https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6243889/l ... orth-less/ as the Shadow Foreign Secretary has this woman not got more pressing matters to attend to .

What she saying about Little Jack Horner?

She’s commenting on a study.

I'd have to agree that the idea of the Mr Men getting to say more words than the Little Misses is wildly unrealistic.

"Little" Burnley ?

in a world where bigger is generally considered better then I get where she is coming from.

See also this definition of little: small in size, amount, or degree (often used to convey an appealing diminutiveness or express an affectionate or condescending attitude).

This is just another example of the Sun trying to belittle the Labour Party and perfectly illustrates why they appeal to the chauvinistic and short sighted.

The sun doesn’t need to waste its time doing that.

Two words... Diane Abbott. (Or three if you’re Diane Abbott)

Cryssys wrote:in a world where bigger is generally considered better then I get where she is coming from.

See also this definition of little: small in size, amount, or degree (often used to convey an appealing diminutiveness or express an affectionate or condescending attitude).

This is just another example of the Sun trying to belittle the Labour Party and perfectly illustrates why they appeal to the chauvinistic and short sighted.

This would be The Sun which, during its almost 49 years of publication has flitted about from Labour to Tory, back to Labour and then back to Tory so it obviously appeals to the chauvinistic and short sighted of both parties in a measure of 22 years of Labour to 26 years of Tory.
All the media make efforts at belittling politicians, let's face it, the politicians do make it easy for them!

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:This would be The Sun which, during its almost 49 years of publication has flitted about from Labour to Tory, back to Labour and then back to Tory so it obviously appeals to the chauvinistic and short sighted of both parties

Spot on. There are small minded chauvinists on both sides of the divide and my guess is that the Sun readership is made up of equal measures of Labour and Tory supporters.

However the point about referring to women as little suggesting that they are worth less is valid and as such so are Emily Thornberry's comments.

bobinho wrote:Two words... Diane Abbott. (Or three if you’re Diane Abbott)

I'll see your Diane Abbott and raise you Boris Johnson

Ok call them BIG Miss then.

What would Louisa May Alcott think.

Cryssys wrote:However the point about referring to women as little suggesting that they are worth less is valid and as such so are Emily Thornberry's comments.

I eagerly await her comments with regard to Louisa May Alcott's novel which will obviously have to be renamed in order to appease Emily Thornberry.
It is such a pity that politicians have nothing better to worry about. This attitude just typifies why we have had no leaders in politics for over 30 years, they are too embroiled in ensuring that they keep the right side of the PC divide to worry about the realities of what is happening in the country.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:I eagerly await her comments with regard to Louisa May Alcott's novel which will obviously have to be renamed in order to appease Emily Thornberry..

Like the Sun, you're being deliberately obtuse. This is a book written in America in 1868 and there is no suggestion that its name should be changed. What's gone is gone. The point is that we live in a different world and attitudes have moved on.

I suggest that you try and catch up.

Cryssys wrote:Like the Sun, you're being deliberately obtuse. This is a book written in America in 1868 and there is no suggestion that it's name should be changed. What's gone is gone. The point is that we live in a different world and attitudes have moved on.

I suggest that you try and catch up.

Deliberately frivolous, more like. I suspect Ashington's comment is more to do with emphasising how utterly trivial this issue is.

Anyway, Alcott wrote a book called "Little Men" as well, so she's in the clear. Unless they start an argument about "Good Wives".

Cryssys wrote:Like the Sun, you're being deliberately obtuse. This is a book written in America in 1868 and there is no suggestion that it's name should be changed. What's gone is gone. The point is that we live in a different world and attitudes have moved on.

I suggest that you try and catch up.

Given it was written (published) in 1868 and the Nineteenth Amendment didn't appear until 1920, times were indeed different.

Emily Thornberry has her own ingrained prejudices which she lets slip every now and then in that sneering patronising manner she has. The ordinary working man for starters.

