Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

Carnelian
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So a vote β€˜against’ is okay as long as it’s on β€˜principle’ ?

How many of the 600 plus times that Jeremy Corbyn has voted against the Whip have been β€˜on principle’, I wonder?

Seems to me there’s still a touch of β€˜double standards’ here but then that’s just the opinion of someone is not a β€˜political animal’ 

Moonie
Moonie posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So a vote β€˜against’ is okay as long as it’s on β€˜principle’ ?

How many of the 600 plus times that Jeremy Corbyn has voted against the Whip have been β€˜on principle’, I wonder?

Seems to me there’s still a touch of β€˜double standards’ here but then that’s just the opinion of someone is not a β€˜political animal’ 

 My point exactly, Moons.

Yogi19
Dame_Ann_Average posted:

The problem is Yogi, he's not resigned over antisemitism because there isn't any...he's resigned because his own CLP voted no confidence in him weeks back and he would not be reselected again. 

A handful of right wing MP's are throwing all sorts of slurs around, there is only one ultimate goal and that is for the Party to stay a Blairite party. 

 

Surely the goal of the opposition is to get into government, four Friends of Israel voted with the government over Brexit which would probably be the downfall of Theresa May and a possible General Election...that is unforgivable in my book.

 This isn't the first time Field was deselected, he advised voters to vote Lib dem in a Liverpool constituency in 1989 (I think) it's against party rules. MP's are there to serve their constituency and he would have been a goner at the next election... He's a Liverpool MP and the Sun is banned in Liverpool, Mr Field thought it would be a good idea to write a column in the Sun, he's done everything he can to ignore his constituents. 

Dame, I truly believe that you, personally have not witnessed any anti semitism in the Labour Party but that doesn’t mean there isn’t any. If there wasn’t/isn’t any, why would Jeremy Corby apologise for it?

 

As far as the role of the opposition, I believe it’s to β€œquestion and scrutinise the work of the government”.

Forgive me if I’ve got this wrong but are you saying opposition MPs should vote against their conscience if it might bring down the government? 

Yogi19
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Baz
Yogi19 posted:

Dame, I truly believe that you, personally have not witnessed any anti semitism in the Labour Party but that doesn’t mean there isn’t any. If there wasn’t/isn’t any, why would Jeremy Corby apologise for it?

 

As far as the role of the opposition, I believe it’s to β€œquestion and scrutinise the work of the government”.

Forgive me if I’ve got this wrong but are you saying opposition MPs should vote against their conscience if it might bring down the government? 

Yogi 

 

There is no more anti semitism in the Labout Party than any other party, I have looked up the latest figures from the NEC ..out of nearly 600.000 members without the affiliated unions up until July there are 50 cases outstanding, that is less than one in every hundred thousand. In fact racism and homophobia is far more prevalent in the Tory Party with only a fifth of the Labour Membership.

 

I was the one that brought up Frank Field voting for the Tories, so I guess the double standard posts applies to me. I will try and explain, Frank Field did not vote with his conscience, he voted to stop a TM being booted out at the least and a likely chance of a General Election. I couldn't give a fig about Frank Field or how he votes, but JC has never gone against the whip to help the Tories stay in power. He mainly voted against the whip when his party was in power ..war, cuts etc. 

 

I don't know how on earth one man is supposed to stop one person in a hundred thousand posting something that might deem to be ant semitic  Good grief, Theresa May can't control Boris' potty mouth and she knows who is saying it. I can blame TM for a lot of things but I would never blame her for what Boris says 

 

Margret Hodge the tax avoider said in an interview that the problem will not go away until Corbyn is gone, there you have it. Not one of these accusers have showed any proof of their claims after being asked time and time again, but it was never about that their sole purpose is to rid the party of MP's on the left. JC apologized mto anyone in the Jewish community who had been hurt by any anti semitic insults, it doesn't matter if it was ten or fifty...he apologized, he didn't apologize for any remarks he's made because he's not anti semitic and has fought racism in all forms all of is life. 

Dame_Ann_Average

Sorry Dame, I meant to reply last night 

 

I get that you are trying to differentiate between their motivation for rebelling but I don’t think we can say, it’s okay to rebel if I agree with you and wrong to rebel if I disagree. 

