Tories

[Arizona]

How many old people do you think there are that live in huge expensive mansions? Most of them will probably be living in family houses that were purchased years ago for very little money.

 

Of course it ruthlessly takes from the elderly. Let's take a hypothetical old lady, who lives in a house worth about £200,000. She bought it 50 years ago as a family home for a few thousand pounds. Her husband died and she relies on the state pension, with perhaps a little more that she has saved privately. At her age, moving just isn't an option. She is forced to pay the same amount as her neighbour, who is an accountant on, let's say £50,000.

 

Tell me what is not ruthless about that.

 

Tax is not just unfair to the old, it's also unfair to the young. Put yourself in the position of a young couple that is trying to fly the nest. Your combined income is abotu £30,000. You have no chance of saving for a deposit, so you settle for renting a flat. The flat is worth £150,000, but it's not yours and you're effectively pouring money down a drain by living there. Your neighbours, in the same house, are a professional middle aged couple who have a combined income of £100,000 and own their property. You have to pay the same amount of council tax as them.

 

Tell me what is fair about that.

 

I don't think either bungle or I would want the 'pips to squeak', as it were, but there has to be a fairer way to organise the tax system than this.

 

With regard to the Tories specifically, they will try to paint themselves as being tough on the rogue bankers. However, it is worth noting that the thousands of poor and in some cases destitute people on incapacity benefits, most of whom are probably genuinely unable to work, were given specific warnings about how their benefits would be cut and they would be forced into any sort of work. The bankers, on the other hand, were told that George Osborne 'reserves the right to tax them' if their bonuses are excessive. He didn't say what was excessive and he didn't say how he would do it. This is because he doesn't intend to follow through his pledge, because he is a Conservative and, therefore, a king of the free market.

 

With regard to the overall question of the choices available, the two main parties persist with petty arguments over the odd £3-4billion pounds.

 

Here's a way to knock off tens of billions in one go - abandon trident. We don't need it and it won't help to protect us against the threats of the world in the 21st century.

 

Here's another - abandon ID cards. We don't need them and they won't stop the thousands of terrorists who are all clearly trying to kill us infidels all of the time.

 

Which party would do both of these things? Google it.

 

The old lady scenario - I really don't see how it's beyong the realms of capability that she could move. Most older people have younger relatives or friends of some kind who can help with moving. There are very few who couldn't and I'm sure they could hire help of some kind.

 

As for the young couple scenario. I'm young, I rent a flat. I pay the same council tax as the middle aged couple next door who own their flat. As it happens I share with some work colleagues to help spread the bills around. I don't feel in the least bit hard done by. Local public services aren't cheaper just because I am young or rent a flat.

 

Trident - I disagree. 1 less sub I agree with, but we do need a nuclear deterrant. 30 years ago you could have said there is no need for any weapon other than nukes. Russia was the enemy and any conflict with them would only ever end in nuclear war. Imagine trying to 'liberate' Iraq and Afghanistan if we couldn't do anything but level entire cities.

 

I.D. Cards - I'll drink to that. The most pointless concept ever to be pulled out of Westminster's collective orifice.

[hamster]

Why do people judge others by how much money they have or how much they ask for? It's not the working classes who cause inflation, they are merely trying to keep up with the pace. Just think what a 1% rise will buy for a someone below the £25k average, as opposed to someone on above it. The further either side that you are, the less that average means to you, and the more it riles when people tell you what you should be doing with it.

 

It is so easy to critisise the lower paid when you are comfortable, but do not please be under the illusion that anyone with wealth has earnt it without the infrastructure of the socialist system behind them. It is because of socialism that wealthy people can get wealthier. And some wonder why the working classes have this so-called chip on their shoulder's!

[Thedelldays]

Arizona. I'm a bit confused

you want a nuclear deterent but are happy to lose one submarine.

 

The number of submarines have no say on the number of nuclear warheads we have.

 

The submarines are just the vehicle used to carry the trident missiles. The missile/warheads are not permenantly on the sub

[hamster]

And I do wish people wouldn't try to validate their point's by adding stuff like "apart from the armed forces". Why the hell should your econimic policies NOT apply to the armed forces? What seperates our military personnel from your rants, we're all part of the same problems, ergo we are ALL part of any solution.

[Arizona]

Arizona. I'm a bit confused

you want a nuclear deterent but are happy to lose one submarine.

