The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Iron Ladyís sin of divisiveness > Comments

The Iron Ladyís sin of divisiveness : Comments

By Philip Lillingston, published 18/4/2013

When you act in the interests of those who elect you, you are going to disappoint those who didn't, but so what?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
>>For those celebrating, instead of dancing on her grave why not criticise the Iron Lady for the actual details of what she did to the country, not because she didnít represent your specific interests.>>

Thatcher hatred has long been the British left's thought substitute.

The Guardian especially has published three or more hate Maggie pieces every day since her death.

But what to do now?

No problem.

Tony Blair hate is the British left's new thought substitute.

Bit like Gillard hate is the Australian right's thought substitute.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 18 April 2013 11:36:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Bit like Gillard hate is the Australian right's thought substitute."

By setting out to govern for all and then successfully governing in the national interest , Bob Hawke won the respect of the majority of voters. He is a Labor role model that Julia Gillard wisely could have emulated.

Sadly, Julia Gillard was too one-eyed ( or should that be pig-headed) to appreciate this. Instead, she chose to return to the pre-Hawke Labor era by waging class warfare, which not surprisingly is alienating the majority of voters.
Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 18 April 2013 12:54:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Raycom

Just to be clear

I am no fan of Gillard's. I think in many way's she has been extraordinarily inept.

But I do not hate her - some of the comments go on as if she were the devil incarnate.

The fact that Gillard is a bad PM does not mean Abbott will be a good one.

As matter stand now I think it's a toss-up. I have a mild preference for the Libs but I shall not celebrate if they win; nor shall I mourn if they lose.

And I stand by my statement. For many on the right Gilard-hate is a substitute for thought.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 18 April 2013 1:20:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steven one thing is for sure, Abbott is bound to look very good, in comparison to Gillard & Rudd. That will be the case even if he is a complete no hoper.

When it comes to Maggy, her funeral, if reports are true, has said it all. The big promotion of the left to go out a spoil it has been shown for what it was. A small hate group, with so few turning up to be hard to even find.

The real feeling for the lady was displayed all the way. The silent majority has again displayed itself, if just for a moment.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 18 April 2013 1:38:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
our country would be a lot more unified had Thatchter ruled here and stopped corrupt union officials hijacking the Labour party and spending cleaners money on prostitutes. The hypocrites in the union even bring people out here on 457 visas to help corrupt and divide our nation more.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 18 April 2013 4:02:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Thatcher had to be loyal either to the majority of voters who happened to support here, or to the minority who voted for someone else.'

The problem with statement is that it is not a reflection of how people voted. Margaret Thatcher didnt have a majority voting for her.

In 1979 her party got 44% of the vote, in 1983 42% of the vote, and in 1987 43% of the vote. At no time did the majority of people vote for her or her party. The majority was in seats which didn;t reflect the popular vote. But that's life - still, you should get your facts correct.
Posted by Phil Matimein, Thursday, 18 April 2013 4:59:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy