Tag Archives: comment

Sabisky quits after journalists unearth WORSE comments than his views on race, women and eugenics

Andrew Sabisky: Gone, but let’s not forget him. His kind of extremism is appallingly toxic.

If you thought the opinions of Dominic Cummings’s advisor Andrew Sabisky were horrifying when This Site published them yesterday, brace yourself.

He has resigned because of comments he made that were even worse:

Scottish newspaper The National dished the dirt:

“In one post, from seven years ago, a man explains that his Mormon wife is reluctant to have sex with him and asks for advice.

“Under the username thedovelamenting, Sabisky responds by urging him to try to “rewire” her brain “to the point where she no longer, consciously or subconsciously sees a conflict between a good Christian woman and serving you up 39 flavours of slut on command”.”

I’ll save you from the particularly vile last part of his comment.

“In another post, he recommends a 26-year-old man looking to lose his virginity pays “lots of money for a really good hooker”.

“When a woman posts about finding “disturbing porn” on her boyfriend’s computer, including erotic fiction about incest, paedophilia and rape, thedovelamenting tells her he doesn’t “see all that much to worry about here.

““Fantasies are strange things. Unpredictable, of uncertain origin, hard to figure how they’ll relate to real life. I have a thing for incest erotica myself despite never having had those fantasies relating to my actual family. So long as he’s not actually breaking any laws and is restricting his viewing habits to girls 18 and up I wouldn’t be too squicked.”

“He then suggests the woman is at fault for not offering her partner the right “kind of sex”, though he admits he “could be way off there.””

According to the article, the offending Reddit posts disappeared right after The National approached Sabisky for comment. Hmm!

Still, it’s a good result, even if it’s just a small part of a much larger picture.

Francis Elliott narrows it down:

Sabisky himself has said he is a victim of “selective quoting” by the media, and claimed to be “in the middle of a giant character assassination”.

But the resignation isn’t even the most interesting part of this story.

The fact that people found it easy to confuse Sabisky with nominal prime minister Boris Johnson – even in jest – is.

The reason it was easy to do is the fact that Downing Street was criticised for refusing to say whether or not Johnson agreed with Sabisky’s views.

This reluctance prompted fury from some Conservatives, according to Sky News:

“Former minister Caroline Nokes said there “must be no place in government for the views he’s expressed”.

“Select committee chair William Wagg declared “there is no way to defend it” and added: “I cannot be the only one uncomfortable with recent Number 10 trends.”

“One Tory staffer told Sky News after the resignation was confirmed: “I’m glad it’s happened but he should never have been hired in the first place. Two days of bad headlines for nothing.””

And it made this comment possible:

And what about this?

But then, we know Johnson is a sexist and a racist – from his behaviour over many years. Right?

Source: Number 10 adviser Andrew Sabisky quits after controversial comments revealed | Politics News | Sky News

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Charlie Brooker becomes next celeb to end his career with a ‘joke’ about Labour and anti-Semitism

Propaganda: It seems the BBC isn’t restricting its political lies solely to news programmes, but has expanded into comedy.

Has it become a contractual obligation that celebrities appearing on the BBC’s Have I Got News For You now have to reel out a duff comment connecting the Labour Party or Jeremy Corbyn and anti-Semitism, and pretend that it’s a funny joke?

It was sad enough when Victoria Coren Mitchell did it, linking Labour with the anti-Semitic trope about a Jewish bankers’ conspiracy. Because the Labour leadership has never suggested it believes anything of the sort, it was in fact she who committed the anti-Semitic slur.

Now Charlie Brooker has used his appearance to link Labour with Holocaust denial:

Did you hear that audience reaction? They didn’t like it at all. That was the sound of a career ending, as Simon Maginn implies here:

And here:

As I say, though, it seems entirely possible that reading an anti-Labour jab from an autocue is now a contractual obligation. But Mr Brooker can’t be so hard-up for cash that he would abandon any principles and ruin his reputation for the sake of 30 pieces of silver from the BBC… can he? We note that he hasn’t exactly been running out to defend himself:

Sadly, Mr Brooker’s (probably-scripted) outburst seems to have achieved what these behaviours often do – and got someone else to join in. Isn’t this Phil Wang from the same programme?

It isn’t satire; it’s just a bad lie. What a way to commit career suicide.

And it seems Have I Got Lies For You may be on its way out now, as well.

There will be plenty of people who like the propaganda-pumping attitude the programme is currently showing – but if enough of us kick it into touch, then maybe the BBC will get the message.

