Why is it with the Tories we have

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

James throws 'bigot' around all the time.

But his own definition says it is about someone 'unreasonably antagonistic' towards people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

James (and pipster) clearly have their own definition of unreasonable (one the High Court wouldn't accept). Mine is closer to yours Sludge. It is absolutely reasonable to be antagonistic to a group of people who enable actions that harm others - through their political choices, the values they promote and the actions they support.

I never liked the Tories (wasn't an enthusiastic supporter of the alternative parties either) but my antagonism towards them was baked in during the Miners Strike. They sometimes throw up some more sympathetic faces, they sometimes make sensible policy decisions, but their default is to wrap themselves in the union flag, wave the King James bible and reduce the state so that those in need are dependent on charity. I am antagonistic toward people who think and behave like that (and for now that includes Starmer and his mates if not the whole Labour Party which still hangs on to some different values).

And when it comes to groups it matters if those are groups you are born into or ones you freely choose to join or support. Anyone who is antagonistic toward people because of their race, ethnicity, gender/sex, religion/culture, disability etc is despicable and sick. We can and should debate the way those inherited characteristics play out - especially the cultural aspects - but where there is no choice the question of reasonableness doesn't arise.

But there is a clear choice about which party programme to support. People are not born Tory, Labour or Plaid. They aren't born to enjoy killing wild animals. They aren't born to exploit or be part of criminal gangs fleecing pensioners of their savings. It is completely right and reasonable to be antagonistic to people who become members of groups that cause harm. I include the Tories in that. James and his friend clearly don't but that is because they like what the Tories do and say - not because they are on the right side of something called bigotry.

---

Absolutely my philosophy too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

James throws 'bigot' around all the time.

But his own definition says it is about someone 'unreasonably antagonistic' towards people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

James (and pipster) clearly have their own definition of unreasonable (one the High Court wouldn't accept). Mine is closer to yours Sludge. It is absolutely reasonable to be antagonistic to a group of people who enable actions that harm others - through their political choices, the values they promote and the actions they support.

I never liked the Tories (wasn't an enthusiastic supporter of the alternative parties either) but my antagonism towards them was baked in during the Miners Strike. They sometimes throw up some more sympathetic faces, they sometimes make sensible policy decisions, but their default is to wrap themselves in the union flag, wave the King James bible and reduce the state so that those in need are dependent on charity. I am antagonistic toward people who think and behave like that (and for now that includes Starmer and his mates if not the whole Labour Party which still hangs on to some different values).

And when it comes to groups it matters if those are groups you are born into or ones you freely choose to join or support. Anyone who is antagonistic toward people because of their race, ethnicity, gender/sex, religion/culture, disability etc is despicable and sick. We can and should debate the way those inherited characteristics play out - especially the cultural aspects - but where there is no choice the question of reasonableness doesn't arise.

But there is a clear choice about which party programme to support. People are not born Tory, Labour or Plaid. They aren't born to enjoy killing wild animals. They aren't born to exploit or be part of criminal gangs fleecing pensioners of their savings. It is completely right and reasonable to be antagonistic to people who become members of groups that cause harm. I include the Tories in that. James and his friend clearly don't but that is because they like what the Tories do and say - not because they are on the right side of something called bigotry.

---

Very very well put Jon, my thoughts exactly.

What next? People who decry and detest Hamas or Paedophiles will be construed as bigots I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Very very well put Jon, my thoughts exactly.

What next? People who decry and detest Hamas or Paedophiles will be construed as bigots I suppose.

