This kind of direct action makes me very very happy. Especially since comedy Dave and his band of merry Bullingdons seem intent of excluding them from the talks.
Mind you given the speed of comedy Dave I doubt we'll have much NHS worth saving by the time the next GE rolls around.
I'm thrilled for you.
I'm very happy too. Such candidacy will further split the Labour vote and provide ample evidence that those moaning against the NHS bill are politically motivated.
Example: a quick search on Clive Peedell, the man orchestrating this gloriously egotistical farce reveals....
I can appreciate feelings being strong on one issue but an MP has to surely have interests across the board not just in unseating someone over one issue.
Will they give a toss about the economy, education, policing or constituents who are having planning permission problems with wanting to build an extension onto the upstairs bedroom?
Yes I believe they will. In any case, they will care more than these mercenary upper-class numpties who don't have a clue about the real world..
It's a clever move by the medics. Because of the general dislike of politicians (and more so since the expenses scandal) they know they'd do well. Wonder if the Coalition will throw them a few bones to buy them off?
These very well paid doctors should do what they are paid for:mad:
You mean like Politicians who are paid to represent their constituents but end up representing big business and corporations? hmmm
I mean yeah those bloody Doctors have a cheek standing up for not just their patients but for society as a whole and those corporatist teet suckling politicians would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling Docs.
I can see why the reactionaries are up in arms with this, I mean think about it, people who are not career politicians who are not in the pockets of corporations or have vested financial interests being involved in Politics actually challenging the establishment, how well bloody dare they.
This could really take off, if I was Labour I would consider not having a mp run in these areas as well
Labour wouldn't not run a candidiate. These doctors aren't on their "side" - the minute Labour do something the doctors disagree with (and they will since Labour essentially support most of the principles behind the reforms) they lose a couple of seats.
You mean like Politicians who are paid to represent their constituents but end up representing big business and corporations? hmmm
I mean yeah those bloody Doctors have a cheek standing up for not just their patients but for society as a whole and those corporatist teet suckling politicians would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling Docs.
I can see why the reactionaries are up in arms with this, I mean think about it, people who are not career politicians who are not in the pockets of corporations or have vested financial interests being involved in Politics actually challenging the establishment, how well bloody dare they.
These doctors are standing up for themselves...nobody else.
MPs serve themselves and their paymasters - the 5%.
Doctors are standing up for themselves and their patients - thats about 90% of us.
Which seems more democratic to you?
Also rubbish.
MP's serve their parties and their constituents. If they don't, they're ultimately rejected by both groups. The idea that MP's are only serving 5% of "us" is ridiculous.
These doctors are standing up for principles that they believe in. Many people agree with them, many others don't. However, to say that these doctors are standing up for about 90% of "us" is equally ridiculous.
MP's serve their parties and their constituents. If they don't, they're ultimately rejected by both groups. The idea that MP's are only serving 5% of "us" is ridiculous.
These doctors are standing up for principles that they believe in. Many people agree with them, many others don't. However, to say that these doctors are standing up for about 90% of "us" is equally ridiculous.
We had a Tory MP who got well below 50% of the total votes cast but the other parties split the centre-left vote.
He was elected time after time by a significant minority of voters.
If the doctors are representing the vast majority who could not afford private health care and who may well find the NHS less responsive in future it may well equate to 90% of us.
You may well be able to afford private medicine in which case it won't worry you what happens to the N.H.S.
We had a Tory MP who got well below 50% of the total votes cast but the other parties split the centre-left vote.
He was elected time after time by a significant minority of voters.
If the doctors are representing the vast majority who could not afford private health care and who may well find the NHS less responsive in future it may well equate to 90% of us.
You may well be able to afford private medicine in which case it won't worry you what happens to the N.H.S.
A big if. The idea is that the NHS will be more responsive, not less - a fact backed up by more money being put into the NHS. Of course, if you elect your Labour MP that won't be the case and, as has been seen by their performance in Wales, standards are already starting to fall.
In among all the stats constantly being bandied about regarding the NHS this is the one that interests me most. Only 7% of RCGP members voted on the plan for primary care trusts to remain in place, while 41,000 family doctors kept their mouths shut. If the NHS reforms are so unpopular - why, when they were given every opportunity to vote against one of the key aspects - did only a tiny minority choose to do so?
Presumably these doctors aren't centre right in their politics so are going to score points over the only centre right political party in this country how exactly?
