OFF: Re: Foot & Mouth

[M Holmes]

Carl Edlund Anderson writes:

> At 19.04 +0000 22.3.2001, ANDREW GARIBALDI wrote:

> >exactly - who the hell in the UK is there left to vote for in terms
> >of political parties - christ, we may have the power to vote but
> >honestly what the hell use is it right now if you don't want he
> >Conservatives Mk 1 (the real Conservatives), the Conservatives Mark 2
> >(Labour), the Conservatives Mark 3 (Liberal)

That's pretty unfair. The Liberals are now unabashedly socialist. They
want to increase tax (though primarily for people other than themselves)
and they've hardly seen anything apart from cannabis that they don't
want to either ban or make compulsory.

> At least the US had a choice.

> Yeah, and shot it down in the primaries! The US gave itsself a choice
> between between Rich Daddy's Boy Party Hack One and Rich Daddy's Boy
> Party Hack Two

And both funded primarily by the oil business, with a lot thrown in from
the nuclear industry for the supposedly Green One (and he wondered why
some would rather vote Nader?)

> Unfortunately, UK poltics seems to be headed down exactly the same
> road.  Labour are pretty hopeless, but the Tories are probably worse,

They ought to be stung up for providing no opposition whatsoever to the
most authoritarian government in my lifetime.

> and who knows what the Lib Dems will do? Like in the States, any real
> choice has been lost in a mire of career politicians playing
> one-upsmanship party-politics games.  Meanwhile, there aren't any
> teachers, trains, hospitals, sheep, etc.

Just as long as we rely on politicians to provide these, we'll get what
we're getting. However there still remains a belief here that somehow
our politicians are better than Soviet politicians and that if we put
them in charge of something we'll somehow escape queues and shortages.

> Cheers, Carl

FoFP