 

The number of submarines have no say on the number of nuclear warheads we have.

 

The submarines are just the vehicle used to carry the trident missiles. The missile/warheads are not permenantly on the sub

 

Sorry, perhaps I've misunderstood. I thought the government was on about saving a few hundred million by buying one less submarine. I wont pretend to know how many subs or missiles are needed for an effective deterant, but if we can save a lot by cutting back on either, whilst maintaining an effective deterant, that makes sense IMO.

[Thedelldays]

Sorry, perhaps I've misunderstood. I thought the government was on about saving a few hundred million by buying one less submarine. I wont pretend to know how many subs or missiles are needed for an effective deterant, but if we can save a lot by cutting back on either, whilst maintaining an effective deterant, that makes sense IMO.

 

In the grand scheme of things. The cost of the actual submarine is small change comapred to the cost of the missiles and warheads.

 

That is why the PM offered to bin one submarine. It was (or seemed) just a gesture.

 

The reason why we have 4 subs to carry the missiles is that 4 is the minimum number needed to maintain a deterent for every minute of the year

[Fuengirola Saint]

If only we'd ditched the Socialists at the last election the country wouldn't be in the mess it is now.

 

Brown claims to have saved the world with his huge spending on the banks, but all he's done is saddled the country with debt to the tune of £20,000 for every person. We should have let the recession run it's course (as the Americans wanted to do), instead of putting the country in serious debt that'll mean a decade or more of high taxes and cuts to public services.

 

It's a fact that the interest on the debt per anum is as much as we spend on the NHS. That's socialism for you!

 

In David Cameron we have a euro sceptic and his cabinet (with the exception of Ken Clarke) are all euro sceptic too. For the first time in years we'll soon have a government that'll put Britain first and put the continentals in their place.

 

Good times are ahead and generation has once again learnt the lesson that Socialism does not work.

 

New Labour is not socialism! Can't you see that?

[badgerx16]

Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher were the greatest leaders of the twentieth century. Both were Tory.

Churchill was a maverick, who had the luck that he would be remembered for leading a coalition war cabinet, and "crossed the floor" between the conservatives and liberals several times as he saw fit. For what good points he had, he made many poor decisions and held many dangerous opinions.

 

He was directly responsible for the disastrous Gallipoli campaign in WW1, led the demands to extend British involvement in the Russian civil war, including sending arms to Poland to help support the anti- Bolsheviks, which did not really count in their favour when the Poles needed Russian help in WW2.

He advocated the use of gas bombs against Kurdish rebels, ( wonder where Saddam Hussain might have got that idea ? ). His appointment as Chancellor of the Exchequer enabled him to return Britain to the Gold Standard, which was a major causative factor in the depression and General Strike, ( this was later admitted by WSC himself as probably his greatest mistake ). He also, at this time, gave great praise to Mussolini, as an example of how countries ought to be governed.

He opposed granting independence to the colonies, and was on the 'wrong' side of the debate when King Edward VIII abdicated.

 

There is no doubting he had the 'right stuff' when it came to leading the country in WW2, and was certainly the "right man. at the right time", but his crushing defeat in the post-war election shows how the country at the time rated his politics.

[badgerx16]

In the grand scheme of things. The cost of the actual submarine is small change comapred to the cost of the missiles and warheads.

 

That is why the PM offered to bin one submarine. It was (or seemed) just a gesture.

 

The reason why we have 4 subs to carry the missiles is that 4 is the minimum number needed to maintain a deterent for every minute of the year

 

So, as someone with an obviously 'informed' opinion, is cutting the numbers down to 3 a false economy, in that it means the deterrent could no longer be effectively maintained.

[badgerx16]

David Cameron is a sham, a veneer laid over the true face of Conservative dogma. Elections these days are not about politics, they are about image, and as it looks like the Labour Party will persist with GB, the Tories will win hands down.

[hypochondriac]

David Cameron is a sham, a veneer laid over the true face of Conservative dogma. Elections these days are not about politics, they are about image, and as it looks like the Labour Party will persist with GB, the Tories will win hands down.

Might as well give them a chance. If they are ****e for four years then let someone else in.

[Thedelldays]

So, as someone with an obviously 'informed' opinion, is cutting the numbers down to 3 a false economy, in that it means the deterrent could no longer be effectively maintained.