Carnelian suggested that Field was in the wrong party because

β€œparties exist so that like minded people gather and vote like-mindedly for the same broad objective because they support more or less the same principles.”

By that definition, Jeremy Corbyn was obviously well out of step with the Labour Party when he voted against the Whip a massive 617 times, and 428 of those rebellions were when his own party was in government. Seems to me that JC was the one who was in the wrong party.

Do I think JC is anti Semite? No and, I know he wasn’t apologising for remarks he made, but as leader of the party, it’s his responsibility to ensure that those who are accused of anti semitism are dealt with accordingly and swiftly.

Ken Livingstone was suspended for two years with no conclusion to the allegations of anti semitism and in the end, he resigned - so the investigation was scrapped. It’s that lack of action that adds fuel to the fire, imo.

As for Boris, the buffoon. I do blame TM for not being much stronger and putting him back in his box! 

 

Minding awaits 

Yogi19

Yogi 

 

If Frank Field was rebelling because of his principles I wouldn't have any qualms, what is going on with a handful of Blairite MP's is designed to get rid of the leadership and for no other reason and I can say that with certainty. I agree with Carnelian about Frank Field, his politics are more akin to the Tories than what the Labour Party set out to be. Blair changed the Labour party and to a certain extent Kinnock too and we lost 4 million voters because of it. Member were disillusioned with hardly any difference between the Tories and the Labour Party. JC voted on his socialist principles and voted against the whip because Blair was never a Socialist and as Margaret Thatcher once said *Tony Blair and New Labour was her greatest achievement* Frank Field also advised Margaret Thatcher ...go figure. 

 

JC cannot deal with people that have been reported for antisemitism, he has no authority to do so, that is dealt with by the NEC. When Ken Livingston was suspended that was up to General Secretary Ian McNicol to deal with, he didn't and he also didn't implement any of Baroness Chakrabarti's recommendations either. Another Blairite who has been given a peerage by TM and is now sitting in the house of Lords in payment for the good work he did in the Labour Party for the Tories 

 

As for Boris, TM is stuck with him, she can't control him because she's too weak at the minute to anything about it, that's why I don't blame her for anything he says, her hands are tied if she wants to stay Prime minister. 

 

Hope the child minding goes well  

Dame_Ann_Average
Last edited by Dame_Ann_Average
Moonie posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So a vote β€˜against’ is okay as long as it’s on β€˜principle’ ?

How many of the 600 plus times that Jeremy Corbyn has voted against the Whip have been β€˜on principle’, I wonder?

Seems to me there’s still a touch of β€˜double standards’ here but then that’s just the opinion of someone is not a β€˜political animal’ 

I don't know.  The point is Labour is a social democrat/socialist party not the Tory Party.  It's not really double standards, it's the standards of the party Field is supposed to be an MP for.  

If Field wants to vote against the party on principles that are more aligned with the Tory Party than the Labour Party, the Tory Party is the party that's best for him. 

 

It's not double standards, it's what parties stand for.  It's why Anna Soubry gets so much flack from Tory voters because on many issues - particularly Brexit - she seems more Lib Dem than Tory.  

 

 

Carnelian
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Well yes, because Labour is a social democrat left wing party!  It isn't the Lib Dems or Tories.  Field's politics are a better fit for the Tory Party.  The problem I have with Field is he is a Tory in practice who hasn't the guts to stand under the Tory rosette because he knows Birkenhead wouldn't elect him as a Tory. 

 

He doesn't care less about antisemitism - and has never voiced an opinion on it -  and is using it to cause the maximum damage to the Labour Party and Corbyn.  That cynical behaviour merits his expulsion from the party.

 

He did recommend 'problem families' be 'ghettoised' - his own words - in secure units under the Birkenhead motorway.  Ghettoising, hmm, wonder who that sounds like? 

 

He also criticised Tory, Keith Joseph for being a (paraphrased)  'a senior Jew who was pursuing the policies of Nazis'.   Something that would get Corbyn hung, drawn and quartered under the present contrived BS agenda of UK media.  I wonder if Field ever raised the issue Thatcher labelling Nelson Mandela as a terrorist during his friendship with her or her support of General Pinochet vile regime?  Field is a very hypocritical character who quite honestly has morals in the cesspit but pretends he's above reproach.  

