Saturday, 1 August 2020

AND NOW, A NON-POLITICAL PARTY BROADCAST ON THE STATE OF THINGS...



Not long ago, I read some idiot say something like "No one who has a heart or conscience likes the Tories."  What a cretin.  Only fools judge people solely by their political beliefs or how they vote (or by what newspaper they read).  I'm sure there are many NHS workers, charity volunteers, and kind, caring folk who vote Conservative, and there'll be many privileged, well-to-do people - even millionaires - who vote Labour.  (Tony Blair, anyone?)  To state that only non-Tories can be considerate, caring, decent people is one of the stupidest things I've ever read or heard anyone say.  And I have no political allegiance - I think they're all as useless as each other on a party level, but when it comes to the voters, there's the same mix of good and bad in one party as in others.

There are some people who complain that the government has made a mess of dealing with the pandemic, and that their response has been chaotic.  Even if that's true, I doubt that any other political party would have dealt with it any better, and anybody who doesn't see that obviously can't see past their own political bias.  All political parties are ruled by people who don't have a clue about much of anything, and in the case of Covid-19, nobody really knew the best way to handle the situation.  They were thrown a curve-ball.  The government's response was made up on the hoof, and it's a pretty safe bet that, whatever party was in power, there would likely have been little or no difference in the way it was dealt with.  Might even have been worse, despite what various party spokesmen are saying now.  (Hindsight is a wonderful thing.)

Let's just hope we all get through it unscathed  And it would be good if we could do it without exploiting the situation to make biased political points just because we want to bash those we traditionally disagree with over the head.  (I say 'we', but I'm not included, being non-partisan.)  That would be the caring, decent, considerate thing to do.  It's a shame there seems to be a lack of those qualities around these days.

Agree, disagree, don't know what to think?  That's what the comments section is there for.  (Seems readers have forgotten it exists theses days.)

11 comments:

Dave S said...

I think that the government could have been more strict in enforcing the lockdown, like France did, for example.

However, the facts as I see them are that the UK government put measures in place to help control covid-19 and many people have chosen to ignore them. I'm classed as a key worker so have been working in the city centre all the way through this, and the number of people choosing to ignore social distancing or refusing to cover their mouths is staggering. I saw someone abuse a security guard in a shop who asked him to wear a mask which the shop were providing free of charge. The guard completely backed down - he should have been straight on to the police to have the guy arrested!

And don't start me on the amount of people so desperate for drink that they travelled to the North of England on the day England's pubs opened! I found it embarrassing that we had so many people willing to risk their own and others lives just so they could get drunk.

Governments can introduce measures and guidelines, but if people are too stupid, reckless, inconsiderate or alcohol-dependant to adhere to them, they won't work.

Rant over for the moment!

Kid said...

You 'rant' as much as you like, DS, always good to hear your opinion. Part of the problem is (apart from what you just mentioned) is that there are so many alleged 'experts' advising the government and not all of them are singing from the same hymn sheet. Any other party in government would have had the same conflicting info to consider, so I'm skeptical that they'd have done any better at the end of the day. It's sort of a 'feel your way along as you go' situation, with something else always popping up which demands a detour or an about-turn.

Colin Jones said...

"Nobody with a conscience votes Tory" - so said Norman Tebbit in the 1980s.

It's the only time I've ever agreed with that evil old vulture.

Kid said...

No, CJ, Norman Tebbit said no such thing. It was an invention by a journalist, and the paper later apologised, published a retraction, and paid £14,000 in damages. And how immensely absurd of you to state your belief that no one with a conscience votes Tory. So every single Tory voter - which will include people from all walks of life (just as in other parties) - has no conscience or heart? What a daft thing to say. You're wearing your political bias on your sleeve and it's ruining the cut of your jacket. Why not try being more even-minded for a change? You've displayed a grudge against pensioners in the past quite a few times, so would it be fair of someone else to say that all Labour supporters are heartless based on your gripe about society looking after the elderly? Get real, eh?

Colin Jones said...

The Tories spent the last 10 years running the NHS into the ground, leaving it hugely underfunded and understaffed and woefully unprepared for the Covid crisis. The real NHS crisis is still to come as it tries to cope with a huge backlog of cases pushed aside by Covid such as cancer treatment etc - and that's assuming there isn't a second wave of Covid this winter. Everybody who voted Tory in the last decade voted for that NHS underfunding and they know it. Nobody with a conscience votes Tory.

Kid said...

