The Jeremy Corbyn thread

[Surf's Up]

Yet again Comrade Corbyn SMASHES May at PMQ's, it really isn't fair anymore. No wonder the Tories are so far ahead in the opinion polls, people feel sorry for them as they are so USELESS and such LIARS , obviously come the election the TORIES will be WIPED out though

Hehehehe - funniest post from Enrest for some time, a return to form!!

 

[Moshe Gariani]

I wonder if anyone takes these sorts of posts from you seriously.

About as seriously as Theresa May should be taken when her best defence of the Tory education policy shambles is to get personal about Labour frontbenchers and their children.

I think we've found the answer to why she is so hopeless at PMQs. She gets her briefing advice by reading the wisdom of the blue brigade on NSC...!!!

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Yet again Comrade Corbyn SMASHES May at PMQ's, it really isn't fair anymore. No wonder the Tories are so far ahead in the opinion polls, people feel sorry for them as they are so USELESS and such LIARS , obviously come the election the TORIES will be WIPED out though

Thanks for the heads up. Just watched it back on iPlayer.

Theresa May will go down in history as one of our more hopeless PMs.

People rarely change their minds once their political beliefs are established but surely no-one can think the Tories current approach to state education is correct...? How on earth can a REDUCTION in the standard of primary and secondary state education over the next 5 years possibly be justified...?

 

[Gwylan]

About as seriously as Theresa May should be taken when her best defence of the Tory education policy shambles is to get personal about Labour frontbenchers and their children.

... particularly when it's an attack on someone who had no say on his child's education

 

[Hastings gull]

... particularly when it's an attack on someone who had no say on his child's education

You cannot believe that surely, or are you just desperate to cling on to it. Corbyn would be like anyone else and what the best for his child - no one uses their own child for social experiments, and if said child is a bright spark, any pranet desperate for their child to succedd would choose grammar school educat To say that his wife insisted on it and he really could do nothing about it is just a convenient ruse to justify his hypocrisy.

 

[London Irish]

Good session for Corbyn today.

Just the right time for Ken Livingstone to start banging on about Hitler again

You mean just the right time some toady Tory journalist goes up and ask him about Hitler? Ken should say **** off every time but the press would stitch him up for that too

 

[Hastings gull]

About as seriously as Theresa May should be taken when her best defence of the Tory education policy shambles is to get personal about Labour frontbenchers and their children.
I think we've found the answer to why she is so hopeless at PMQs. She gets her briefing advice by reading the wisdom of the blue brigade on NSC...!!!

You might not like it, but she has a point. I was at a grammar school, and I can certainly confirm that there were quite a few lads there –some I still know from supporting the Albion –who were from poorer parts of the town and have gone on to do very well. Of course this is also possible at the local comp, but you would have to be that shade more strong-willed to avoid the disruption to lessons and general distractions. The intention is to help brighter children achieve their potential, irrespective of background, and thus she is quite right to criticise Labour luvvie hypocrites, who choose one avenue for their own offspring and another for everyone else’s children. And before you say -not this again -YOU brought it up again!

 

[The Birdman]

We have had less money in Sussex for education and labour areas have had more that's fair

 

[spring hall convert]

You mean just the right time some toady Tory journalist goes up and ask him about Hitler? Ken should say **** off every time but the press would stitch him up for that too

If he's stupid enough to fall for it EVERY time, it adds further fuel to the raging fire labelled, Labour's incompetence.

But credit where it's due, JC stuck to his task well today and inflicted a few blows. I still think it's Angus Robertson that gets TM hot under the collar though.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

You might not like it, but she has a point. I was at a grammar school, and I can certainly confirm that there were quite a few lads there –some I still know from supporting the Albion –who were from poorer parts of the town and have gone on to do very well. Of course this is also possible at the local comp, but you would have to be that shade more strong-willed to avoid the disruption to lessons and general distractions. The intention is to help brighter children achieve their potential, irrespective of background, and thus she is quite right to criticise Labour luvvie hypocrites, who choose one avenue for their own offspring and another for everyone else’s children. And before you say -not this again -YOU brought it up again!

I brought it up because it is a PATHETIC excuse of an argument with which to try and defend the indefensible. Very strange that you choose to repeat it.

 

[Hastings gull]

I brought it up because it is a PATHETIC excuse of an argument with which to try and defend the indefensible. Very strange that you choose to repeat it.

You bring it up and when someone repeats it, you find it strange! On the subject of being pathetic . . Or does this whole business strike a chord as you are a hypocrite.

 

[Weststander]

Yet again Comrade Corbyn SMASHES May at PMQ's, it really isn't fair anymore. No wonder the Tories are so far ahead in the opinion polls, people feel sorry for them as they are so USELESS and such LIARS , obviously come the election the TORIES will be WIPED out though

Deluding yourself, must have made the pain even greater at May 2010 and May 2015, as Labour collapsed in those general elections. Looks like more of the same in May 2020 as immensely unpopular Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and their miserable class warfare comrades such as Livingstone and McCluskey will be total turn off for 80% of the electorate.

 

[Ernest]

Deluding yourself, must have made the pain even greater at May 2010 and May 2015, as Labour collapsed in those general elections. Looks like more of the same in May 2020 as immensely unpopular Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell and their miserable class warfare comrades such as Livingstone and McCluskey will be total turn off for 80% of the electorate.

May and her COHORTS by 2020 will have plunged the UK into CHAOS and will be voted out of power FOREVER

 

[Gwylan]

You cannot believe that surely, or are you just desperate to cling on to it. Corbyn would be like anyone else and what the best for his child - no one uses their own child for social experiments, and if said child is a bright spark, any pranet desperate for their child to succedd would choose grammar school educat To say that his wife insisted on it and he really could do nothing about it is just a convenient ruse to justify his hypocrisy.

Are you for real? Corbyn and his wife divorced over this very issue. You can accuse Corbyn of many things but he stuck to his principles on education - unlike Abbott - and he can be commended for it.

But the most worrying thing is that you seem to believe that we're still back in the 19th century and wives have no voice of their own and should obey what their husbands say.

Women, know your limits!

 

[Weststander]

May and her COHORTS by 2020 will have plunged the UK into CHAOS and will be voted out of power FOREVER

The electorate will never support Momentum, Livingstone, Abbott, McDonnell and the bitter Left.

Not forgetting the effect of the SNP wiping out 40+ Labour seats.

 

[Hastings gull]

Are you for real? Corbyn and his wife divorced over this very issue. You can accuse Corbyn of many things but he stuck to his principles on education - unlike Abbott - and he can be commended for it.

But the most worrying thing is that you seem to believe that we're still back in the 19th century and wives have no voice of their own and should obey what their husbands say.

Women, know your limits![/QUOTE]

What an incredibly stupid post. Who said anything about women's rights? What are you talking about? I made no such point nor even implied that. And you ask if I am for real? . . How do you know that this is the one issue that caused their divorce? How did he stick to his principles? Did he pull his lad out of the grammar school? No, of course he didn't. Like anyone else, he wanted the best for his kid, but realised how politically damaging his lad going to a grammar school would be, so brought up the issue about his wife.. Like you, I can only go by what I see and read and I heard him say on TV that his wife was adamant that the lad would go to a grammar school, because that was a convenient excuse. Good for her - it is what you, I, and virtually everyone else would do.

 

[midnight_rendezvous]

You might not like it, but she has a point. I was at a grammar school, and I can certainly confirm that there were quite a few lads there –some I still know from supporting the Albion –who were from poorer parts of the town and have gone on to do very well. Of course this is also possible at the local comp, but you would have to be that shade more strong-willed to avoid the disruption to lessons and general distractions. The intention is to help brighter children achieve their potential, irrespective of background, and thus she is quite right to criticise Labour luvvie hypocrites, who choose one avenue for their own offspring and another for everyone else’s children. And before you say -not this again -YOU brought it up again!

Helping 'brighter' children at the expense of the majority of children. My school's funding is being cut by £200,000. That's the equivalent of 8 teachers. All to fund a system of education that is almost exclusively aimed at and to aid the wealthy.

 

[Hastings gull]

Helping 'brighter' children at the expense of the majority of children. My school's funding is being cut by £200,000. That's the equivalent of 8 teachers. All to fund a system of education that is almost exclusively aimed at and to aid the wealthy.

To say that one move means that your school loses is far too simplistic, as I am sure that you appreciate. It is unlikely that the end result will aid the wealthy, as they will be in private education anyway, would they not? I presume that you prefer a system where all are the same and the wealthy, as you put it, are held back.

 

[midnight_rendezvous]

To say that one move means that your school loses is far too simplistic, as I am sure that you appreciate. It is unlikely that the end result will aid the wealthy, as they will be in private education anyway, would they not? I presume that you prefer a system where all are the same and the wealthy, as you put it, are held back.

The government have cut funding and are instead investing significantly more money in grammar schools. Funding priorities are changing. And it's not just my school, schools up and down the country are having their budgets cut. As a teacher I want a fair education system however any one in the education profession knows that children from more deprived backgrounds are more likely to have significant barriers to learning. By cutting school funding those barriers are more likely to increase and the gap will widen between them and their peers. But you know, sod it, let's pay 5mil a year for some taxis to grammar schools.

 

[Hastings gull]

The government have cut funding and are instead investing significantly more money in grammar schools. Funding priorities are changing. And it's not just my school, schools up and down the country are having their budgets cut. As a teacher I want a fair education system however any one in the education profession knows that children from more deprived backgrounds are more likely to have significant barriers to learning. By cutting school funding those barriers are more likely to increase and the gap will widen between them and their peers. But you know, sod it, let's pay 5mil a year for some taxis to grammar schools.

As I understand it, the government is trying to make the finding system fairer, and whilst you conveniently talk of cuts, an equal amount of schools will gain -were there not protests last year from West Sussex schools, who will now gain? If the system is indeed fairer, then given that you want a fair system, should you not be rejoicing? But I suspect that you don't actually want a fair system, just one that suits your political bias. You are right in that children from deprived backgrounds will struggle, which is of course why the government is introducing grammar schools to help bright pupils from such backgrounds, but you don't want that. It is ironic that the taxi will take a disadvantaged child to a grammar school, to which you object, yet claim you are on the side of such pupils. As a teacher, you will no doubt suspect that a grammar school will indeed give said child a better chance in life, but you would prefer to keep said child at the local comp for political reasons of your own.

Your assertion that cutting funding will lead to greater disparity is wild, off the cuff and a throw-away protest line -particularly as headteachers warn that cuts may affect the existence of small A level classes and other "luxuries". As you know full well, the school in a deprived area will have a huge number of PP pupils -and the thousands of pounds generated will rightly go to helping these children, though the level of success due to this financial help is patchy. It is not as if they have been abandoned.