivings about him). Again I will say that I really think the Iraq war,and the lies that were told to railroad Britain into it, was a shameful episode in British and Labour party history (though I think the Tories were all for it as well) not everything on his record is bad, ask anyone in Northern Ireland, (or the Republic) and they will tell you he was hugely influential in securing a peace in the North, thats quite an achievement whatever way you look at it.
Good leadership doesn't mean you get your own way all the time and no one should argue with you. he had the same flaw as Maggie Thatcher-anyone that didn't toe the line was sidelined and got nowhere in government so he was surrounded by a bunch of toadies that did what they were told. he also relied on unelected advisers listening to them more than to his own MP's. He was control freak. We don't have presidential system of government, the PM is simply first amongst equals, and god forbid we ever should. Parliament is sovereign and it is the job of MP's to hold the cabinet to account. except our MP's seem to have forgotten that.
I would agree with you about Iraq. it's almost like the emperor's new clothes with all the MP's terrified so state the obvious. he should have been called to account as soon as it became clear what had happened. Maybe it was shock and disbelief that a PM could lie like that. I watched the debate and still can't believe they voted in favour of it. Gordon Brown was part of it all and he can hardly avoid responsibility either.
If he hadn't resigned and stretched things out by saying he was goping to he would have been forced out imo. Even the dimmest back benchers were beginning to realise he was losing them support. He got a standing ovation but it was probably relief they hadn't had ton take action.
Yes hard left-wing socialism has had it's day, has had for years but the basic urge for social justice is still very much there. Three things lost labour support in scotland the NHS, the tossers that were running the country for labour and the war in iraq. (not to mention disbanding all the scottish regiments at a time when they were involved in conflict, recruitment is down 70%). In fifty years labour have never failed to get the majority of seats in scotland-it was a standing joke that a monkey in a red suit would get elected.
GB didn't have an election IMO because he was scared labour would lose it. there is a very strong possibility he will lose his seat at the next election. I would like to think so. His constituency was the home of Adam Smith who was arguably not only the father of capitalism but also had many viewpoints we would regard nowadays as socialist as well. I think sight of GB and alan greenspan and GB bowing to his memory would have given him a good laugh.
True i would agree with you on Ireland but in part some of that was due to the cutting of funding for the IRA from america.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 76,00.html
Although I cannot claim to know much about it. Happily I have always been on the periphery of sectarianism- I know plenty orangemen- but have always kept away from it and always will. Ironic isn't it? end terrorism in one country but export it all over the planet.
In the short term he might have helped his party but like Maggie destroyed the tories he has destroyed labour as a viable party at least for a while.