Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who here used to like Tony Blair?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:31 PM
Original message
Poll question: Who here used to like Tony Blair?
I remember how happy I was when Labour kicked ass in the 1997 elections. Seems like such a long time ago.

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well,maybe initially more accepting of him.
But like him....Never...Initially wanted to change the name of the Labour party and purged certain leftst members..Like the mayor of London...In the end Blair lost that battle...Blain did not like the Socialist tint...that is a first for anywhere in Europe in its' leftist parties...
I am proud to be a Socialist..Most of the world is in agreement with me on that..That is the leftists throughout the world...Minus the US, where we have been brainwashed...We drink out of mugs we got from the DSA with roses on them...Makes our day..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Pretty much says it for me, too. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. One could also say, that if he hadn't at least attempted...
to purge those more "leftist" elements, the UK might be "celebrating" its 25th year of Tory rule. Of course, as things have turned out, maybe it wouldn't be any different than it is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Any one who attempts to purge the likes of
Tony Benn or Ken Livingston is on my suspect list..By the way, Ken Livingston was recently re-elected mayor of London overwhealmingly..
Are not British major parties sort of umberella like as are US parties...No one has the right to purge a wing of the party..Such actions are pretty Stalinist to me.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Actually marginalization of party members is quite popular here in..
the States. We see it everyday on this board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Indeed. You just demonstrated it in post #4...
...through your unsupported premise that leftists would have caused Tories to rule even longer, thus intimating that leftists, and not those who use the fascist tactic of purging, are the problem.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Ummm....I'm not a member of the Labor Party.
Nice try though. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. You don't have to be to slam leftists like you did.
You indicated that getting rid of leftists allowed Blair to win.

You do not support this allegation, and it is a slam against leftists (which I am not, but don't like to see unfairly attacked) to intimate that leftists were the problem.

Make more sense now?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Where did I slam "leftists"????
Edited on Sat Feb-05-05 03:44 PM by tx_dem41
I stated what conventional wisdom from British politics was("One could say"), right or wrong to further discussion.

And, heck, the Labor Party hasn't been the "leftist" party in the UK in 15 years. Get with the program. Check out the Lib-Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Ken Livingston isn't a leftist?
Gee, what was I thinking?

Your argument read to me as "getting rid of people like Livingston equals the Tory party not in power", You don't back this up in any way except with anecdotal "One could say" non-evidence.

You really don't understand how blaming leftists like Livingston for Tory party rule could be seen as a marginalization of leftists like Livingston?

I could be reading your posts wrong, but it sure seemed to me that you were saying people like Livingston, and not Blair, are the problem. Perhaps you believe Britons think that. I see no evidence of such, but I could be wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I travel to the UK all the time. If you go, talk to people in the pub...
...I am relating what they say. Excuse me for trying to give some of the "average" Laborite opinion. I guess we will just stick to more uninformed, personal opinions from now on.

No where in this thread have I given my own opinion anywhere. I will now state that I love "Red Ken". He has done an excellent job as Mayor of London, especially with the vehicular fee to get into Central London. But, I could care less about the future of the Labor party (and that is not even taking into account the War). The whole "Third Way" philosophy that the Labor party has adopted has gutted it of its core, progressive principles. So, I'm a little confused on why someone would be hung up on how the Labor Party thinks vis-a-vis leftism or progressivism.

I am now looking towards Charles Kennedy and the Lib-Dems as the solution, with the understanding that they have a LOT of work to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
32. You know what? I pegged you wrong, and for that I apologize.
I clearly totally misunderstood you. It happens sometimes.

Never been lucky enough to get to London, so you'd have more knowledge of the Brit-on-the-street view than I, certainly.

So, yeah...my bad. Sorry to have gotten it so wrong!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #32
45. No need to apologize, but thanks!
I was probably not communicating precisely enough at the beginning. Good to meet you, and thanks for the PM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillieWoohah Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #10
56. I'm calling Godwin on that
It's not a "fascist purge" every time a political party performs some kind of internal reshuffle and appoints/elects new faces.

Purges tend to be top down and done at the instigation of the party leaders. The remaking of the British Labour party was largely a result of the democratically-expressed desires of party members electing new people to the top positions.