Maybe she wouldn't be so annoyed if there was a Mr Anti-Semite.

She's probably the best bet of the current Labour heavy hitters, but its a **** poor field to be honest.

Appalling lack of decent politicians in the top positions at the moment it has to be said.

Emily Thornberry is everything that I despise about what has infected the Labour Party in recent years. They are no longer the party for working people, they are the London Party, living in their North London bubble abandoning their traditional heartlands for the concerns of metroman. They have zero idea about what working people are all about, what their hopes and concerns are.

Not a fan of Labour at all, but it would take a leader a lot more competent than Corbyn to unite all of it with the country we live in these days.

Same for the other lot as well

When Brexit is finally over and the dust has settled then maybe someone will emerge from the wreckage to provide some sort of leadership. Currently though the whole debate is too divisive, there is no room for any middle ground and any aspiring leader has to be in one camp or the other. Currently Corbyn is trying to slime his way around the edges but he will either cosy up to his metro friends and alienate what used to be Labour's powerbase, or recognise where Labour's roots were and give up his Saturday night quinoa parties. I don't think he has the gumption to do either.

They have got a great chance of winning an election after Brexit.

Lancasterclaret wrote:They have got a great chance of winning an election after Brexit.

I would love there to be a Labour government after Brexit, but not with Corbyn and the Islington set in charge.

She will probably have her own range of books out very soon

Gender neutral tickle
Gender neutral happy
Little gender neutral

She is one of the perfect examples of sadly why we won't have labour in charge anytime soon.

Cryssys wrote:Like the Sun, you're being deliberately obtuse. This is a book written in America in 1868 and there is no suggestion that its name should be changed. What's gone is gone. The point is that we live in a different world and attitudes have moved on.

I suggest that you try and catch up.

For your information, I caught up years ago which is why I look upon our current crop of politicians with disdain. I shall repeat my thoughts so that you can really understand what I am saying:-

"It is such a pity that politicians have nothing better to worry about. This attitude just typifies why we have had no leaders in politics for over 30 years, they are too embroiled in ensuring that they keep the right side of the PC divide to worry about the realities of what is happening in the country."

I think I am probably ahead of the game, rather than trying to catch up, and I am happy that I no longer need to worry about it.

Chobulous wrote:I would love there to be a Labour government after Brexit, but not with Corbyn and the Islington set in charge.

Quinoa parties - maybe, who knows? But not in a Westminster bubble.

Corbyn has more unscripted conversations with ordinary members of the public than probably May, Cameron, Brown, and Blair did combined. By all means knock the guy, but at least stay within the bounds of reason.

If MP'S took more interest in issues such as this regarding gender inequality http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44062475 maybe they would earn the public's respect.

We desperately need a new party, a proper working class party.

I refuse to listen to anyone who tries to tell me that is Labour.

ClaretMoffitt wrote:We desperately need a new party, a proper working class party.

I refuse to listen to anyone who tries to tell me that is Labour.

Could you explain how Labour are no longer the party for the working class?

ClaretMoffitt wrote:We desperately need a new party, a proper working class party.

I refuse to listen to anyone who tries to tell me that is Labour.

BNP?

AndrewJB wrote:Could you explain how Labour are no longer the party for the working class?

I could write you an essay if I could be bothered.

And Greenmile, are they still around? Is fat Nick still their leader?

AndrewJB wrote:Could you explain how Labour are no longer the party for the working class?

Strange isn't it how we now have a Labour executive whose policies are more left wing than any for decades (to the extent that they frighten most of us in the centre), and yet they are perceived by a minority as being "no longer for the working class".

I'm sure I saw Nick Griffin doing sign language for the BBC just a while ago.