---

The problem with that response , which I agree with , is that it will just bring more yeah but no nonsense in from the tory boys

And that's precisely why I have as little to do with them as I can

I try to socialise with like minded people and tory thinking people are not on the menu

If I was at a party and some tory boy wax going on and on about Thatcher, privatisation , low taxation , blah blah blah I would eventually have to give him a leathering with a chicken drumstick and throw him out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

The problem with that response , which I agree with , is that it will just bring more yeah but no nonsense in from the tory boys

And that's precisely why I have as little to do with them as I can

I try to socialise with like minded people and tory thinking people are not on the menu

If I was at a party and some tory boy wax going on and on about Thatcher, privatisation , low taxation , blah blah blah I would eventually have to give him a leathering with a chicken drumstick and throw him out

---

Would you refuse medical treatment if you knew the Dr or consultant was a Conservative voter ?
Maybe your surgeon for your dodgy knee was a Hamas hating Israeli - would you accept him as your surgeon ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Blair - did he only care about himself ? , what about Lord Kinnock, MP pension, MEP pension, EU commissioner pension (whilst employing his son and his wife) before they also both became MEPs - a real man of the people there.
How about Geoff Hoon with his private consultancy work whilst defence secretary, Mandelson and the cash for passports - the list is endless on both sides.

Rachel Reeves and her own book - copy and pasted from wikipedia, or perhaps the leadership skills or Angie Raynor - cant wait for that sh1t show to happen.

Gordon announces he has ended boom and bust - just before he bust's the economy with his light hand on the finance regs. Once you have been around the block a few times your start to see the pattern. 12 years in power for Blair / Brown - 13 years for the tories - too much for any party. Yet in Wales we have 26 years of Labour....

---

never mind the gordon lets buy diesel idea , now that has really ben a lssting legacy and fecked up the poor , business costs due to transport costs , and poor get fecked over again , its alright though hes wearing a red rosette and is singing keep the red flag flying , woof,woof ..

20 mph , ULEZ that will fix it well not fr the poor who cannot afford the electric cars and fines

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Very very well put Jon, my thoughts exactly.

What next? People who decry and detest Hamas or Paedophiles will be construed as bigots I suppose.

---

I hate Hamas and Paedophiles can I get a badge PLEASE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Very very well put Jon, my thoughts exactly.

What next? People who decry and detest Hamas or Paedophiles will be construed as bigots I suppose.

---

The fact you would compare sexual child abuse to voting for a centre-right political party demonstrates my point on bigotry superbly.

Thanks Dorcus! 👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

Would you refuse medical treatment if you knew the Dr or consultant was a Conservative voter ?
Maybe your surgeon for your dodgy knee was a Hamas hating Israeli - would you accept him as your surgeon ?

---

I can walk away from boring Tories like you in a pub or the office party and I do

If I am on the operating table it's different and of course the heart consultant , if he is a tory , and that's generally not the case , then boring the crap out of me with his politics or telling me I will pay less tax under the conservatives is unlikely to happen

Tory boys do slip through though .....that odious creep Dr Liam fox is an ex gp and Scottish too

He's a tosser I certainly would avoid unless he was my last hope

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The fact you would compare sexual child abuse to voting for a centre-right political party demonstrates my point on bigotry superbly.

Thanks Dorcus! 👍

---

Thatcher , Jimmy Saville

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I can walk away from boring Tories like you in a pub or the office party and I do

If I am on the operating table it's different and of course the heart consultant , if he is a tory , and that's generally not the case , then boring the crap out of me with his politics or telling me I will pay less tax under the conservatives is unlikely to happen

Tory boys do slip through though .....that odious creep Dr Liam fox is an ex gp and Scottish too

He's a tosser I certainly would avoid unless he was my last hope

---

🤣

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

🤣

---

Tell us all that disgusting story about that poor old ex para that was beaten up by those horrible dirty lefty Palestinian types recently ?

The story you used to push your pathetic right wing, pro Israel agenda?

The story that proved to be utter bullshit and made up by a liar ?

The story and lies that led to loads of neo nazi types threatening people of Arabic origin ?

Tell us all about how you have totally condemned that lying , no good right wing nonsense ?

Here is your chance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Tell us all that disgusting story about that poor old ex para that was beaten up by those horrible dirty lefty Palestinian types recently ?