Also, purging is more associated with communism than fascism. "Stalinst purge" is a lot more of a cliche than "fascist purge".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stella_Artois Donating Member (838 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. It had to be done
Labour moving to the centre was preferable to the Tories being in power for another 10 years.

You can be as socialist as you like, but if you are never actually in government you might as well be pissing up the wall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mr blur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Have to disagree with you there.
In was time for the Tories to go anyway. They had little hope of winning the next election. Blair was almost bearable as the face of Labour most acceptable to the Daily Mail-reading classes of middle England at the time. Now he's a disgrace. And totally out of his depth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BornaDem Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. I never liked him and now he's proved that I was right...
when he started cozying up to Bush in support of the unjust war in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Tony was a good man
But he swallowed both his pride and the Kool-Aid after Bush was installed.

It's a sad end to a promising career, but there it is.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. If you haven't, read Greg Palast. Blair was never a great man.
He was corrupt from the get-go.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. I hadn't seen it
I thought Blair's "New Labour" was a good idea, incorporating the moderates into a party that had some of that old-time fightin' laborite moxie. I didn't study much about its implementation, though. And I have grown distrustful of the character assassination in hard-left circles and publications like Counterpunch.

But since I am woefully uninformed about British poltics, and I still trust Palast, and I'll take a second look.

Thanks for the heads-up.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #25
34. Here's a good one on earlier, pre-Iraq Blair...
Figured it's only fair to actually offer something up now that I'm off work, so here's something from 1998:


http://gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=73&row=2

Our next stop was Soho. There, in the trendy loft offices of LLM lobbyists Ben Lucas and Jon Mendelsohn, we endured a mind-numbing two-hour lecture on the Third Way, "analytically-driven evidence-based decision-making". We were confronted by a solid wall of New Labour-speak. But it had a purpose.

Lucas and Mendelsohn's were introducing us to a world in which message matters more than content. For their fee of between 5,000 and 20,000 per month, the duo would instruct us in the political grammar of the World of Tony Blair.

We needed LLM's help in defeating environmental restrictions, we said. Mendelsohn advised us to recast our plan for new, polluting power stations into something that sounded Earth-friendly. "Tony is very anxious to be seen as green," he said. "Everything has to be couched in environmental language - even if it's slightly Orwellian."

LLM clients are expected to "reshape their core corporate culture", to get in line with New Labour's vision. He cited the "cultural reshaping" of one LLM client, Tesco which recently pledged 12 million to Peter Mandelson's Millennium Dome project.



Palast even has a section on his site dedicated to Blair: http://gregpalast.com/columns.cfm?subject_id=6&subject_...

Although some claim that Palast "just makes shit up", I agree with you that his work is trustworthy. I also share a wariness for CounterPunch, which seems (pardon the pun) a bit hit-or-miss to me.

Anyway, enjoy!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #11
37. Agreed; never was never will be a "good man"; just a total liar
like his pal bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #37
49. Neoliberals + neoconservatives = neo-hell!
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. I thought he was great in "Puppets On Parade "
Edited on Sat Feb-05-05 02:55 PM by jdots
then he really sold out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattNC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. I still like him
just not as much as I used to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. How do you like a war criminal?
Not an attack, just curiousity. I couldn't like a war criminal, myself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. "Not an attack"
LOL...that's rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. It's a serious question, despite your sarcasm.
Blair is a war criminal. I don't like war criminals. I don't understand how anyone can like someone who is a war criminal.

Perhaps the poster sees something bigger about Blair that causes him to like Blair despite his war criminal status. I know AP defends Blair based on a complex analysis I don't happen to agree with but is at least reasoned and explained.

So this is actually a question to learn a different perspective. Sorry if you find it otherwise; that's your problem, not mine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zmdem Donating Member (546 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
27. How is Blair a war criminal ?
Do you mean Yugoslavia or Iraq ?

He acted within the bounds of the English constitution, so I fail to see how he is a war criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Well, see, there's this pesky thing called
international law.

Even Blair's counsel, before the invasion, was warning him of it.