We don’t like lies, and we don’t like people who lie to us.

Worst of all is the probability that Boris Johnson will use this as part of his excuse to axe the BBC’s status as the UK’s public service broadcaster and remove the requirement to pay the licence fee.

Still, the BBC did its best to ensure the Tories won the general election, knowing that this would be on the cards.

The Corporation’s bosses really are like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Psychiatrists try to defend failure to speak out on ‘abusive’ Universal Credit project

The Royal College of Psychiatrists has tried to explain its reasons for failing to object to a pilot project in Cornwall in which Job Centre advisors – with no training – decide whether claimants need mental health care.

This Site reported on the project in August:

The department… is trying to cut doctors working on mental health out of the benefit system by claiming that rank-and-file Job Centre advisers are just as able to spot mental health problems – and recommend the best treatment.

They aren’t; they can’t. It’s just a cynical bid to stop people with mental health problems from claiming Employment and Support Allowance or Personal Independence Payment.

The Tory government’s press release stated: “The initiative means work coaches can continue to refer people with mental health conditions to specialist one to one support, without the need for a GP or clinical assessment.”

I responded:

“Without the need”? Translation: “Without the support of evidence from a qualified doctor who can bring their expertise to a benefit tribunal.”

The press release said: “The support is also designed to help people find their way back into the workplace when they’re ready.”

I responded:

Translation: “The intention is to ensure that people with mental illnesses must continue to seek employment, whether they are ready or not.”

Disability News Service is now reporting that the Royal College of Psychiatrists has responded to this insult against its practitioners – after being nudged to do so by no fewer than five disability groups.

RCP states, according to the article, that:

RCP’s social inclusion lead has “continued to raise concerns and provide expert advice about the impact of welfare reform on people with mental illness and those with learning disabilities”.

[It says] it is “clear that anyone undertaking a mental health assessment needs to be sufficiently qualified to do so and, as part of the assessment, should engage with clinicians involved in providing care to the person concerned”.

[It also says] RCP believes that a jobcentre would not be “a suitable therapeutic environment to assess and discuss an individual’s mental health”.

[It adds:] “Having to do so would likely increase the stress and pressure on people with a mental illness when seeking support, and the possibility of them seeing the receipt of benefits as being conditional on them agreeing to mental health treatment.

“In addition, there is a risk that being referred to the wrong type of treatment may reduce the likelihood of seeking help in the future, make their illness worse and increase the likelihood of experiencing a future crisis.”

The disability groups are not happy with this response – and rightly so.

Why the delay in responding? Were these psychiatrists hoping the issue would go away?

Is the RCP going to talk to the Department for Work and Pensions about its concerns? Or were its comments just a sop to the disabled people’s representatives?

And what about the people of Cornwall?

What have they experienced while the RCP stood by in silence?

Source: Dismay over psychiatrists’ failure to speak out on ‘abusive’ universal credit project – Disability News Service

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory Muslim peer receives ‘vile Islamophobic emails’ after calling for Boris Johnson to be kicked out – proving racism in the party?

Boris Johnson: All he wanted was publicity – and like gullible idiotrs, we gave it to him.

This Writer suggested – only two days ago – that Boris Johnson’s “joke” about burqa-wearing Muslim women was garnering support for him among racists.

It seems I was correct.

Of course we should not take anything a politician says at face value – Ruth Smeeth claimed to have received 25,000 anti-Semitic messages via social media, 20,000 of them in 12 hours. But research by Jewish organisation the Community Security Trust showed a peak of only 200 such messages, nationally, per day at the time of the alleged abuse, suggesting that she was… exaggerating.

And Mr Johnson?

He won’t care what Lord Sheikh says. Nor will he care about any disciplinary action by the Conservative Party.

He probably thinks, as other commentators do, that Theresa May will not want to upset supporters of Mr Johnson before crucial Brexit votes in the autumn.

So what has he achieved with his “joke”?

Publicity – for himself. And that is all he wanted.

Conservative Muslim forum founder, Lord Sheikh, has said he has received dozens of “vile” Islamophobic emails after calling for Boris Johnson to be removed from the Conservative Party after his remarks about niqabs.

The Tory peer said the ex-foreign secretary had also “let the genie out of the bottle” after he suggested veiled Muslim women resembled “letter boxes” and “bank robbers”.

He told BBC Newsnight he had received the “vile“ emails, with “obscene language” since calling for the Conservatives to withdraw the whip from Mr Johnson.