MP's serve their parties and their constituents. If they don't, they're ultimately rejected by both groups. The idea that MP's are only serving 5% of "us" is ridiculous.
These doctors are standing up for principles that they believe in. Many people agree with them, many others don't. However, to say that these doctors are standing up for about 90% of "us" is equally ridiculous.
You're half right, they serve their parties who in turn serve big business. Anyone who truly believes that MP's serve the people deserve to be laughed off the internet.
You're half right, they serve their parties who in turn serve big business. Anyone who truly believes that MP's serve the people deserve to be laughed off the internet.
30-odd years ago you would of been partially correct though, old school MP's probably did care about their constituents rather than their financiers. but since the trendy, yuppie style politiburo's slimed their way into politics throughout the 80's you know the likes of Blair, Mandelson, Hague etc, it's never been the same.
Bang goes the coalitions majority in 2015. I hope they consolidate and form one political party that would really shake things up.
What would be funny is if The Greens or the Monster Raving Loonies got a majority. The reactionaries on here, dyed in the wool Tories and indeed the establishment would brick it.
Comments
I'm thrilled for you.
I'm very happy too. Such candidacy will further split the Labour vote and provide ample evidence that those moaning against the NHS bill are politically motivated.
Example: a quick search on Clive Peedell, the man orchestrating this gloriously egotistical farce reveals....
Seriously. Bring it on.
Yes I believe they will. In any case, they will care more than these mercenary upper-class numpties who don't have a clue about the real world..
Yep am proud to say equality for all is a big priority for me.
LOL, seriously??
How many Doctors do you know that have a moat or a chauffeur driven limo?
You mean like Politicians who are paid to represent their constituents but end up representing big business and corporations? hmmm
I mean yeah those bloody Doctors have a cheek standing up for not just their patients but for society as a whole and those corporatist teet suckling politicians would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling Docs.
I can see why the reactionaries are up in arms with this, I mean think about it, people who are not career politicians who are not in the pockets of corporations or have vested financial interests being involved in Politics actually challenging the establishment, how well bloody dare they.
Why not they stood down in Tatton(Knutsford) to get rid of Neil Hamilton, it would be great to get rid of George Osborne.
These doctors are standing up for themselves...nobody else.
Rubbish.
MPs serve themselves and their paymasters - the 5%.
Doctors are standing up for themselves and their patients - thats about 90% of us.
Which seems more democratic to you?
Also rubbish.
MP's serve their parties and their constituents. If they don't, they're ultimately rejected by both groups. The idea that MP's are only serving 5% of "us" is ridiculous.
These doctors are standing up for principles that they believe in. Many people agree with them, many others don't. However, to say that these doctors are standing up for about 90% of "us" is equally ridiculous.
We had a Tory MP who got well below 50% of the total votes cast but the other parties split the centre-left vote.
He was elected time after time by a significant minority of voters.
If the doctors are representing the vast majority who could not afford private health care and who may well find the NHS less responsive in future it may well equate to 90% of us.
You may well be able to afford private medicine in which case it won't worry you what happens to the N.H.S.
Whenever I think of Martin Bell I ask what difference he made.
Principles or ideologies?
A big if. The idea is that the NHS will be more responsive, not less - a fact backed up by more money being put into the NHS. Of course, if you elect your Labour MP that won't be the case and, as has been seen by their performance in Wales, standards are already starting to fall.
In among all the stats constantly being bandied about regarding the NHS this is the one that interests me most. Only 7% of RCGP members voted on the plan for primary care trusts to remain in place, while 41,000 family doctors kept their mouths shut. If the NHS reforms are so unpopular - why, when they were given every opportunity to vote against one of the key aspects - did only a tiny minority choose to do so?
The latter informs and shapes the former, doesn't it?
You're half right, they serve their parties who in turn serve big business. Anyone who truly believes that MP's serve the people deserve to be laughed off the internet.
God, and I thought I was cynical.
30-odd years ago you would of been partially correct though, old school MP's probably did care about their constituents rather than their financiers. but since the trendy, yuppie style politiburo's slimed their way into politics throughout the 80's you know the likes of Blair, Mandelson, Hague etc, it's never been the same.
What would be funny is if The Greens or the Monster Raving Loonies got a majority. The reactionaries on here, dyed in the wool Tories and indeed the establishment would brick it.
If only there was a Jedi party.