Camerons face

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by crabby, May 3, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Watching Parliment's question time... I don't like Blair but I dislike Cameron more. Cameron was getting all smug thinking his was giving blair a roasting over deportation, then blair stood up and gave some figures on the tory record.... when cameron was a special advsior to the home office only 300 were deported a year, at any one time 500 a year had unknown nationality being released. He did not expect Cameron to take responsibility but the look on Cameron's face was a picture. He looked like he wanted to go home and cry to mummy.

    I do think Clarke should go, Prescott should stay and more of the public should watch this. Opens your eyes more to both sides of the arguments and to be honest it shows why Blair has been in so long, in the common's he's good, he's not stupid.

    Editted to add: Blair did bring up the point that when they tried to bring in tougher laws the Tories voted against it, as per usual. On the otherhand blair's getting a roasting over his handling of Clarke and quite rightly deserves to have 3 para mortars joining in the roasting :p
  2. Cameron will be a liability. He absolutely exudes (excretes?) faux sincerity. I really don't think he has a scooby about anything. Some of his party activists hereabouts think the same.

    Bet you wish you had Duncan-Smith or Hague back now don't you.
  3. Crabby, can I ask why it is you think that Prescott should stay? After all he abused his position of trust and was caught.
  4. Hague tried to early. If Hague was standing now and didn't have his past attempt he'd wipe the floor with labour.

    Cameron is involved in personal attacks, he's planned his speeches and he can't come back at any arguments.

    He's still not come up with policy, only fluffy ideas, some of which he's already backtracked on.

    I wish there was a real alternative to Labour, but Lib Dems are just.... *sigh* and Cameron would be a complete liability to this country.

    Long live El Presidente Blair :p :p

    (for those that will instantly jump on me and rip my throat out don't take that last sentence seriously :p)
  5. I'm not overly happy about the bod in charge of the Lib Dems , but he is old and wise allegedly. However Vincent Cable is commonly agreed to be an outstanding Parliamentarian. There is change coming , just as soon as we mount the Putsch at conference this year :twisted:
  6. Prescott has a reasonably good record. Affairs are unfortunately a matter of everyday life. I don't see how he abused his position of trust in a way - he had an affair with someone he worked closely with and for a long time. It takes two to have an affair, she can not wipe her hands of her responsibility for her actions. She knew he was married just as much as he knew he was married.

    I'm surprised his wife has not left him, that he deserves. But for Labour Prescott has been important in keeping "old labour" inline with "new labour" and has helped tone down some of the blairite stuff. We probably have more to thank him for than we realise!! If he hadn't been doing a reasonable job he wouldn't have been deputy PM all this time.
  7. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    The reality is that Cameron will win votes in the wishy-washy centre where they count: there are lots of people out there who still think Tony Bliar seems like a nice man, and Cameron is cut from a similar cloth. Duncan-Smith was dire and we're well shot of him. Hague is young enough to possibly have another go one day: he's a very capable bloke who made a serious mistake in going for the leadership when he did.
  8. Apart from which the real issue isn't just about numbers removed, it's also about the numbers coming in. Lets have a look at some FACTS (extracted from -> )

    More "foreign folk live in the UK now than ever before, the rate of immigration ids increasing exponentially especially when you consider these figure do not include the estimated 500,00 to 1,500,000 illegal immigrants.
  9. You point being? The incoming numbers did not rise by 5 times within a ten year period, unlike the deportions. Remember in those numbers are those from Europe and America, as well as what people would traditionally define as "immigrants".

    Editted to add: Rising exponentially? Bollox... BBC need to learn their maths. How much has illegal immigration increased? That wasn't quoted either. If you look at the recent record on immigration Labour aren't actually doing too badly, they've cut down the decision time by months since the Tory times, they have got tougher; they're just not quite tough enough.
  10. Sorry edited for lack of sense to the post above..

    If you check on page three of the stats it gives the origin of the immigrants... the US is far down the pecking order. (5th in rank but not in volume)

    Add in the fact that many of the "European" immigrants are not actually European in origin and it muddies the waters even further, my ex-German neighbours being perfect examples. They come from a small village outside of Dehli... Very German....... They just happened to have spent 5 years in Germany, gained citizenship (or the German equivalent) and then moved here.
  11. I can't understand why people think that an affair by a public person is 'private'. He is a married man and has now failed to live up to the promises he made to his wife and in front of either a) the law of the land or b) to his religion. Not personally a happy clapper but I feel that those oaths are serious and should be honoured. How do you trust a man who can't be trusted by his wife? What lies has he told her that he wouldn't be willing to tell to his constituents.

    Abuse of position of trust? Using his grace and favour accommodation and the time when he was meant to be at work sh@gging? She is as guilty as he is, but it shouldn't just fall on her. He is damaged goods.

    As for Cameron he looked like a slapped spoiled brat when Blair didn't answer his questions and dug up >10 yr old history!
  12. 360,371 - 1971 -> 1981
    402,245 - 1981 -> 1991
    1,147,905 - 1991 -> 2001

    Err.. How is your maths mate? The above rise as per the figures does not map out to a straight line graph to me? The figures on there do look strangely exponential to me? Unless you can do special maths (New Labour stylee of course). Maybe you should book in at your Ed Centre for a rehash of maths.......
  13. Look up the definition of exponential, it may not be a straight line but it's also not adjusted to the overall population, which would flatten the line
  14. Ahhhh! I see so we have to "adjust" the numbers... That makes the numbers more palatable does it?

    Now just think Ladies and Gents, Who do we know that favours "adjusting" data to make it fit?
    Thats right the political apologist scum that have left us in this bloody situation in the first place.

    Sorry Crabby, I don't buy into fiddling figures to make them fit the picture, would you care to issue some FACTS with sources (non political) to back up your opinions?

    PS I don't like any politicians.. Especially the ones in power :)
  15. ex·po·nen·tial
    adj : of or involving exponents; "exponential growth" n : a function in which an independent variable appears as an exponent [syn: exponential function]

    ie. a formula where an external variable within the data gives non-linear data streams
    ie. Non linear function, not necessarily logarithmic though usually so.