His remarks came after the Conservative Party’s decision to consider disciplinary proceedings against Mr Johnson – a move that has led to criticism of Theresa May from Brexiteer MPs who claim the complaints are politically driven.

Source: Tory Muslim peer who called for Boris Johnson to be kicked out of party receives barrage of ‘vile Islamophobic emails’ | The Independent

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Lipman gave the game away at protest against anti-Semitism

Maureen Lipman: You’d think a performer of her standing would know the danger in ill-advised words.

Actress Maureen Lipman gave the fake crusade against anti-Semitism in the Labour Party a shot in the foot on Sunday when she accused Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour members of opposing – not Jews, but Israel.

Opposition to the actions of the Israeli state is not anti-Semitism and never has been considered to be – at least, not by reasonable people. How could it be, when we see so many examples of Israelis behaving like this? The Campaign Against Antisemitism, which organised the demonstration on Sunday where Ms Lipman made her ill-advised comment, has a somewhat problematic position on the matter – as, of course, must the various Parliamentary ‘Friends of Israel’ organisations which are constituted to support the nation, not the Jewish religious/ethnic group.

Here’s Ms Lipman, talking herself into accusing Mr Corbyn of hating Israel and supporting Arabs:

One of the proposals for future ways in which Labour should tackle anti-Semitism is, of course, education – to ensure that members know what currently constitutes this attitude. But some of us are there already. Not only do we know what it is – we know what it isn’t, and we know what it means when people talk about it in a certain way:

Ms Lipman, of course, courted ridicule at the demonstration when she said Mr Corbyn was the reason she left the Labour Party. She had said the same thing about Ed Miliband in 2014, a fact that was – conveniently? – forgotten by certain newspapers (note the name of the paper mentioned below)…

… but not by members of the public…

…who, of course, found a unique way to remind the mainstream media’s representatives – who should have been reporting this to the public anyway:

This issue has always been about misrepresentation, though – misrepresentation of Jeremy Corbyn and notable Labour members (including myself) as aggressors; misrepresentation of Jews as victims (a position against which many right-thinking Jews have taken offence).

Result: British Jews are divided and the British public is disinterested. Who profits from that?

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Personal Independence Payment claimants! Send details of your experience for Parliamentary debate

Laura Pidcock MP.

Labour MP Laura Pidcock has tweeted the following:

So there will be a debate in Parliament’s Westminster Hall on the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) benefit on January 31.

If you have claimed PIP, please send your recollections and comments on the experience to Ms Pidcock at [email protected]

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Damage done, Donald: Nobody cares which nasty word Trump used

Rough Draft bookstore in Kingston, New York, passed this comment on Mr Trump’s opinion of the developing world [Image: Michele Filgate, from indy100.com].

Apologies to those who are offended by such language, but they must be the best people to judge whether it makes any difference at all if Donald Trump called developing countries “shitholes” or “shithouses”.

I’m guessing they’d be offended by both. Am I right?

The damage is done – and all because Donald couldn’t do the decent thing.

Or at least, he couldn’t say it.

Donald Trump did not use the term “s***hole” to describe developing countries during a meeting on immigration, instead using the word “s***house”, it has been claimed.

The US President provoked a storm of outrage after reports emerged of comments he allegedly made in an Oval Office meeting last week while referring to migrants from Haiti, El Salvador and unspecified African nations.

He was accused of having said “we don’t need more Haitians”, and saying of the African countries: “Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?”

The President has denied he had used the word “s***hole” but admitted being “tough” during the meeting.

Now claims have arisen suggesting he instead said “s***house”.

Source: Donald Trump said ‘s***house’ and not ‘s***hole’, claims White House source | The Independent

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Theresa Mays ‘British Dream’ is a nightmare for the rest of us

Theresa May: Politically, she’s a dead woman walking [Art: Dave Brown].

To be honest, talking about it was a nightmare for her.

Theresa May’s keynote speech at the Conservative Party Conference was a disaster from beginning to end – not just because of the stunt by ‘Lee Nelson’ performer Simon Brodkin, not because of her extended coughing fit, in which she choked on her own words, not even because, it seems, arcane forces contrived to knock an ‘F’ off the slogan on the backdrop behind her (“F off”? It’s a headline-writer’s dream).

It was a disaster because it was rubbish.

This Writer thought it might be worth examining just the start of the speech, to demonstrate what I mean.

