chairman bill wrote:Oh so holier than thou, aren't you?

Could I maybe point out that Livingstone was also elected twice, and achieved far more positive things for London than Bumbling Boris ever has. And it was your typifying Boris as competent & Livingstone as incompetent that was clearly the pro-Tory bollocks that I was commenting on. Your stock-in-trade seems to be pro-Tory bollocks, and nothing here is set to counter that view.

What the fuck are you blathering about?

My stock in trade is defence of freedom and democracy, nothing I've written here counteracts that, and so far as mayor of London is concerned, I'll leave it up to the people who have to live there to decide rather than sticking my oar in.

yeah, right.

Strontium Dog wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:Boris is a political liar, a cheat on his wife, it is totally amazing how his charisma totally negates that in the public eye.

Not everyone votes on spin. Maybe the Londoners who have repeatedly elected him are judging based on results and not personalities. Maybe they consider a competent liar and cheat to be better than an incompetent liar and cheat who does deals with left-wing dictators.

Just a thought.

Boris has been cited 11 times (on LBC who played his quotes on air) stating he would not run as an MP and would be solely dedicated to his full term of mayor, what part of liar do you not understand? He has had three affairs, and one love child, what part of cheat and indeed oath breaker do you not understand?

I am left with only one conclusion, your views on the subject of Boris Johnson are to instigate discourse for discourse sake and have zero merit to them.

My stock in trade is defence of freedom and democracy, nothing I've written here counteracts that

A London word for that is BOLLOCKS.

Peter Brown wrote:

Strontium Dog wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:Boris is a political liar, a cheat on his wife, it is totally amazing how his charisma totally negates that in the public eye.

Not everyone votes on spin. Maybe the Londoners who have repeatedly elected him are judging based on results and not personalities. Maybe they consider a competent liar and cheat to be better than an incompetent liar and cheat who does deals with left-wing dictators.

Just a thought.

Boris has been cited 11 times (on LBC who played his quotes on air) stating he would not run as an MP and would be solely dedicated to his full term of mayor, what part of liar do you not understand? He has had three affairs, and one love child, what part of cheat and indeed oath breaker do you not understand?

I am left with only one conclusion, your views on the subject of Boris Johnson are to instigate discourse for discourse sake and have zero merit to them.

What in the actual fuck are you talking about?

I JUST referred to Boris in my post as a cheat and liar. I've red bolded the parts, so you can't pretend you haven't seen it.

Try reading the fucking thing, cheers. This message goes to the person who gave your post a thumbs up too.

Boris sees the mayor of London as a part time job.

Just what plans has ever completed?
He is a bloody arse of a spoilt brat and I hope he becomes leader of the Tory/fascist party.

London has a massive housing problem but what is he doing about it?

SD, what evidence do you have that shows Boris to be competent, whilst showing Ken Livingstone to have been incompetent, a liar & a cheat?

chairman bill wrote:SD, what evidence do you have that shows Boris to be competent, whilst showing Ken Livingstone to have been incompetent, a liar & a cheat?

Liar? Sure, he's a politician and that's what they do. I believe Andrew Gilligan keeps a handy list somewhere that can easily be found by those interested.

Cheat? Well, he's also had children out of wedlock and a rather convoluted history of partners, so if you want to judge by such things.

However, do I honestly care about either? No, but I think competence matters.

Matt_B wrote:Cheat? Well, he's also had children out of wedlock and a rather convoluted history of partners, so if you want to judge by such things.

I don't, but if we are to do so, we've no evidence of actual cheating. None whatsoever. I'd add that the right-wing press did their best to expose dirty laundry when he led the GLC, and they found bugger all. Well, that's not true; they discovered his liking for amphibians.

However, do I honestly care about either? No, but I think competence matters.

I think his record with the GLC and during both terms as mayor, stand comparison with just about any other politician in similar position. It certainly stands way above Boris' achievements.

Strontium Dog wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:

Strontium Dog wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:Boris is a political liar, a cheat on his wife, it is totally amazing how his charisma totally negates that in the public eye.

Not everyone votes on spin. Maybe the Londoners who have repeatedly elected him are judging based on results and not personalities. Maybe they consider a competent liar and cheat to be better than an incompetent liar and cheat who does deals with left-wing dictators.

Just a thought.

Boris has been cited 11 times (on LBC who played his quotes on air) stating he would not run as an MP and would be solely dedicated to his full term of mayor, what part of liar do you not understand? He has had three affairs, and one love child, what part of cheat and indeed oath breaker do you not understand?

I am left with only one conclusion, your views on the subject of Boris Johnson are to instigate discourse for discourse sake and have zero merit to them.

What in the actual fuck are you talking about?

I JUST referred to Boris in my post as a cheat and liar. I've red bolded the parts, so you can't pretend you haven't seen it.

Try reading the fucking thing, cheers. This message goes to the person who gave your post a thumbs up too.

I misread your message it seems. It happens you know.

in red so you might be happy

Matt_B wrote:

chairman bill wrote:SD, what evidence do you have that shows Boris to be competent, whilst showing Ken Livingstone to have been incompetent, a liar & a cheat?

Liar? Sure, he's a politician and that's what they do. I believe Andrew Gilligan keeps a handy list somewhere that can easily be found by those interested.

Cheat? Well, he's also had children out of wedlock and a rather convoluted history of partners, so if you want to judge by such things.

However, do I honestly care about either? No, but I think competence matters.

Its a conservative defence they are the upholders of moral traditions, like faithfulness in marriage, sex in wedlock, and a marriage is a legal contract to be monogamous, so I feel it is quite fair to bring that claim seeing Boris is a Tory upholding Tory values and was married that if he broke these things he was a cheat to Tory values and legal vows.

Peter Brown wrote:I misread your message it seems. It happens you know.

Bollocks! SD might occasionally misread something (though he never actually gets it wrong), but people like you simply engage in the most egregiously criminal assaults on one of RatSkep's sole defenders of freedom 'n' democracy. Allegedly.

chairman bill wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:I misread your message it seems. It happens you know.

Bollocks! SD might occasionally misread something (though he never actually gets it wrong), but people like you simply engage in the most egregiously criminal assaults on one of RatSkep's sole defenders of freedom 'n' democracy. Allegedly.

I attacked your view, this would be one of those personal attacks you wouldn't perform.

I'm a Trotskyite enemy of freedom, so feel free to simply dismiss anything I say. But SD is above reproach. Never wrong, never instigates personal attacks, is fragrant and attractive and simply wonderful.

chairman bill wrote:I don't, but if we are to do so, we've no evidence of actual cheating. None whatsoever. I'd add that the right-wing press did their best to expose dirty laundry when he led the GLC, and they found bugger all. Well, that's not true; they discovered his liking for amphibians.

Well, other than three children he'd kept secret born to two different mothers, neither of which was his partner at the time. I suppose there are ways for that to happen without there being any cheating going on but, as I said before, I'm not fussed.

And yes, his record as mayor generally seemed pretty good to me, but I'm more interested in what SD has to say on that seeing as he was the one questioning Livingstone's competence.

chairman bill wrote:I'm a Trotskyite enemy of freedom, so feel free to simply dismiss anything I say. But SD is above reproach. Never wrong, never instigates personal attacks, is fragrant and attractive and simply wonderful.

It would be like having a stock in trade of the defence of freedom and democracy, just like GW Bush and Tony Blair had after delusional WMDs and terrorists under the beds of Afghanistan were exposed to the West. Thankfully God told them what to do.

Matt_B wrote:Well, other than three children he'd kept secret born to two different mothers, neither of which was his partner at the time. I suppose there are ways for that to happen without there being any cheating going on but, as I said before, I'm not fussed.

Apparently both mothers were worried about getting too old to have a child, but didn't want anonymous sperm via artificial insemination. Livingstone has admitted to having provided the sperm, but no more detail has been forthcoming, and why should it? As for the secrecy - whose business was it?

And yes, his record as mayor generally seemed pretty good to me, but I'm more interested in what SD has to say on that seeing as he was the one questioning Livingstone's competence.

Me too. Don't hold your breath.

Meanwhile, with respect to the matter of Boris aiming for the top job ... what makes the Tory Party think that what this country needs is another fucking Bullingdon Boy tosser toff?

We've had Bullingdon Boy tosser toffs running the country for four years, and they've been a bunch of fucktards and bastards from the outset. Trying to sell the Tories' diseased policies by swapping one Bullingdon Boy for another, is like trying to persuade your neighbour that your rabid pit bull, that's recently amputated said neighbour's leg, is really a cuddly teddy bear at heart, by slapping lipstick on it.

All Boris will do is continue the same hate-the-poor, love-the-rich plutofascist policies, but with added tabloid comedy thrown in. He possesses the same mindset as the rest of the Tory scum, namely that he thinks the poor are vermin to be stamped on, whilst the assorted unholy cabal of chinless aristos, corporate robber barons and bonus b(w)ankers he comes from are the only people who deserve to be treated as human beings. We need Boris, or any fucking Tory for that matter, like we need a mass Ebola outbreak. The sooner they're sent packing, the better.

But...I've seen him on TV! He's an amiable buffoon. What possible harm could it be having such an amusing posh boy as leader of the country? It must have been so jolly being part of that Bullingdon crowd. These people were born to rule. Clearly they know better than us how things ought to be done.

I've no doubt we'll get some Tory apologist telling us that Labour taking funding from the Trades Unions that helped establish the party, is somehow comparable. Anyway, cash for peerages, anyone?

David Cameron in spotlight over two more peerages to Tory party donors
Labour claims 13 peers created by the prime minister during term of office have donated more than £22m to party coffers
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/08/david-cameron-spotlight-lordships-given-tory-party-donors

David Cameron was embroiled in another cash for peerages row after he ennobled two big donors in a 22-strong list of new political peers.

The pair were the Conservative party treasurer Michael Farmer, who has given £5.9m to the party, and an Asian businessman, Ranbir Singh Suri, chairman of Oceanic Jewellers. Labour said that 13 peers created by Cameron since becoming prime minister were Tory donors, including Farmer and Suri. The 13 have collectively given the Tories more than £22m, Labour claimed.

Of the 22, there are 12 Conservative peers, six Liberal Democrats, three Labour and one Democratic Unionist. Half are women. (cont)

Liberal Democrats were donated the price of a cuppa tea.

seriously the LibDem and Labour donations were given peanuts compared to the Tory ones

Mr Farmer has donated more than £6.5 million to the Conservatives.
Mr Singh, a former general secretary of the Board of British Sikhs, has contributed a further £312,435

new Liberal Democat peers, Barbara Janke, former leader of Bristol City Council, has donated £5,498, while ex-Sheffield City Council leader Paul Scriven has given £2,000.

Labour side, ex-East Enders actor Michael Cashman has donated £2,500 while the publisher and chair of Penguin Random House, Dame Gail Rebuck, has given £2,000.
Press Association

Ukip complained that Cameron had denied it any peerages, despite its strong showing in the European and local elections.