 

To have a deterent you either do properly or not at all. And 4 subs s

is the minimum number required. The French do the same with 4 Le Triumphant class SSBNs

 

I think when brown said he would scrap one submarine, I think it was a gesture.

 

That is not saying what submarines that replace the current Vanguard class will be 3 in number with updated refiting requirements to maintain a continuous deterent. But they would not come into service until around 2022/2025.

[RonManager]

To have a deterent you either do properly or not at all. And 4 subs s

is the minimum number required. The French do the same with 4 Le Triumphant class SSBNs

 

I think when brown said he would scrap one submarine, I think it was a gesture.

 

That is not saying what submarines that replace the current Vanguard class will be 3 in number with updated refiting requirements to maintain a continuous deterent. But they would not come into service until around 2022/2025.

 

Thank you, I will pass this information on to my comrade, the glorious leader of the People's State of Freedonia.

[Thedelldays]

I would think keeping the deterent is something we have to do. More and more countries are developing nukes not discarding them. We have no idea who will be a potential enemy in 25 years time. North Korea, iran hell even Russia are very much a power house on the nuclear front and in other ways that I won't say that would make you a bit concerned.

 

IMO the savings from the MoD should be made at the upper level. There are some 85 thousand civillians employed by the MoD. Waaay too many. The procurement process is a known joke even at my level. Read and heard that the MoDs top 20 procurement projects are together 480 months late and over £16bn over budget. That is something like losing £4m a day. That is where the savings should be made in the mod IMO.

Edited 11 October, 2009 by Thedelldays

[EastleighSoulBoy]

New Labour is not socialism! Can't you see that?

 

Spot on, even us 'Labour Luddites' recognise this, to our cost.

 

The party had to modernise because they felt they were unelectable. They just lurched, in my humble opinion, too far to the right, although at the time many of us had not realised it.

 

The problem for us socialists, as I have said previously, is that there is precious little else for us to vote for and my political beliefs are not for compromising. So I either put up with a crap sandwich (Labour) or a double crap and poo sandwich (Tory).

[badgerx16]

The problem for us socialists, as I have said previously, is that there is precious little else for us to vote for and my political beliefs are not for compromising. So I either put up with a crap sandwich (Labour) or a double crap and poo sandwich (Tory).

Presumably the vegetarian option ( Lib-Dems ) just doesn't do it for you ?

[aintforever]

To have a deterent you either do properly or not at all. And 4 subs s

is the minimum number required. The French do the same with 4 Le Triumphant class SSBNs

 

I think when brown said he would scrap one submarine, I think it was a gesture.

 

That is not saying what submarines that replace the current Vanguard class will be 3 in number with updated refiting requirements to maintain a continuous deterent. But they would not come into service until around 2022/2025.

 

But surely even having an few old nukes is a deterant? They may or may not work properly and the might not be in operation all the time - but it would be one hell of a gamble for any country to attack us while they are there.

[Thedelldays]

But surely even having an few old nukes is a deterant? They may or may not work properly and the might not be in operation all the time - but it would be one hell of a gamble for any country to attack us while they are there.

 

You would think but then you have foreign intelligence networks that would n ow they don't work properly. Again may as well not have them. Don't forget. It is not the warheads themselves but the rockets that carry them. Other nations develop ways if shooting them down over the years from what little intel they may get. So they will need updating etc

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Presumably the vegetarian option ( Lib-Dems ) just doesn't do it for you ?

 

The point now is do any of them do it for me? I actually vote Lib Dem to keep the Tory out from Eastleigh. It might be nice to see what they could do, Vince Cable does make a lot of sense at times but is it just rhetoric? I can't vote Tory because it just goes against my beliefs, while I can see why some vote for them.

 

To be honest I'm pretty cheesed with both main parties, there's so little between them although New Labour haven't gone far enough to totally get my goat.

 

Somebody suggested the Socialist Party in an earlier thread. Maybe I have mellowed over the years and don't see myself anymore as an activist?

 

I'll obviously have to make up my mind within 6 months or so. Maybe a hung parliament with the Lib Dems holding the casting vote? Can't see that benefitting the country though.

[aintforever]

You would think but then you have foreign intelligence networks that would n ow they don't work properly. Again may as well not have them. Don't forget. It is not the warheads themselves but the rockets that carry them. Other nations develop ways if shooting them down over the years from what little intel they may get. So they will need updating etc

 

You're probably right, it just seems a daft waste of money, it hasn't stopped any of the numerous wars we've been dragged into and as soon as any country starts chucking nukes around the World's over anyway so I can't see them ever being used by anyone.

 

The only danger I can see is if a terrorist islamic group get hold of some, and they would not give a stuff about any deterrent.

 

With the state of our finances I would rather take the gamble and not spend the cash.

[Fuengirola Saint]

The point now is do any of them do it for me? I actually vote Lib Dem to keep the Tory out from Eastleigh. It might be nice to see what they could do, Vince Cable does make a lot of sense at times but is it just rhetoric? I can't vote Tory because it just goes against my beliefs, while I can see why some vote for them.

 

To be honest I'm pretty cheesed with both main parties, there's so little between them although New Labour haven't gone far enough to totally get my goat.

 

Somebody suggested the Socialist Party in an earlier thread. Maybe I have mellowed over the years and don't see myself anymore as an activist?

 

I'll obviously have to make up my mind within 6 months or so. Maybe a hung parliament with the Lib Dems holding the casting vote? Can't see that benefitting the country though.

 

I know what you mean, here in Spain we at least still have a Left wing party in the Izquierda unida ( United Left) and a fairer voting system. When i lived in Hythe i always voted Liberal Democrat to hoy the Tory out but it never worked, even in 1997 when they were universally hated:-(

[solentstars]

Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher were the greatest leaders of the twentieth century. Both were Tory.

 

Margaret Thatcher inheritted a Socialist car crash and fixed a broken Britain.

 

David Cameron will find himself in a similar position to Thatcher with the country broke and the public sector layabouts going on strike. From the comments at the Conservative conference it is clear that the wallers in the public sector are not going to be pay rises and nor should they. Private sector workers are having to accept pay freezes so the layabout teachers and post office workers will have to accept pay freezes too.

 

Under Cameron we will have a leader that will not shirk from the tough decisions needed to fix the problems caused by 12 years of Labour and it's policy of rewarding the lazy and penalising the workers. It's time to get the slobs off benefits and drag them kicking and screaming to the workhouses.

churchill and Clement Attlee were the the greatest two real leaders of the 20th century in this country,maggie saddled this country with mass unemployment and put up vat to 15 % from 7% and is a pgymy compared to these giants.

and the current labour party are just a tory party mark 2 ,you watch camerons tory party get paid by the same bankers who got us into this mess.

what a choice we have?

[Verbal]

David Cameron is a sham, a veneer laid over the true face of Conservative dogma. Elections these days are not about politics, they are about image, and as it looks like the Labour Party will persist with GB, the Tories will win hands down.

 

It's not even the politics of the Tories that bother me so much as the sheer lack of talent. Osborne in particular is a prize idiot, for which he repeatedly provides ample evidence. And he will have his finger constantly on the economic nuclear button.

 

Compared to him, the bumbling Norman Lamont was a giant.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

It's not even the politics of the Tories that bother me so much as the sheer lack of talent. Osborne in particular is a prize idiot, for which he repeatedly provides ample evidence. And he will have his finger constantly on the economic nuclear button.

 

Compared to him, the bumbling Norman Lamont was a giant.

 

As a 'loony lefty' I always had a begrudging respect for Ken Clarke to be honest.

[Verbal]

As a 'loony lefty' I always had a begrudging respect for Ken Clarke to be honest.

 

Yeah, I know what you mean - and I expect he'll have to ride to their rescue within months of the Tories taking power.

[ottery st mary]

Far too many public schoolboys...Politics and Football....... not a clue....Scam artists.

[dune]

What a deluded mong you are.

 

I just hope you've not been able to breed.

 

Mong Noun. Imbecile, idiot. Offensive expression alluding to someone with Down Syndrome, being Mongoloid. Derog.

 

Hitler and the NAZI party shared similars views to you towards those born with mental and physical deformaties. It's sickening that in the 21st centruty there are still neanderthals like you that hold such reprehensible views towards disabled people.

[Johnny Bognor]

The party had to modernise because they felt they were unelectable. They just lurched, in my humble opinion, too far to the right, although at the time many of us had not realised it.

 

The problem for us socialists, as I have said previously, is that there is precious little else for us to vote for and my political beliefs are not for compromising. So I either put up with a crap sandwich (Labour) or a double crap and poo sandwich (Tory).

 

I think the problem for socialists is that the argument has been lost. The whole continent of Europe is now run by right wing governments with the exception of UK, Spain & Portugal. After May next year, only Spain and Portugal will be governed by left wing parties.

 

Does this not tell you something?

 

(make your own sandwiches?)

[bridge too far]

I think the problem for socialists is that the argument has been lost. The whole continent of Europe is now run by right wing governments with the exception of UK, Spain & Portugal. After May next year, only Spain and Portugal will be governed by left wing parties.

 

Does this not tell you something?

 

(make your own sandwiches?)

 

The same right wing parties that support the European Union?

 

Wow! Cameron will have a problem then. Oh I forgot, his cronies in Europe are nazi sympathisers (allegedly).

[revolution saint]

If it's OK to call this labour party socialist then is it OK to call the Tories facists?

[Fuengirola Saint]

I think the problem for socialists is that the argument has been lost. The whole continent of Europe is now run by right wing governments with the exception of UK, Spain & Portugal. After May next year, only Spain and Portugal will be governed by left wing parties.

 

Does this not tell you something?

 

(make your own sandwiches?)

 

This just tells me that people are more interested in their new Iphone,X-factor or flat screen tv to be bothered about politics,they have given up. I have to give the Tories credit, they get their vote out, whereas the Labour vote i feel will collapse due to the intense hatred towards Brown( not all of it warranted).

[Johnny Bognor]

This just tells me that people are more interested in their new Iphone,X-factor or flat screen tv to be bothered about politics,they have given up. I have to give the Tories credit, they get their vote out, whereas the Labour vote i feel will collapse due to the intense hatred towards Brown( not all of it warranted).

 

I don't think it matters whether Labour will get their vote out, even if the die hards stand by their party. The Middle Classes who went red in the nineties have gone blue and this is what ultimately decides the election.

[Johnny Bognor]

If it's OK to call this labour party socialist then is it OK to call the Tories facists?

 

No I would say that isn't fair. If you call the Labour party communist, then perhaps it would then be a level playing field.

[Rattlehead]

If it's OK to call this labour party socialist then is it OK to call the Tories facists?

 

Depends on whether they really hate faces or not.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

I think the problem for socialists is that the argument has been lost. The whole continent of Europe is now run by right wing governments with the exception of UK, Spain & Portugal. After May next year, only Spain and Portugal will be governed by left wing parties.

 

Does this not tell you something?

 

(make your own sandwiches?)

 

I don't think the left have totally given up. Once the true Tory policies are revealed then union membership will rise. Then we'll get into another 'who's got the biggest balls' argument. Just another fixture in the boom, bust, blame the Unions, get the Tories in, boom, bust, blame the Tories, get Labour in league.

 

It will need something more that our current political scenario to completely cure things. I think neither New Labour or the Conservatives have the real answer because they govern from power, not concensus.

[Johnny Bognor]

The same right wing parties that support the European Union?

 

Wow! Cameron will have a problem then. Oh I forgot, his cronies in Europe are nazi sympathisers (allegedly).

 

Considering Labours complete failure on the immigration front, Brown & Co have done far more to promote facist views than Cameron could.

 

Nick Griffin's appearing on question time the week after next FFS

[badgerx16]

Considering Labours complete failure on the immigration front, Brown & Co have done far more to promote facist views than Cameron could.

But I thought that the capitalists needed cheap foreign labour so that they could cut staff costs to the bone ?

[Johnny Bognor]

But I thought that the capitalists needed cheap foreign labour so that they could cut staff costs to the bone ?

 

Are you suggesting the BNP are Capitalist?

 

They will close down free trade, are anti-globalisation and would nationalise everything. Their basic principles are based on collectivism and so they have more in common with socialism.

 

I think the BNP are mis-labled - they are National Socialists.

 

This is why Labour are worried, because the BNP will attract more of their own core support. Capitalists, by definition, could never support the BNP.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Are you suggesting the BNP are Capitalist?

 

They will close down free trade, are anti-globalisation and would nationalise everything. Their basic principles are based on collectivism and so they have more in common with socialism.

 

I think the BNP are mis-labled - they are National Socialists.

 

This is why Labour are worried, because the BNP will attract more of their own core support. Capitalists, by definition, could never support the BNP.

 

Lovely twist!

[dune]

Considering Labours complete failure on the immigration front, Brown & Co have done far more to promote facist views than Cameron could.