Labour are still a workers party. That they sometimes behave like a pressure group for underrepresented minority groups (and sometimes over-do it, according to some, but I suppose that depends on the kind of propaganda you expose yourself to) doesn't change this fact. In fact, balancing he scales is the point of the Labour party. I suppose when a person believes they are losing status, them lashing out is unsurprising, even at a phantom enemy. Folk just want to use the word 'gay' pejoratively and without others thinking they're a bit of a c.unt, I think. Usually results in 'the gays' and those who give them voice being attacked for spoiling the party.

KNEW IT!!!

tiger76 wrote:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6243889/l ... orth-less/ as the Shadow Foreign Secretary has this woman not got more pressing matters to attend to .

She can only answer the questions that are put to her, no matter how trivial, or irrelevant to the more pressing matters.
Given that she was asked that particular question, her answer is pretty unsurprising really. Not sure what you would expect her to say?
People like Morgan only ask questions like that because they know it's "click-bait" for some people.

Fair enough the standard of politicians is low,but the standards of journalism is even lower in the UK,Piers Morgan being a prime example.
There is just something about Emily Thornberry that makes her hard to warm towards,she is similar to the maybot they don't have a natural infinity with the public,If Labour form a government soon then will be the time to judge the likes of Thornberry,it's frightening that her and Boris have such senior roles within their parties.Speaks volumes about the dearth of talent in parliament.

.

nil_desperandum wrote:Strange isn't it how we now have a Labour executive whose policies are more left wing than any for decades (to the extent that they frighten most of us in the centre), and yet they are perceived by a minority as being "no longer for the working class".

Labour's problem is they instinctively pigeon hole people hence, the " working class " vote, the " LBGT " vote, the " BAME " vote, the " Green vote ", the " Youth vote " etc and have, for a number of years, adopted a strategy of attempting to win over Groups of minorities, which, together with mobilising the Unions, is expected to bring them success in the polls.
They've forgotten that they're talking to " people ", a lot of whom do not necessarily wish to be defined by their education, colour, sexuality, religion etc. Some are conservative, some are liberal and so on. The other problem is that some of these " minority groups " have values that are diametrically opposed to each other, for example, the Pakistani heritage Asian community generally have views on homosexuality,and pre-marital relations that seem very " illiberal " to some of us.
Jeremy Corbyn's view of the world is about as far removed from the average white working class voter as it is possible to get, especially in the 45+ age group.... he drones on about Palestine & Venezuela whilst they want to see crackdowns on drug dealers, knife crime & foreign criminals ..

I've heard him "drone on" about the Tories' shocking disregard for rising crime rates, rising hospital waiting times, rising delays in cancer-sufferers being seen, rising dead-end, so-called "jobs", lower standards of living, a widening gap between the haves and have-nots. Wot a bore !

If it be your will wrote:Okay, you've got me listening. What policies would they have? List, say, five (or more if you wish).

- Tight immigration control where permanent residence is only granted to those who have skills we need to fill market gaps, while the government simultaneously make a conscious effort to incetivise training for it in the UK so we never stay dependent.

- Lower taxes by bringing down public spending in order to make a tax free threshold of up to the first 20k, truly bringing the working man/woman on low income out of tax entirely.

- Increase NHS efficiency by charging people who miss GP/specialist appointments more than once in 12 months, clamp down on health tourism and invest that more into things that matter, like services for serious illness.

- A cabinet made of people who have been there and done it, not pompous, rich, public school boys/girls who have been destined for public office since the day they went to nursery. A party made of of real men and women, who have worked, lived life and genuinely want to change things.

- A focus on traditional values, a more "Family, Flag, Faith" (despite me personally being an atheist) set of values rather than this current faceless, robotic pseudo-liberalism that is infesting all the liberal elite, not just politicians.

- A party that fights for not just workers rights, but for business rights too; one that doesn't jump into bed with the unions and communists, rather one with an authentic approach where workers and businesses are treated fairly and not set upon each other.