The story you used to push your pathetic right wing, pro Israel agenda?

The story that proved to be utter bullshit and made up by a liar ?

The story and lies that led to loads of neo nazi types threatening people of Arabic origin ?

Tell us all about how you have totally condemned that lying , no good right wing nonsense ?

Here is your chance

---

I'm starting to see how you became such a gullible bigot.

Because even when you can see things with your very own eyes, such as the fact I barely referenced that story at all and the fact that the police not charging someone doesn't mean it didn't happen (unless you also think 90% of women who are raped are also liars?) Despite that, it still doesn't stop you from totally misrepresenting it. As you know I was highlighting the rise in antisemitism and it's use by a minority on the recent marches. You know that, so stop lying.

I'll always condemn lying. Starting on this occasion with you.

Sorry for laughing too. I didn't realise you were being serious.

Ye gods....what a shower we have trying to run the UK..and I include all parties.
I have always voted Conservative in my life.....but ...just LOOK at this photo of animated backslapping..Pathetic:
Attachment 5925

Beyond belief...when they reverse what they previously already introduced mostly...and which Liz Truss was sacked for...

A sensible comment: https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ag-stealth-tax

We need an Oliver Cromwell...or at least vote for the Reform Party....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maurice Swan

Ye gods....what a shower we have trying to run the UK..and I include all parties.
I have always voted Conservative in my life.....but ...just LOOK at this photo of animated backslapping..Pathetic:
Attachment 5925

Beyond belief...when they reverse what they previously already introduced mostly...and which Liz Truss was sacked for...

A sensible comment: https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ag-stealth-tax

We need an Oliver Cromwell...or at least vote for the Reform Party....

---

Did they do enough today for you to pack your bags and come back to Blighty?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I'm starting to see how you became such a gullible bigot.

Because even when you can see things with your very own eyes, such as the fact I barely referenced that story at all and the fact that the police not charging someone doesn't mean it didn't happen (unless you also think 90% of women who are raped are also liars?) Despite that, it still doesn't stop you from totally misrepresenting it. As you know I was highlighting the rise in antisemitism and it's use by a minority on the recent marches. You know that, so stop lying.

I'll always condemn lying. Starting on this occasion with you.

Sorry for laughing too. I didn't realise you were being serious.

---

You lying tory spoilt kid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maurice Swan

Ye gods....what a shower we have trying to run the UK..and I include all parties.
I have always voted Conservative in my life.....but ...just LOOK at this photo of animated backslapping..Pathetic:
Attachment 5925

Beyond belief...when they reverse what they previously already introduced mostly...and which Liz Truss was sacked for...

A sensible comment: https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ag-stealth-tax

We need an Oliver Cromwell...or at least vote for the Reform Party....

---

The Reform party is full of right wing nutters mo

If you belong to that circus probably best you stay in France

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

You lying tory spoilt kid

---

So this lying old tit and women who have been raped but fear coming forward .....are the same ?

That must be what you think sonny because I don't .....and I know that the old war hero who you trumped up is a bare faced liar who wasn't an ex para , he wasn't even in the scouts!

You are as guilty as him you coward for using his non story to drum up your right wing views

And after being told it was all rubbish you have failed to take the the opportunity to hold your hand up and accept it

This is no surprise , it's you MO , as the detectives would say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

James throws 'bigot' around all the time.

But his own definition says it is about someone 'unreasonably antagonistic' towards people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

James (and pipster) clearly have their own definition of unreasonable (one the High Court wouldn't accept). Mine is closer to yours Sludge. It is absolutely reasonable to be antagonistic to a group of people who enable actions that harm others - through their political choices, the values they promote and the actions they support.

