Serenity Garden Cbd Gummies: Honest...
Home & Garden0 min ago
John Mcdonnell - Hands-Up Anybody Who Fancies This Clown To Hold The Nation's Purse Strings?
https:/
As a rule of thumb I don't have a great deal of time for Nicholas Soames, but I love this quote from him:
"I think my grandfather's reputation can withstand a publicity-seeking assault from a third-rate, Poundland Lenin. I don't think it will shake the world."
As a rule of thumb I don't have a great deal of time for Nicholas Soames, but I love this quote from him:
"I think my grandfather's reputation can withstand a publicity-seeking assault from a third-rate, Poundland Lenin. I don't think it will shake the world."
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Churchill did some shameful things in his career. It does not diminish his achievements or mean that he was suddenly wrong to have continued the war in 1940. This was a laudable and eminently sensible decision for which we all have reason to be grateful.
But he did indeed do shameful things which are well documented and only the most insecure of nationalists have anything to gain from pretending otherwise.
But he did indeed do shameful things which are well documented and only the most insecure of nationalists have anything to gain from pretending otherwise.
Spot on, Krom - more succinctly put than my usual meanderings and saving me lots of typing.
As a child in the 50s I could never understand what seemed to be the rank ingratitude of the electorate in turfing out Churchill after he won the war - but as a grown-up I read his (shockingly murky) life-story and the 1947 election all made perfect sense.
McDonnell is a calculating politician - the people offended by his remarks probably weren't going to vote for him (or Corbyn) anyway - but it may tick some boxes elsewhere. I don't like him - but you dismiss him as a mere 'brainless marxist' at your peril.
As a child in the 50s I could never understand what seemed to be the rank ingratitude of the electorate in turfing out Churchill after he won the war - but as a grown-up I read his (shockingly murky) life-story and the 1947 election all made perfect sense.
McDonnell is a calculating politician - the people offended by his remarks probably weren't going to vote for him (or Corbyn) anyway - but it may tick some boxes elsewhere. I don't like him - but you dismiss him as a mere 'brainless marxist' at your peril.
I wonder why so many people are fixated on one-word answers, 100% opinions and blindness to alternative views. Is anybody suggesting that Churchill would have shot anybody who voted against him, even though he thought it was a good way to deal with civil unrest? One of Churchill's strengths was that people believed in him. Whether he was right or not is actually irrelevant. Two wars won. Churchill spending much of the second drunk, wearing a canvas precursor of the tinfoil hat, can be overlooked in that context.
My grandfather and uncles played their parts in both wars but would have cheerily killed anybody who told them they did it for Churchill. Some might even question why the USA joined the war in Europe when their real fight was with Japan, given that one man had it under control on his own.
All of our national heroes, exactly like those from other countries, were complex, flawed characters. In a pluralist society, it can be as close as one opinion that tips a question either way, and even then the balance can shift on a daily basis.
For most of us, true life or death choices are mercifully rare. As Soames said, Churchill wouldn't have cared what McDonnell thought. Likewise, McDonnell will sleep soundly, and so will I. Let's all of us try to keep a sense of perspective.
My grandfather and uncles played their parts in both wars but would have cheerily killed anybody who told them they did it for Churchill. Some might even question why the USA joined the war in Europe when their real fight was with Japan, given that one man had it under control on his own.
All of our national heroes, exactly like those from other countries, were complex, flawed characters. In a pluralist society, it can be as close as one opinion that tips a question either way, and even then the balance can shift on a daily basis.
For most of us, true life or death choices are mercifully rare. As Soames said, Churchill wouldn't have cared what McDonnell thought. Likewise, McDonnell will sleep soundly, and so will I. Let's all of us try to keep a sense of perspective.
The UK has a habit (apart from Attlee in 1947) of only electing a Labour Government when it is going to filled with "pragmatists and trimmers" - Wilson/Callaghan, Blair/Brown.
Conviction Politicians tend to get short shrift - and I can't see Corbyn/McDonnell convincing the electorate in general (or me in particular) that they have suddenly discovered pragmatism.
Keir Starmer might be worth a punt as 'The next Labour PM' - if he can ditch some of the ideologically challenged dead wood.