What interesting suggestions! You would be in the presidency)

Maja wrote:What interesting suggestions! You would be in the presidency)

Oh, they'd dig up way too much dirt on me to even get close to public office

What we need is a UK version of Donald Trump. Someone who has risen through the ranks of businesses and can grasp the real world, is head strong and has the gutts to take the bull by the horns and make things happen.

ClaretMoffitt wrote: - A cabinet made of people who have been there and done it, not pompous, rich, public school boys/girls who have been destined for public office since the day they went to nursery. A party made of of real men and women, who have worked, lived life and genuinely want to change things.
.

I don't have time(or inclination) to go through the current Shadow Cabinet, but my impression is that the make-up of the current Shadow Cabinet is just about the opposite of the cabinet you describe.
Just to give one example: Keir Starmer, (who might be considered as one of the "poshest") was born to a working class family in Southwark - the second of four children of a toolmaker and a nurse. He was named after the founder of the Labour Party Keir Hardie.
Others: Rebecca Long - Bailey - daughter of an (Irish) Salford docker.
John McDonnell - son of a Liverpool bus driver. Educated at night school at Burnley College!
Dawn Butler - one of 6 children born to an immigrant Jamaican family in the East End.
Angela Rayner????
Check them all out.

Top Claret wrote:What we need is a UK version of Donald Trump. Someone who has risen through the ranks of businesses and can grasp the real world, is head strong and has the gutts to take the bull by the horns and make things happen.

You mean the same Donald Trump who inherited all his money from his Father?

Cryssys wrote:I'll see your Diane Abbott and raise you Boris Johnson

You don't play cards do you?

When you call, you can't expect to take the pot with two pair against my royal flush...

Emily thornberry.

They should do a little miss character based on the smug fat fingered champagne socialist.

Little miss metropolitan bubble dweller.

"Family, Flag, Faith"

I've heard stuff like that before, now what was it....oh I remember now

It was "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer"

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Oh, they'd dig up way too much dirt on me to even get close to public office

Didn't seem to matter in Trumps case...

Like the ideas, I wonder how easy they'd be to implement?

Clarets4me wrote:Labour's problem is they instinctively pigeon hole people hence, the " working class " vote, the " LBGT " vote, the " BAME " vote, the " Green vote ", the " Youth vote " etc and have, for a number of years, adopted a strategy of attempting to win over Groups of minorities, which, together with mobilising the Unions, is expected to bring them success in the polls.
They've forgotten that they're talking to " people ", a lot of whom do not necessarily wish to be defined by their education, colour, sexuality, religion etc. Some are conservative, some are liberal and so on. The other problem is that some of these " minority groups " have values that are diametrically opposed to each other, for example, the Pakistani heritage Asian community generally have views on homosexuality,and pre-marital relations that seem very " illiberal " to some of us.
Jeremy Corbyn's view of the world is about as far removed from the average white working class voter as it is possible to get, especially in the 45+ age group.... he drones on about Palestine & Venezuela whilst they want to see crackdowns on drug dealers, knife crime & foreign criminals ..

You're describing the Labour Party under Blair. One of the reasons Blairite Labour called Corbyn "unelectable" is he stepped away from this kind of politics. It is exactly how Corbyn rose in popularity, gained the leadership, and Labour membership doubled. How Labour won Canterbury and Plymouth, and a large share of the vote in the face of a deeply hostile press.

As for Corbyn himself, what exactly do you know about his view of the world? I've been to see him speak, and he never said a word about Palestine or Venezuela. He just talked about making Britain a fairer place, and taking back control of important elements of our economy. His voice isn't magical or hypnotic, but his message is far more inspiring than what we get from the Tories (austerity for everyone except the rich).

How on earth can you say "Jeremy Corbyn's view of the world is about as far removed from the average white working class voter as it is possible to get" when Theresa May is in the midst of a scandal about trying to kick lots of ordinary British people out of Britain? Are you suggesting that Rees Mogg or Boris Johnson have a stronger link with the average working class voter? Go and see Corbyn speak.