I never liked the Tories (wasn't an enthusiastic supporter of the alternative parties either) but my antagonism towards them was baked in during the Miners Strike. They sometimes throw up some more sympathetic faces, they sometimes make sensible policy decisions, but their default is to wrap themselves in the union flag, wave the King James bible and reduce the state so that those in need are dependent on charity. I am antagonistic toward people who think and behave like that (and for now that includes Starmer and his mates if not the whole Labour Party which still hangs on to some different values).

And when it comes to groups it matters if those are groups you are born into or ones you freely choose to join or support. Anyone who is antagonistic toward people because of their race, ethnicity, gender/sex, religion/culture, disability etc is despicable and sick. We can and should debate the way those inherited characteristics play out - especially the cultural aspects - but where there is no choice the question of reasonableness doesn't arise.

But there is a clear choice about which party programme to support. People are not born Tory, Labour or Plaid. They aren't born to enjoy killing wild animals. They aren't born to exploit or be part of criminal gangs fleecing pensioners of their savings. It is completely right and reasonable to be antagonistic to people who become members of groups that cause harm. I include the Tories in that. James and his friend clearly don't but that is because they like what the Tories do and say - not because they are on the right side of something called bigotry.

---

Good post Jon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Good post Jon.

---

It's true that people don't choose their race, which is why we rightly view racism as worse than bigotry. People are not stuck with their religion though. They may be born into it, but it's a personal decision to continue with it, so under the above scenario it is fair game to be antagonistic towards them. And whilst I agree that abuse of unchosen characteristics are worse, surely the issue is behaving like an arse? If someone is abusive to someone, it may be worse for something they have no control over, but it doesn't mean that abuse for other reasons is okay.

Equally, no one doubts the party that has been in power for two thirds of the post war period hasn't don't many bad things. They have. But is it right or fair to abuse anyone who may support them for that? if someone votes Labour, would it be fair to accuse them of turning a blind eye to grooming gangs, or supporting the Iraq war, or rising unemployment or bankrupting the country or any of the other tropes unfairly thrown at them? I would suggest it wouldnt be.

The alternative is a bit of open mindedness, a bit of tolerance, a bit of trying to understand others views, a bit of humility and a bit of civility. That strikes me as the fat better, less ignorant and certainly less bigoted approach to politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

James throws 'bigot' around all the time.

But his own definition says it is about someone 'unreasonably antagonistic' towards people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

James (and pipster) clearly have their own definition of unreasonable (one the High Court wouldn't accept). Mine is closer to yours Sludge. It is absolutely reasonable to be antagonistic to a group of people who enable actions that harm others - through their political choices, the values they promote and the actions they support.

I never liked the Tories (wasn't an enthusiastic supporter of the alternative parties either) but my antagonism towards them was baked in during the Miners Strike. They sometimes throw up some more sympathetic faces, they sometimes make sensible policy decisions, but their default is to wrap themselves in the union flag, wave the King James bible and reduce the state so that those in need are dependent on charity. I am antagonistic toward people who think and behave like that (and for now that includes Starmer and his mates if not the whole Labour Party which still hangs on to some different values).

And when it comes to groups it matters if those are groups you are born into or ones you freely choose to join or support. Anyone who is antagonistic toward people because of their race, ethnicity, gender/sex, religion/culture, disability etc is despicable and sick. We can and should debate the way those inherited characteristics play out - especially the cultural aspects - but where there is no choice the question of reasonableness doesn't arise.

But there is a clear choice about which party programme to support. People are not born Tory, Labour or Plaid. They aren't born to enjoy killing wild animals. They aren't born to exploit or be part of criminal gangs fleecing pensioners of their savings. It is completely right and reasonable to be antagonistic to people who become members of groups that cause harm. I include the Tories in that. James and his friend clearly don't but that is because they like what the Tories do and say - not because they are on the right side of something called bigotry.

---

In respect of your last paragraph,I take it you also despise Labour ,particularly with the role it played in the conflict in Iraq?

Also Starmer doesn’t appear keen on a ceasefire in Gaza.