 

So yes it is ok to vote for left wing principles in the Labour Party.  It's not ok in the Tory Party!

 

If the Tory Party want to oust Ken Clark or Anna Soubry for being too leftist, that's their call.  I doubt there's many Ukip would be MPs who support Remain!

 

You've made the mistake of attacking me for a hypocrisy you perceive I have but I don't have that hypocrisy at all.

Carnelian
Last edited by Carnelian

Sorry Dame, I’m having problems when I try to quote long posts

 

I thought JC was on the NEC and his supporters on the NEC were in the majority? If that’s correct, he’s hardly without influence on the NEC.

John McDonnell said that the party was a β€œbroad church” and he would welcome Frank Field back into the fold. 

He’s right, in the respect that within the Labour Party there is quite a wide spectrum of opinions on what they want from a modern socialist party.

Whilst plenty support JC and his vision for the party, there are other long time Labour Party voters who find him too far left and will never vote Labour while JC is leading the party. If Labour isn’t careful, I can see a split coming.

 

Yogi19

 

Yogi, the new NEC panel don't take their seats until after the Conference ( I'm not sure of the dates) So the vote last night was with the old panel with some of the right of the party. 

Labour always was a broad church and MP's accepted the differences or tolerated the differences. Frank Field would be welcomed back although I doubt his CLP will have him back, they washed their hands of him weeks ago. Only 6% of voters vote for a person to represent them in their constituency, the rest vote for the party they support. Birkenhead is Labour through and through. I think Frank Field would have little chance of being voted in as an Independent.

 

 JC isn't looked upon as far left in most European Counties most left wing Europeans look upon him as a Social Democrat and I haven't seen anything radical in his policies that are hard left, this Country has move so far right anyone who opposes Capitalism is viewed as hard left. 

 

I truly can't see a split or breakaway, they want the Labour party coffers and to be fair if people wanted a centrist party why are the Lib Dems doing so badly. After months and months of a right wing media battering and no chance of rebuttals from Jews who know and have stated the antisemitism slurs are false we are still 4 points in front. I am in groups and a did a rough count of around about 100,000 members of just two of the groups I am in, I see more people joining daily and more members joining the Labour Party daily...I am sure that percentage will go up near a General Election when broadcasters have to give equal airtime to JC...at present the BBC/Sky are rolling out the same anti Corbyn Mp's day after day..I'm sure they have them on speed dial. 

 

They will not give up trying to oust JC...this was Margaret Hodge last night, talk about over egging the pudding 

Two steps forward and one step back. Why dilute the welcome adoption IN FULL of the definition of with an unnecessary qualification?

 

This was Margaret Hodge a month ago on Sky News

 

So they have done what she suggested and that's not enough. At least one good thing that has come out of this, more people have looked into what is happening in Palestine and more people now understand their plight. 

 

 

Dame_Ann_Average
Carnelian posted:
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Well yes, because Labour is a social democrat left wing party!  It isn't the Lib Dems or Tories.  Field's politics are a better fit for the Tory Party.  The problem I have with Field is he is a Tory in practice who hasn't the guts to stand under the Tory rosette because he knows Birkenhead wouldn't elect him as a Tory. 

 

He doesn't care less about antisemitism - and has never voiced an opinion on it -  and is using it to cause the maximum damage to the Labour Party and Corbyn.  That cynical behaviour merits his expulsion from the party.

 

He did recommend 'problem families' be 'ghettoised' - his own words - in secure units under the Birkenhead motorway.  Ghettoising, hmm, wonder who that sounds like? 

 

He also criticised Tory, Keith Joseph for being a (paraphrased)  'a senior Jew who was pursuing the policies of Nazis'.   Something that would get Corbyn hung, drawn and quartered under the present contrived BS agenda of UK media.  I wonder if Field ever raised the issue Thatcher labelling Nelson Mandela as a terrorist during his friendship with her or her support of General Pinochet vile regime?  Field is a very hypocritical character who quite honestly has morals in the cesspit but pretends he's above reproach.  

 

So yes it is ok to vote for left wing principles in the Labour Party.  It's not ok in the Tory Party!