She started by telling us her life story. Nobody cared. We didn’t care that she thought the Tories under Margaret Thatcher were the party with all the ideas. Neoliberalism is dying a slow death, determined to take as many of us with it as possible. We didn’t care that she said the Thatcher project required hard work and discipline – Tory MPs come from a societal stratum that doesn’t understand the meaning of hard work, and as for discipline, count how often they stab their leaders in the back.

Nobody cared about her platitude about a Tory promise that each new generation should be able to build a better future. If that was the promise, then it was broken before Margaret Thatcher ever stood on the steps of Number 10. She planned the impoverishment of every working person in the UK and people like Theresa May have seen that project through, almost to its successful conclusion.

So when she said that dream was what she believes in, nobody cared. In fact, it was a turn-off.

She correctly identified the reason: “40 years later, for too many people in our country, that dream feels distant, our party’s ability to deliver it is in question, and the British Dream that has inspired generations of Britons feels increasingly out of reach.”

After 40 years, the Tories had failed to deliver on its promise. In fact, they have deliberately worsened conditions for the vast majority of the population. That should have been the moment she announced her resignation, called a general election, and left the stage.

And what’s all this nonsense about a “British dream”? She repeated the phrase more than 20 times during this benighted speech, as though it meant something. It didn’t. She was simply trying to copy the success of the “American dream” as an idea in the US. But recycled ideas, bought off-the-shelf, don’t work. We all knew what she was doing and we weren’t having any of it.

https://twitter.com/MattTurner4L/status/915618317876031489

(Although I notice the BBC seems to have swallowed it wholeheartedly, Radio 4’s PM programme happily repeating the nonsense.

At least she apologised for calling a ‘vanity’ election and running a lousy campaign.

She continued: “The choice before us now is clear. Do we give up, spend our time looking back?”

Yes. Conservatives are a backward-looking organisation that has nowhere left to go.

“Or do we do our duty, look to the future and give the country the government it needs?”

Yes – by throwing in the towel and letting Labour take over.

This country will judge us harshly if we get this decision wrong.

Yes we will.

“Because all that should ever drive us is the duty we have to Britain and the historic mission of this party – this Conservative Party – to renew the British Dream in each new generation.”

A “historic” mission to renew an idea symbolised in a phrase that Mrs May had literally just mentioned? Give us a break.

“The dream that, for decades, has inspired people from around the world to come to Britain. To make their home in Britain. To build their lives in Britain.”

And then to be accused of being illegal immigrants after somebody saw Mrs May’s racist “go home” vans a few years ago, perhaps?

So far, her speech had been easily-dispelled waffle. Apparently the next section was subtitled “The good a Conservative government can do.” Let’s look at her claims.

“Seven years ago, our challenge was to repair the damage of Labour’s great recession – and we did it.”

Whose “great recession”? It has now been firmly established that the recession was caused by an international banking crisis and had very little to do with the Labour government that was well on the way to re-balancing our finances when the Tories turned up, hand in hand with the Liberal Democrats, and flushed us all down the toilet.

“The deficit is down.”

But the Tories promised to eliminate it by 2015 – two years ago.

“Spending is under control.”

But the Tories have announced ÂŁ15 billion of unfunded spending since the election.

“And our economy is growing again.”

Debatable.

“An income tax cut for over 30 million people.”

A huge mistake when you’re trying to pay off a deficit. Better to increase wages and therefore ability to pay tax.

“Four million taken out of paying it at all.”

A sign of failure. They don’t earn enough. What happened to the promise that each generation would do better than the last?

“Employment up to a record high.”

On zero-hour contracts. If everyone worked just one hour a year, the Tories would claim full employment (not my line).

“Unemployment down to a historic low.”

Because so many jobseekers have been sanctioned – some of them into the grave.

“Income inequality at its lowest for thirty years.”

The most doubtful statistic This Writer has seen in nearly a quarter of a century as a news reporter.

“More women in work than ever before.”

Forced there to make ends meet for their families, or because they cannot afford to retire.

“Over 11,000 more doctors in our NHS.”

All of whom started training under Labour.

“Over 11,000 more nurses on our hospital wards.”

And nobody taking up new training places because the Tories have poisoned nursing as a career.

“Free childcare for 3 and 4 year olds doubled.”

Postcode lottery?

“1.8 million more children in good or outstanding schools.”

Have the Tories lowered standards, then?

“3 million more apprenticeships.”

How many full-time jobs at the end of them?

“Crime down by more than a third.”

Is that reported crime? Recorded crime? Or actual crime?

“More young people from disadvantaged backgrounds going to university than at any time in the history of our country.”