Bush, of course, laughs at the notion and says "Better call my lawyer."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zmdem Donating Member (546 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Perhaps you are right
It is possible that Britain has surrended her sovereignity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 05:31 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. See the website putting the case for the impeachment of Blair
The report A Case to Answer reveals:

Tony Blair made 28 statements about Iraq's weapons that were unsupported by the intelligence assessments available to him,

Tony Blair failed to disclose available counter evidence, or failed to ensure that claims were verified on 12 occasions

Tony Blair failed to withdraw material later found to be false,

Tony Blair had entered into an agreement with the US without the consent of the Cabinet, Parliament or the people of the UK, and

that based on these charges, there is a clear case for the Prime Minister to answer and that regretfully, the only way to hold him accountable is through proceeding with a motion of impeachment.

http://www.impeachblair.org/report.shtml


Unfortunately this seems to be fizzling out. MPs were signing the motion, but the Speaker of the Commons has not scheduled a debate on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #27
33. Iraq - remember the "45 minutes" bullshit?
He lied Britain into an illegal war. How could he NOT be a war criminal that way?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
54. When was he convicted?
I must have missed that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #54
58. Was the war illegal? Yes or no.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 04:44 AM
Response to Reply #58
59. So far no has proven it in a court of law
If he is a war criminal, why hasn't he been prosecuted? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattNC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #7
31. i don't consider him to be a war criminal n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
20. I don't know
Edited on Sat Feb-05-05 04:11 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
if it would be possible for anyone to actually like him, but I remember being encouraged by his, well.. as it transpired... unconscionable posturing, as a left-wing firebrand!

At the time, he used a kind of androgenously high voice-register, presumably to seem unthreatening. As he climbed the greasy pole to achieve his ambition, he was apparently a master at upsetting as few of his parliamentary colleagues as possible.

However, the neocons/new Tories hated him, because they knew him for a smarter version of themselves. And of course as he stole more and more of their psychopathic policies, they just lost it completely - together with any chance of getting back into power. Even now Howard and his the neocons don't seem to have grasped that, for the far-right, to tell the most outrageous lies is not optional, it is absolutely indispensible. Thatcher knew it, Major knew it, Blair knows it, but post Major, they've completely lost the plot.

The only Socialist MP of unyielding integrity ws a Kiwi called Gould. Once he was really convinced of Blair's game - and it was quite early - he chose to return to NZ. And he was a high-flyer then, who could have risen higher still very quicky, had he been prepared to sell his soul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
21. I did. He changed after September 11th.
He become Bush's OFFICAL POODLE!

:puke:

Vote Liberal Democrat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I agree with you on the Lib-Dems...
Not sure if Blair was EVER who the left thought he was with the whole "Third Way" philosophy.

Now, we just need to do something about Charles Kennedy's brogue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. "brogue"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. He is from Scotland...
Edited on Sat Feb-05-05 04:33 PM by tx_dem41
and speaks with a pretty thick Scottish brogue. IMO, it limits his effectiveness when he makes speeches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
henrik larssonisking Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #24
47. tony blair who is also from scotland (born) #2
gorden brown, who will probuably be his succesor is scottish too, looks like the west lothian question is still alive and kicking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 05:39 AM
Response to Original message
36. bLiar's been a lying ass from the start, and he's still just a lying ass.
Funny how so many Americans love the guy, and so many Brits hate the guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
henrik larssonisking Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #36
40. brits hate him????????
none of the brits i know hate him, even the tories respect him, i guess we will see if your theory is correct come may i believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. ALL the Brits I know and knew the 14 years I lived in London hate him
Do you look at the UK polls??? bLiar's approval ratings have been negative for a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
henrik larssonisking Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. you believe in the accuracy of polls now :)
im just stating that no brit i know hates the guy, some wouldnt vote for him, but they still respect him. In fact i would say ive never met any Brits who hate him, now red ken is the opposite, i know a lot who hate the dude big time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. What's with the snarky "now"?
Edited on Sun Feb-06-05 09:22 AM by LynnTheDem
You have no idea whether I ever did or did not believe in polls, thank you very much.

I'm stating that the Brits I know do dislike bLiar; that I lived in London for 14 years, several of which included bLiar as PM, and that most polls have shown negative ratings for bLiar for a long time now.