 

If the Tory Party want to oust Ken Clark or Anna Soubry for being too leftist, that's their call.  I doubt there's many Ukip would be MPs who support Remain!

 

You've made the mistake of attacking me for a hypocrisy you perceive I have but I don't have that hypocrisy at all.

Carnelian , I deliberately added the caveat that β€œyou β€œ was meant in the widest possible sense of the word ....I wasn’t attacking any one individual. The bottom line is , politically at least ...unless an individual is a saint ....and I’ve not met one yet ...we are all subject to our own biases. What we choose to believe ; where we get our news/information from; what statistics we accept or don’t accept ; how we determine truth and lies; who we think are the good guys or the bad guys ; what causes we believe are on the side of the angels , what are on the side of the devil ...all these factors are pre determined by our own personal preferences and life experiences.

 

The danger/reality  is that a lot of people don’t seem to acknowledge, or even understand  this ...therefore they mistakenly see everything as black and white ....them and us ...love or hate .....whereas the truth of the matter is that most , if not all,  of political life is simply shades of the same damn awful muddy grey . What I’d really like is that instead of this party rubbish and infighting  ...left or right ...politicians would get their act together and start sorting the country out ! But then I’d like a lot of things that are never going to happen

Baz
Last edited by Baz
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Well yes, because Labour is a social democrat left wing party!  It isn't the Lib Dems or Tories.  Field's politics are a better fit for the Tory Party.  The problem I have with Field is he is a Tory in practice who hasn't the guts to stand under the Tory rosette because he knows Birkenhead wouldn't elect him as a Tory. 

 

He doesn't care less about antisemitism - and has never voiced an opinion on it -  and is using it to cause the maximum damage to the Labour Party and Corbyn.  That cynical behaviour merits his expulsion from the party.

 

He did recommend 'problem families' be 'ghettoised' - his own words - in secure units under the Birkenhead motorway.  Ghettoising, hmm, wonder who that sounds like? 

 

He also criticised Tory, Keith Joseph for being a (paraphrased)  'a senior Jew who was pursuing the policies of Nazis'.   Something that would get Corbyn hung, drawn and quartered under the present contrived BS agenda of UK media.  I wonder if Field ever raised the issue Thatcher labelling Nelson Mandela as a terrorist during his friendship with her or her support of General Pinochet vile regime?  Field is a very hypocritical character who quite honestly has morals in the cesspit but pretends he's above reproach.  

 

So yes it is ok to vote for left wing principles in the Labour Party.  It's not ok in the Tory Party!

 

If the Tory Party want to oust Ken Clark or Anna Soubry for being too leftist, that's their call.  I doubt there's many Ukip would be MPs who support Remain!

 

You've made the mistake of attacking me for a hypocrisy you perceive I have but I don't have that hypocrisy at all.

Carnelian , I deliberately added the caveat that β€œyou β€œ was meant in the widest possible sense of the word ....I wasn’t attacking any one individual. The bottom line is , politically at least ...unless an individual is a saint ....and I’ve not met one yet ...we are all subject to our own biases. What we choose to believe ; where we get our news/information from; what statistics we accept or don’t accept ; how we determine truth and lies; who we think are the good guys or the bad guys ; what causes we believe are on the side of the angels , what are on the side of the devil ...all these factors are pre determined by our own personal preferences and life experiences.

 

The danger/reality  is that a lot of people don’t seem to acknowledge, or even understand  this ...therefore they mistakenly see everything as black and white ....them and us ...love or hate .....whereas the truth of the matter is that most , if not all,  of political life is simply shades of the same damn awful muddy grey . What I’d really like is that instead of this party rubbish and infighting  ...left or right ...politicians would get their act together and start sorting the country out ! But then I’d like a lot of things that are never going to happen

Very well said Baz

Kaytee
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Well yes, because Labour is a social democrat left wing party!  It isn't the Lib Dems or Tories.  Field's politics are a better fit for the Tory Party.  The problem I have with Field is he is a Tory in practice who hasn't the guts to stand under the Tory rosette because he knows Birkenhead wouldn't elect him as a Tory. 