 

I believe Labours sole motivation for importing unskilled migrants was because they will more than likely vote Labour. They are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them when they've been given a council house and/or benefits (including child benefits for their children "back home") by the Socialists. However the Socialists took their core white working class vote for granted and didn't forsee so many Labour voters defecting to the BNP.

 

Labour is now a party that means nothing to it's core vote and with the muslim vote also now lost to Galloway and the wishy washy Liberals, and with the SNP destroying Labours heartland in Scotland, they are a party that mean nothing to nobody apart from the slobs on benefits and public sector workers.

[Johnny Bognor]

Lovely twist!

 

Wasn't Hitler a National Socialist?

 

BNP do not have one single economic policy that is remotely capitalist.

 

Their entire economic policy would not look too far amiss from your average socialist. Their key themes are:

 

1. Anti-globalisation

2. Banning/Restricting foreign Imports

3. Anti-Outsourcing

4. Controlling the economy for the nation

5. Would nationalise all utilities

 

This looks like traditional socialist fayre to me.

[aintforever]

It is a sad state of affairs that all we have is a choice between a disfunctional Labour party with their one eyed Scottish idiot and Cameron's soggy biscuit brigade.

 

I generally side towards Labour because i believe more in what they are supposed to stand for, but with them you get obscene hand outs to dole bludgers and benefit cheats. With the torys you dont get that but you get a bunch of toffs royally screwing over anyone who is not rich. We are ****ed either way.

[moonraker]

I believe Labours sole motivation for importing unskilled migrants was because they will more than likely vote Labour. They are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them when they've been given a council house and/or benefits (including child benefits for their children "back home") by the Socialists. However the Socialists took their core white working class vote for granted and didn't forsee so many Labour voters defecting to the BNP.

 

Labour is now a party that means nothing to it's core vote and with the muslim vote also now lost to Galloway and the wishy washy Liberals, and with the SNP destroying Labours heartland in Scotland, they are a party that mean nothing to nobody apart from the slobs on benefits and public sector workers.

 

Complete and utter codswollop, and I dont vote Labour, neither do I read the Daily Mail/Express. Slobs on benfits dont bother voting unfortunate individulas who are struggling just might.

[View From The Top]

I believe Labours sole motivation for importing unskilled migrants was because they will more than likely vote Labour. They are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them when they've been given a council house and/or benefits (including child benefits for their children "back home") by the Socialists. However the Socialists took their core white working class vote for granted and didn't forsee so many Labour voters defecting to the BNP.

 

Labour is now a party that means nothing to it's core vote and with the muslim vote also now lost to Galloway and the wishy washy Liberals, and with the SNP destroying Labours heartland in Scotland, they are a party that mean nothing to nobody apart from the slobs on benefits and public sector workers.

 

How is our pet neo-nazi?

 

Heckled any immigrants today Adolf?

[View From The Top]

The fact that more people will vote for the final of X-Factor than will vote in the next general election speaks volumes.

 

Politics is now so far removed for "ordinary" people and so many sound bite career politicans profess to speak for them, that vast swathes of our population just won't bother.

 

In addition, with so many disillusioned Labour supporters abstaining the Tories are a shoe in.

[Thedelldays]

How is our pet neo-nazi?

 

Heckled any immigrants today Adolf?

 

Adolf? Says you that don't want certain people breeding

[View From The Top]

Adolf? Says you that don't want certain people breeding

 

Far right tory scum shouldn't be allowed to breed and pollute the minds of future generations.

 

Thankfully, as most are unlikely to get the chance to breed nature is taking care of it.

 

The only thing lower than a skate is a far right tory.

[Johnny Bognor]

Far right tory scum shouldn't be allowed to breed and pollute the minds of future generations.

 

Thankfully, as most are unlikely to get the chance to breed nature is taking care of it.

 

The only thing lower than a skate is a far right tory.

 

But far left scum are OK by you?

[Thedelldays]

Far right tory scum shouldn't be allowed to breed and pollute the minds of future generations.

 

Thankfully, as most are unlikely to get the chance to breed nature is taking care of it.

 

The only thing lower than a skate is a far right tory.

 

Just simply swap the word Tory for the word Jew and Hitler would probably have not agreed with you more.

[View From The Top]

But far left scum are OK by you?

 

Nope, they are low, but just not as low.