Conviction Politicians tend to get short shrift - and I can't see Corbyn/McDonnell convincing the electorate in general (or me in particular) that they have suddenly discovered pragmatism.
Keir Starmer might be worth a punt as 'The next Labour PM' - if he can ditch some of the ideologically challenged dead wood.
True, on both points, Ludwig. It is a false dichotomy, but that is what people seem to want the second days. Rational discussion has been superseded by soundbites.
That McDonnell fell into it is also true, although I might have used 'walked' rather than 'fell'. Had he refused to answer a seemingly straightforward question it would have been more of a disaster. How many people still squirm at Paxman's sixteenth repetition of a simple question?
I was taught, as a much younger idiot, that if you know a trap awaits you, walk right in. At least you are prepared. Next time you might not be so lucky, but your assailant will be angrier.
That McDonnell fell into it is also true, although I might have used 'walked' rather than 'fell'. Had he refused to answer a seemingly straightforward question it would have been more of a disaster. How many people still squirm at Paxman's sixteenth repetition of a simple question?
I was taught, as a much younger idiot, that if you know a trap awaits you, walk right in. At least you are prepared. Next time you might not be so lucky, but your assailant will be angrier.
JF85 @ 11.22:
"Some might question why the USA joined the war in Europe"
They joined the war in Europe, both times, because Germany declared war on them, not the other way round. After Pearl Harbor, the USA declared war on Japan. Germany had a pact with Japan and so declared war on the USA.
In WW1, the USA was at war with Mexico, who had signed a pact with Germay, so Germany declared war on the USA.
TTT, prior to WW2, Churchill was a failure at everything, which is why no party wanted him in their ranks. His failures are well catalogued. To the victors go the spoils, and one of those was to choose a new government after the war. The people rejected him. The people fought the war for democracy too, not just Churchill. He was the right man at the right time. Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Cometh the General Election, lots of people at that time had already seen, and lived through, Churchills failures, and as much as he had been a brilliant, charismatic leader in the war, the people didn't want him in peacetime. The election result of 1945 speaks for itself. Some RN veterans I know were still in service at the time of the election and as they were handed their proxy vote, there were jokes from colleagues about voting for Churchill, but the overwhelming response was "Balls to Mr. Churchill", as the election result so emphatically showed.
"Some might question why the USA joined the war in Europe"
They joined the war in Europe, both times, because Germany declared war on them, not the other way round. After Pearl Harbor, the USA declared war on Japan. Germany had a pact with Japan and so declared war on the USA.
In WW1, the USA was at war with Mexico, who had signed a pact with Germay, so Germany declared war on the USA.
TTT, prior to WW2, Churchill was a failure at everything, which is why no party wanted him in their ranks. His failures are well catalogued. To the victors go the spoils, and one of those was to choose a new government after the war. The people rejected him. The people fought the war for democracy too, not just Churchill. He was the right man at the right time. Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Cometh the General Election, lots of people at that time had already seen, and lived through, Churchills failures, and as much as he had been a brilliant, charismatic leader in the war, the people didn't want him in peacetime. The election result of 1945 speaks for itself. Some RN veterans I know were still in service at the time of the election and as they were handed their proxy vote, there were jokes from colleagues about voting for Churchill, but the overwhelming response was "Balls to Mr. Churchill", as the election result so emphatically showed.
"Indeed. The question was, "Hands up anybody who fancies this clown to hold the nation's purse strings". Anyone?"
No idea of his financial skills/abilities to be able to answer. But it was asked wrt the opinion he gave of Churchill, which has little to do with the question.
In any case we have Brexit to sort out first; as the Tories are the least awful at that, they have to remain in government for now anyway. If he sticks around long enough he may be given the chance to try, but somehow I suspect someone else will be in that slot by the time Labour returns to power.
No idea of his financial skills/abilities to be able to answer. But it was asked wrt the opinion he gave of Churchill, which has little to do with the question.
In any case we have Brexit to sort out first; as the Tories are the least awful at that, they have to remain in government for now anyway. If he sticks around long enough he may be given the chance to try, but somehow I suspect someone else will be in that slot by the time Labour returns to power.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.