 

He doesn't care less about antisemitism - and has never voiced an opinion on it -  and is using it to cause the maximum damage to the Labour Party and Corbyn.  That cynical behaviour merits his expulsion from the party.

 

He did recommend 'problem families' be 'ghettoised' - his own words - in secure units under the Birkenhead motorway.  Ghettoising, hmm, wonder who that sounds like? 

 

He also criticised Tory, Keith Joseph for being a (paraphrased)  'a senior Jew who was pursuing the policies of Nazis'.   Something that would get Corbyn hung, drawn and quartered under the present contrived BS agenda of UK media.  I wonder if Field ever raised the issue Thatcher labelling Nelson Mandela as a terrorist during his friendship with her or her support of General Pinochet vile regime?  Field is a very hypocritical character who quite honestly has morals in the cesspit but pretends he's above reproach.  

 

So yes it is ok to vote for left wing principles in the Labour Party.  It's not ok in the Tory Party!

 

If the Tory Party want to oust Ken Clark or Anna Soubry for being too leftist, that's their call.  I doubt there's many Ukip would be MPs who support Remain!

 

You've made the mistake of attacking me for a hypocrisy you perceive I have but I don't have that hypocrisy at all.

Carnelian , I deliberately added the caveat that β€œyou β€œ was meant in the widest possible sense of the word ....I wasn’t attacking any one individual. The bottom line is , politically at least ...unless an individual is a saint ....and I’ve not met one yet ...we are all subject to our own biases. What we choose to believe ; where we get our news/information from; what statistics we accept or don’t accept ; how we determine truth and lies; who we think are the good guys or the bad guys ; what causes we believe are on the side of the angels , what are on the side of the devil ...all these factors are pre determined by our own personal preferences and life experiences.

 

The danger/reality  is that a lot of people don’t seem to acknowledge, or even understand  this ...therefore they mistakenly see everything as black and white ....them and us ...love or hate .....whereas the truth of the matter is that most , if not all,  of political life is simply shades of the same damn awful muddy grey . What I’d really like is that instead of this party rubbish and infighting  ...left or right ...politicians would get their act together and start sorting the country out ! But then I’d like a lot of things that are never going to happen

Great post, Baz 

Yogi19
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Baz posted:
Carnelian posted:
Yogi19 posted:

Jeremy Corbyn voted against the Whip on over 600 occasions and is lauded as a man of principle.

Frank Field gets castigated for doing the same.

Some serious double standards afoot, IMO. 

 

BTW, am I the only one to keep reading this thread as β€œFrank Ifield has resigned.....” 

Corbyn voted against the whip on matters of principle.  Peace, Iraq war, Afghanistan war, First Iraq war, Blairite welfare cuts, jumping into bed with the gambling industry etc.  

Field for matters of his rightist principle.  For the Iraq war, ghettoisation of the 'undesirable working class' for attacks on the poorest and for privatisations.

So it’s ok to vote against as long as it’s leftist principles , but not rightist?   Or is it just ok if politicians vote against stuff as long as you ( in the widest  sense of the word) agree with their principles ? 

Well yes, because Labour is a social democrat left wing party!  It isn't the Lib Dems or Tories.  Field's politics are a better fit for the Tory Party.  The problem I have with Field is he is a Tory in practice who hasn't the guts to stand under the Tory rosette because he knows Birkenhead wouldn't elect him as a Tory. 

 

He doesn't care less about antisemitism - and has never voiced an opinion on it -  and is using it to cause the maximum damage to the Labour Party and Corbyn.  That cynical behaviour merits his expulsion from the party.

 

He did recommend 'problem families' be 'ghettoised' - his own words - in secure units under the Birkenhead motorway.  Ghettoising, hmm, wonder who that sounds like? 

 

He also criticised Tory, Keith Joseph for being a (paraphrased)  'a senior Jew who was pursuing the policies of Nazis'.   Something that would get Corbyn hung, drawn and quartered under the present contrived BS agenda of UK media.  I wonder if Field ever raised the issue Thatcher labelling Nelson Mandela as a terrorist during his friendship with her or her support of General Pinochet vile regime?  Field is a very hypocritical character who quite honestly has morals in the cesspit but pretends he's above reproach.  

 

So yes it is ok to v