Options
Oh dear, Labour gets it wrong again
penelopesimpson
Posts: 14,909 Forum Member
✭✭
Daft to go for George Osborne over benefits re. Mick Philpott.
A great many labour voters (and others) believe that Mick Philpott was having a lifestyle funded by the State. George Osborne has called for a debate.
Labour don't believe in debate. We know that, but thanks for confirming it once again.
You are out of step with your own voters. Daft.
A great many labour voters (and others) believe that Mick Philpott was having a lifestyle funded by the State. George Osborne has called for a debate.
Labour don't believe in debate. We know that, but thanks for confirming it once again.
You are out of step with your own voters. Daft.
0
Comments
I am sorry I am more fond of Labour than I am of the Tories but how the blue blazes do you jump to that conclusion. George Osborne should concentrate on the economy something he has failed to assist in any way rather than trying to get political gain out of the death of six innocent children. Shame on him!
I dont see why so many are having problems understanding this. The problem is linking the fact that he killed his kids to benefits. Which the daily mail did, and now Osbourne has done.
Oh some evil bastard killed 6 of his children. This evil bastard was on benefits. Lets attack benefits while the public are already outraged over the murders. They are more likely to agree to cut more.
Its just bad taste to use this tragedy for political means.
But which the Judge didn't. In his summing up he just mentioned that Philpott had used his children to make himself look big and really didn't have any care or concer for them. Benefits were not mentioned. So where has all this rhetoric come from.
He was obviously having a lifestyle funded by the state I don't think anyone can or does dispute that. The problem seems to be with the implication by the Daily Mail that his lifestyle, which many people share, is some how responsible for his actions.which in turn implies that others who are living this same lifestyle are also capable of doing what he has. I'm not sure why Tories on here can't see that this is what it's all about and what some posters are objecting to.
However, this might be tempered if the telegraph piece on MPs griping about £15/day lunch subsidies (on top of recently jacked up salaries plus 2nd house allowance, plus travel plus £400 per month food...) gets run elsewhere...
You aren't another CCC robot who knows nothing beyond what you are ordered to know?
Still though anyone using this to score political points is disgusting. Children have been murdered ffs. Where is the respect for them?
Exactly.
The fire was about him and the way he lived was about him. He didn't care about anyone else and was totally happy for the state to support him and his 11 meal tickets.
Yup, that's right. Thick and stupid, walk around with my eyes shut, never read a newspaper, listen to the radio or television. And as for Newsnight and the Today programme - well, who needs them when you've got Jeremy Kyle.
Bah!
Why not try debating?
No debate then?
Presumably the same applies to Ed Miliband?
Oh, I forgot. Labour can raise questions, but others may not.
Oh dear, oh dear.:(
I've seen a whole load of labour politicians saying how disgusting Osborne is today.
Too stupid to realise that most of the people they are talking to agree with him and don't like to be told they are disgusting.
If Ed said that "all tories are baby eaters" would you condemn George if he made any comment in response?
Unions and Labour MPs and Balls have condemned Osborne today, I don't see your point.
Could we also have a debate about the teaching profession, seeing that some teachers turn out to be paedophiles?
Sure - go start a new thread about it.
A benefits claimant is a narcissistic violent piece of scum, therefore all benefits claimants should be treated as if they are narcissistic violent pieces of scum
Its a bit early for the next Tory Manifesto.
I agree he is a killer but how significant is it that he was on benefits and what role did it play in what he did ?
For what anyone knows he could have lived the same lifestyle if he had funded it himself and the outcome of that lifestyle could have been exactly the same. The difference being that people would not be blaming it on him being on benefits so we would probably not even be having this discussion.
Not significant at all..according to the judge.
The main motive, according to the rags.
I know which I would rather believe...
It's the way Osborne is using it for propaganda. As you can't see that you're just the sort of voter he's aiming at.