Well, that all depends on which party's propaganda you choose to believe, CJ. Even a cursory bit of research on my part shows that there are conflicting counter-claims which cast doubt on the matter. Truth is though, that with ever-increasing demands on the NHS, no government has ever funded it to the extent it needs - and it's doubtful that any government ever could. And I'm afraid you're talking utter shite! Why would you agree with the cretin who prompted this post? People vote for all sorts of reasons - loyalty, tradition, don't like what the other parties have to offer in the main - to say that nobody, I repeat, NOBODY, who has a conscience votes Tory is the sort of thing an intellectual imbecile would say.

You're always moaning about pensioners getting free TV licenses (you'll be happy now, eh?), winter payments, etc., and describe them as a drain on the NHS. There are old people dying because they can't afford their power bills, but because a relative few are reasonably well off, you grudge any of them getting any help. Frail, elderly, ill, vulnerable people that you seem to despise. If there's anyone who gives the impression of being heartless and without a conscience, it's YOU, CJ, so perhaps you shouldn't be casting the first stone.

Always a pleasure to hear from you - even when you're talking absolute bollocks!

Colin Jones said...

I have NEVER said that pensioners are a drain on the NHS - now you are just inventing things. I merely said that BETTER OFF pensioners shouldn't be getting free TV licences etc - I have no problem with pensioners on Pension Credit getting a free licence. You can't seriously expect the BBC to spend 20% of its' annual income (£750 million) giving free licences to millions of pensioners who can easily afford to pay it (and plenty can so don't deny it).

Kid said...

Och, behave yourself, CJ. You've often stated that pensioners are going to be (if they're not already) a 'problem' for the NHS because they receive (or will receive) a disproportionate share of its resources. If that's not saying they're a 'drain' then you're being pedantic and splitting hairs.

And I wouldn't deny (and never have) that plenty pensioners can afford to pay for a TV license, but in your previous rants you've never distinguished between those who can and those who can't, and just laid into them all indiscriminately. However, if the BBC didn't insist on paying exorbitant wages to a bunch of talentless tossers (executives included), they'd be able to give all pensioners a free license. The BBC is a public broadcaster, so it shouldn't be in the game of competing with independent companies. I'm quite sure that if Graham Norton or Gary Lineker decided they weren't getting paid enough and decided to walk, someone else would rise from the ranks and do their jobs just as well, if not better.

Now apologise to Norman Tebbit for repeating a lie about him. It's what someone with a conscience would do.

Anonymous said...

No government, of whatever colour, has done well with this crisis. Each country is blaming someone else for the disaster. Wrong protocols have been followed, and its taken to long to learn lessons. THE big lesson to learn is that international co-operation is paramount in defeating this killer, which is different from any other viral pandemic because of the large number of asypmtomatic carriers. Covid does not stop at borders.
Spirit of 64

Colin Jones said...

I agree that BBC presenters are overpaid but £750 million is an awful lot of money which couldn't be saved just by paying them less. Anyway, I pay the licence fee so the BBC can make programmes, not to give free licences to well-off pensioners. And I think most people agree with me - when the BBC announced their decision last year the right-wing press tried to drum up a hate campaign against the BBC which soon fizzled out probably because most newspaper readers thought it was perfectly reasonable that better-off pensioners should pay up.

I'll apologise to Norman Tebbit when he apologises for being a reactionary old reprobate.

But, just to prove I'm a nice guy, I will withdraw my assertion that ALL Tory voters have no conscience - just most of them.

Kid said...

Very sensible comment, S64, and containing nothing with which I disagree. All UK political parties seem to be useless in the main when it comes to anything, but those who vote for them are composed of a wide variety of different types of people, not clones, as CJ seems to suggest.

******

It all depends on what the reasons are for giving pensioners free TV licenses, CJ. (I know you'll say it was to buy votes for the Tories.) Are they given to them as some kind of 'reward' for having reached a certain age and having paid the license fee since it was first introduced? If so, one could argue that everyone within the age-range should receive it regardless of their circumstances. And let's face it, it's of short-term benefit for most of them.

Or is it given to them specifically to help alleviate the cost of living for the less well-off? If so, then I'd say you perhaps have a point that the better-off should pay it if they can. I just think it's a bit mean to give all of them a free license to begin with, then take it back off them. The BBC is funnelling millions (if not billions) into extra channels it doesn't need, and it should think again about exactly what it's there for. You say you pay the fee so that they can make programmes - it's just a shame therefore that they squander so much money on shite ones.

(Norman's just off the 'phone - he says he knows you're a nice [but grumpy] guy and can't understand your animosity towards him. He says he'll buy you a bike if you'll be friends with him.)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...