And getting hugely into debt.

“Britain leading the world in tackling climate change,”

With fracking?

“eradicating global poverty,”

By importing it all here?

“and countering terrorism wherever it rears its head.”

A sick joke. Five successful terror attacks in the UK this year – and this year isn’t over. Mrs May herself ordered the cuts that made the police less able to investigate and prevent terrorism.

“Same sex marriage on the statute book, so that two people who love each other can get married, no matter what their gender.”

This was a certainty in any case. A Labour government would have brought it in if the Tories had not.

“And a National Living Wage – giving a pay rise to the lowest earners – introduced not by the Labour Party, but by us, the Conservative Party.”

A living wage would pay enough for a person/family to be able to provide for themselves without relying on any benefits at all. The Tory living wage does not allow this and is, therefore, a lie.

“Never allow the Left to say they have a monopoly on compassion.”

Next, Mrs May moved on to a particularly cringeworthy passage in which she tried to claim that Tories fight injustice. At the end of every anecdotal example she mentioned, she said, “That’s what I’m in this for.”

No. She’s in this for power and money. We all know this because, despite calling an election to satisfy her own vanity and losing her Parliamentary majority, Mrs May did not do the decent thing – she clung on, first by lying to the Queen about having done a deal with the DUP, then by doing a deal with them, then by rigging the composition of Parliamentary committees to give the Tories a majority they do not deserve. She is continuing as prime minister because she wants power for its own sake.

Let’s move on to the reactions before I lose the will to live.

The following are trawled from Twitter and have been chosen because they are either relevant or gave me a giggle. Enjoy – you need some light relief after the above:

https://twitter.com/BootstrapCook/status/915549142541271040

And:

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

You can see why Johnson was berated for ‘punishment beatings’ comment

Boris Johnson in one of his more sane moments.

Boris Johnson appears to be living in a fantasy world in which the UK is still fighting World War II against ‘ze Germans’.

His resurrection of Second World War imagery in response to a comment by French President Francois Hollande was not only inappropriate; it was offensive.

And he did it deliberately, to get a rise out of our EU colleagues and comrades – only a day after Theresa May warned all her cabinet ministers against “any stray word” that could make securing a Brexit deal more difficult.

Downing Street’s defence of his outburst is risible. A spokeswoman said he had not likened Hollande to a Nazi – but nobody had suggested he had.

The claim that he was only “making a theatrical comparison to some of those evocative WWII movies” misses the point – it is exactly that comparison that caused the offence.

With Johnson as Foreign Secretary, the UK must prepare for the hardEST Brexit. EU nations will not tolerate deliberate offence.

Boris Johnson has warned EU leaders not to give the UK “punishment beatings” for Brexit “in the manner of some World War Two movie”.

The foreign secretary said penalising “escape” was “not in the interests of our friends and our partners”.

Source: Brexit: Boris Johnson warns against ‘punishment beatings’ – BBC News

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Wallasey Momentum on accusations of homophobia against Angela Eagle: ‘Evidence first – verdict later!’

Almost 400 people crowded Wallasey civic hall at a meeting to discuss the local Labour party's suspension [Image: Liam Murphy on Twitter].

Almost 400 people crowded Wallasey civic hall at a meeting to discuss the local Labour party’s suspension [Image: Liam Murphy on Twitter].

A report attacking Labour Party members in Wallasey that was leaked after being presented to the ruling National Executive Committee has now been savaged by the constituency’s Momentum group.

The response, below, was originally published on Wirral In It Together, along with a comment on behalf of that blog. This Writer recommends that you visit that site and read the comment there, in order to gain further insight into the situation.

The Momentum comment mentions This Blog and the Skwawkbox blog, both of which have already published articles about the report to the NEC – saying Momentum does not endorse all the comment and analysis we have provided. That’s fine – these are all opinion pieces. The more points of view are available to the reader, the more likely it is that they will reach an informed opinion.

Here’s what Wallasey Momentum has to say, published as on Wirral In It Together:

The consequences of Angela Eagle’s disastrous decision to resign from the Shadow Cabinet and launch a botched attempt to challenge Jeremy Corbyn continue to be played out in Wallasey.  The attempted coup did massive damage to Labour’s standing in the polls.  Locally, the continued trashing of the Party’s reputation may come to bite Labour in marginal Council seats and in the general Election across Wirral.