And that's fact.

Edited to add; Labour lost 461 seats and eight councils in June elections. Quite the ass-kicking for bLiar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
henrik larssonisking Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #43
46. and im willing to take a bet from you
Edited on Sun Feb-06-05 10:29 AM by henrik larssonisking
that he will win easily when the general election comes along, and im stating that none of the BRits i know hate the guy, some disagree with him, but they would rather have him than the alternatives.

on edit, notice the smiley on the tag line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #46
50. Of course he'll win
There's no one to replace him; if there were, at a 32% "approval" rating bLiar would be out on his arse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #46
52. Quite a few of us hate him
I certainly distrust him now, completely, and have no respect for him at all. It's true that I can't imagine him as laughing to himself how he's managed to fool the electorate for personal gain, unlike, say, Bush or Cheney; so he doesn't have the taint of evil they do. But I do think that he is an acolyte of power, and he has tied himself to Bush with no regard for the morality of the man. Since he is an intelligent man, I, and many people in Britain, feel betrayed by him, and I'd like to see the impeachment succeed.

Most Britons would rather have Gordon Brown as Prime Minister. Unfortunately the only way for that to happen is for Labour MPs to rebel against Blair; many are also in love with his power, and so do whatever he says, and enough of the rest are too worried that getting rid of their leader would be seen as unfaithful by parts of the electorate that they need to get re-elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #42
53. You evidently move
Edited on Sun Feb-06-05 04:59 PM by KCabotDullesMarxIII
in very right-wing circles. He's hated more than Thatcher. By their fruit you shall know them. Oh, by the way, Welcome!

One thing he's never made any secret about is that he admires Margaret Thatcher, who was the prime mover for the mass homelessness in this country. Unfortunately, for us his actions speak to that effect louder than words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
henrik larssonisking Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. lol yeah i guess red clydeside can in some alternate
universe be considered right wing territory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #55
61. You're not
related to Blair, are you? Both his grandparents were Communist trade-union bigwigs in the red Clydeside shipyards, I believe. Strange how soon the far-left converts to the far-right, isn't it.

"Unelected busybodies... descendants of brigands, muggers, bribers and gangsters,"...

...was how Kinnock once described the House of Lords. Last week he took his seat there.

A whiff of the ermine and you won't see them for dust. "Put a beggar on horseback, and he'll ride it straight to Hell". I'm to the left of the prophet Amos, but I'd prefer most toffs to those chancers any time. The b-o-hs destroyed the Labour party, sold out to a corporatist dressed up in a left-wing firebrand's togs, and have bedded down very nicely, thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
38. I used to think well of him. Obviously I didn't know enough about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AussieDave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 06:44 AM
Response to Original message
39. I have never understood how he could throw his lot in with Bush
- Blair is obviously far more intelligent than W, Laura and the twins put together. I, too, was pleased when Labour wiped the floor with the Tories in 1997 - but now I just wonder, as so many others have, how badly I've misjudged him.

Perhaps naively, I still believe that Blair joined onto the Iraq invasion for the purest of motives, but was just utterly deceived by Bush and the neocons. Unfortunately for him history will lump him in with the Bushies in its very harsh judgment. Instead of being a great Prime Minister he's turned out to be a deeply flawed one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
44. No
He sucks eternally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
48. Blair
I used to like Tony Blair. When he first arose to prominence, there was a lot of talk that he was trying to be the British version of Bill Clinton---someone seeking a "third way" in politics. So I liked him for that.

I don't know when it was that he started drinking the kool aid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
51. I didn't care for Tony back in the Clinton days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DFLforever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
57. I was overjoyed when Labour won in 1997.
Edited on Sun Feb-06-05 07:03 PM by DFLforever
But the Iraq war changed that.

One thing, even before the war, I could never stand to hear Blair speak. He seemed to articulate little more than empty, meaningless phrases. I kept waiting to hear the subject, or the verb - anything that would make his observations or conclusions or whatever he was trying to say, or not say, intelligible. A master of hot air, Tony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TyeDye75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 06:39 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. This isnt really a day for soundbites but.....
I feel the hand of history on my shoulder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 02:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC