Article

2004-07-17 Britain

Blair faces quit call in backbench backlash

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2004-07-17 12:36:19 AM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 It's not wise to dismiss such upsets as 'political jabbering' or irrelevant, just because Labour still has a safe majority in parliament. For whatever reasons, Blair's party sufered major losses in those two seats which, if replicated nationwide at next year's election, would see a total change in the British political landscape. The most worrisome impact would be having the Lib Dems in a position of power. That would be the US's worst case scenario as far as the UK is concerned.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 4:17:03 AM|| 2004-07-17 4:17:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Thanks, Bulldog, when I read the article it seemed like just the usual jabbering -- kind of thing I could read in WaPo any day of the week. Of course, we too could see our political landscape change in the coming election, and not for the better.

Posted by Steve White 2004-07-17 11:02:54 AM|| 2004-07-17 11:02:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Hopefully not though, Steve!

The Lib Dems are the only party in British politics that seriously worries me. In attitude towards the big issues and threats, they're comparable to your average continental party - i.e. blind. In attitude towards the other issues, no one really has a clue what they stand for. They're the ultimate populists, all for banning things one minute, legalising the next. When Labour went 'New' under Blair, and skewed rightwards stealing traditional Tory ground, the Lib Dems veered leftwards to occupy the now vacant statists 'n' loonies territory.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 12:26:27 PM|| 2004-07-17 12:26:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Bulldog, are we talking Red Ken and Clare Short?

Posted by Jen 2004-07-17 12:33:31 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-07-17 12:33:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Nope! They're the loony left of the Labour party. Like Galloway was, and Tam Dalyell, Robin Cook etc. They're the 'Old Labour' dinosaurs who always resented Blair's rebranding of Labour, and still protest noisily about it. There's little chance that they'll take the party back any time soon.

The Lib Dems are mostly a bunch of non-entities. Professional politician-types. The ugly, boring little people. Little Hitlers. Heh.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 12:42:38 PM|| 2004-07-17 12:42:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 I mean "little" there in terms of character, not size or social status. They mainly represent the self-excluded and the Middle classes.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 12:46:24 PM|| 2004-07-17 12:46:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 ...and now claim to champion the ethnic minorities (like your Democrats, they strive to promote racial disharmony and cultural segregation in order to monopolise minority votes), which used to be one of Labour's most reliable sources of support. They are also claiming the right to anti-war-types' votes. They really have nothing to commend them.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 12:51:14 PM|| 2004-07-17 12:51:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Bulldog, what's up with this story about Barclay's Bank and the new Britain Independent party?
( They're bad because they're anti-immigrant? The way things sound in the UK, you could get knighted for that!)

Posted by Jen 2004-07-17 12:55:25 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-07-17 12:55:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Barclays have said they're blocking the accounts of the BNP, not UKIP. Two very different parties. UKIP (The United Kindon Independence Party) is effectively a single-issue anti-EU party with much public support (at least in European elections) whereas the BNP (British Nationalist Party) is widely considered to be a quasi-fascist racist group which attracts the sort of people who turn red with violent rage at the sight of someone walking down their street who has a complexion darker than Nicole Kidman's.

It's up to Barclays whose custom they decide to turn down, but I think it's pretty disgusting that they were happy to have the BNP's business until a recent BBC documentary exposed some of its members as violent thugs (not news: we all knew that anyway) and, at least according to the BNP website (see link above) after pressure from an un-named 'pro-Labour national newspaper'. The BNP as an organisation is a legitimate political party, and whatever you think of its baser instincts, its policies don't advocate illegal activities (as far as I'm aware), so Barclays doing this does smell like cooperation with a form of political censorship.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 1:16:42 PM|| 2004-07-17 1:16:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Oops. UKIP = United Kingdom Independence Party, not Klingon or whatever else you might imagine from my typo.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-07-17 1:23:19 PM|| 2004-07-17 1:23:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Somehow I think anything with 'Klingon' in it might get at least 2% of the vote...

Posted by Pappy 2004-07-17 5:32:52 PM|| 2004-07-17 5:32:52 PM|| Front Page Top

07:50 Anonymous1781
13:37 Jen
13:27 Jen
00:54 Lucky
00:33 Lucky
00:16 RWV
00:02 RWV
23:59 RWV
23:31 Lucky
23:31 Anonymoose
23:25 incredulous
23:21 Korora
23:20 Korora
23:18 Anonymoose
23:18 Anonymoose
22:59 .com
22:52 Anonymoose
22:52 Fred
22:51 3dc
22:48 The Doctor
22:42 Pappy
22:36 AzCat
21:34 trailing wife
21:30 OldSpook