The next move by those trying to defend Angela is an inaccurate report on the local Party.  Just one example will give the flavour: “A small number of members held a public meeting to discuss their concerns about the suspension of Wallasey CLP”.  The Liverpool Echo live streamed this meeting called by Wirral TUC.  The Echo reported that over 400 people attended.  Prior to Jeremy’s election the normal attendance at all member CLP meetings was 15 to 20.

The “confidential” report was immediately leaked to the Liverpool Echo.  Local Party members first saw it in the media.  It has now been published online by a blog Skwawkbox.  There is analysis on that blog and also on Vox Political.  It’s worth reading but Wallasey Momentum does not endorse all the comment and analysis.

The enquiry concludes that it is highly likely that the brick incident was related to Angela’s leadership challenge.  But the very specific allegations by Angela’s supporters, never contradicted by Angela despite being offered a chance to do so on national TV, were that it was a Wallasey Labour Party member, at the behest of Jeremy Corbyn, who threw the brick.  No evidence is produced to support those wild allegations.  However the report says that calls for members to be disciplined if they can’t substantiate their allegations are “intimidation”.

All this is bad enough, but for a Party that stands for fairness, the most worrying aspects are how the allegations of homophobia are treated.

In the leaked report, under “Allegations of homophobia” it says “The investigation has found that some members have truthfully claimed that homophobic instances occurred during the AGM.  Others truthfully said that they were not aware of those instances.  It is possible for the events to have occurred without the knowledge of all members.  The allegations are not that the CLP is institutionally homophobic or that members were aware of homophobia but took no action, but are specific to individuals.  These allegations will be reported to the next meeting of the Disputes Panel regarding individual disciplinary action.”

Party members who are interested in truth and justice should study this passage carefully.

They will see that the investigation has reached a verdict before any individual has been charged.  They conclude “Some members have truthfully claimed
” But no allegation has yet been put to anyone.  No-one has had no [sic] chance to respond, and to call witnesses.  How can the enquiry have concluded that the allegations are true?  It is like the trial scene from Alice in Wonderland.

Even worse, the Labour Party is apparently going to move to “individual disciplinary action”.

There is no mention of having a hearing, looking at the evidence, or of any process at all for the accused.  At the time of writing, months after the alleged incident, no-one has been informed by the party that they are the ones about whom the secret allegations have been made.  When they are informed, they will know that they have already been publically [sic] convicted – by the National Executive Committee!

So where does this leave the Labour Party if the evidence does not in fact support the allegations?

The central claim made in the media was that someone used an offensive homophobic term about Angela Eagle.  If it is true, that would be an outrage deserving of disciplinary action.

However, in order to test the validity of this claim, the person or persons eventually accused will need to know who their accuser is.  They will then know where the accuser was sitting in the room.

And the people sitting near the accused, near the accuser, and in between, can then be asked for their version of events.  If none of those people heard the abuse, as the Party report suggests was the case for most people present, how credible is the accuser’s claim?

As we have stated for months now, what is being alleged is a hate crime.  Labour Party procedures tell complainants in these circumstances to report the matter to the Police.  Officers of Wallasey CLP responded to the initial reports by asking the complainants to do just that.  It appears they did not do so.

Party procedures then require that the Labour Party report the issues to the Police. Again, that does not appear to have happened.  Why might that be?  It is essential that the Police are now brought into this since the NEC sub-committee has concluded that there was homophobia.

The worry must be that having reached a verdict, the Labour Party will now feel obliged to stand by it whatever the evidence shows.  A finding of homophobia against an individual could cost them their job.  If there is no reliable evidence, it will be libel.  This could all end up in court.  Have the Labour Party NEC and its full time officials thought this through?

We should add that Wallasey Momentum is not behind the reported “crowd funding” of legal action –and we don’t know who is.  It could be a hoax.  But legal action is clearly possible if and when an individual is accused.

The Labour Party NEC must urgently reconsider the train of events that they seem to have set in motion.  A proper independent investigation of the allegations must take place, with a fair hearing, and the conclusion following the evidence.  The Party procedures are clear and fair – but they have not been followed.  Any specific allegations against individuals must be shared with them, and that should happen now, not in January 2017 or Spring 2017.  An unbiased interviewer who has not already decided the result should question the accuser, the accused, and their witnesses.  An independent panel should then consider those facts, and there should be a right of appeal.  It is going to be hard for the Party to recover from this massive procedural blunder, but they must try.

Evidence first – verdict later!

Source: UPDATED – Wallasey Momentum’s Response to Labour NEC Report ~ Alleged Homophobia Towards Angela Eagle | Wirral In It Together

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook