BBC Blog Network

User Profile

redcliffe62

Listed below are comments made by redcliffe62 between Wednesday, 2nd September 2009 and Saturday, 17th October 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Sun and sandwiches 00:14am on 17 Oct 2009 i find it astonishing thta knowing the broadcasting guidelines the bbc have not even discussed the debate with the snp at all.
someone, somewhere, must have made that decision.
brian should explain why no discussions have been made and if the bbc will continue to treat the snp with contempt.

i have a feeling it is someone in london of course; after all when has the bbc allowed its bias and less than impartial approach to politics in scotland to be seen as anything other than normal business practice.
Is Australia needy for acclaim? 02:53am on 10 Oct 2009 re the hey hey skit which i watched live. i thought it was crass, but then again the red faces segnent always was. it was meant to be a cross between naff, sick and bizarre. this met that criteria.
the show never suffered from political correctness, and had its own morals and ethics.

that an american guest was offended was his choice. i was not offended by black guys playing white women in "white girls", which to me is exactly the same scenario. in both cases people were painted up to match a stereotype. why was on eoffensive and the other not? because one was racist and one was not? give me a break.

if you wnat to take things to the n'th degree and say some black people in america might be offended, because people do it there these days to cause offense, i would agree.
bur an indian doctor and his middle eastern mates clearly had no intention to cause offence to another ethnic group.

i cannot think of too many (read ANY) occasions where white people in oz dressed up as aborigines and mocked them or their culture. so similarly what happened was not racist per se, but it had a go at the jackson five and their changes over time.

americans should sit up and realise the opinion of the world is not universal and does not always revolve around them. the differnece in the skit from 20 years ago was that michael jackson was now white and not black. that was part of the joke. not that our u.s. cousins could get past the word racism.

finally, harry connick has a point, times have changed in america, but his skin tone playing the part of a southern preacher was not "his own" in a film in which he starred over 10 years ago. whether he was tanned, meant to be coloured or black he should perhaps explain. it was funny, and not offensive as there was a black man standing beside him. that made it PC OK.

in australia therefore we do not need a negro man's approval (or whoopi goldberg)of the skit to decide if it is PC or not. it should be noted the only people who can tell jewish jokes seem to be jews themselves like sacha baron cohen. and jokes about black people in america are PC if said by black people. only black people can use the n word as otherwise it is racist? more drivel and pC gone mad in my view. it is assumed if you belong to "the ethnic or religious group" you cannot per se be racist against yourself.

i guess after 200 years of guilt in america about slavery and demeaning behaviour to various ethnic groups the situation is different. although both countries, oz and the states, have a more backward approach to racism outside the metropolitan areas, where discussions are shall we say a lot more black and white!
Paper trail 6:04pm on 30 Sep 2009 the scottish sun website has huge coverage from its parent paper and is pro tory. a bit on the rangers loss but essentilaly the same stories.
they are supporting the tories, they are just pretending that is not the case in scotland as that will lose half their circulation. to be seen brown nosing a tory view would make people rush for the beano, sorry record.
if they were not following the english version then the links to the english view would not be so prevalent in the "scottish sun".
'Labour's lost it,' says the Sun 05:41am on 30 Sep 2009
as per mr hill's comments above;

the sun on their "scottish" website is backing the tories, the story is still part of the website but in the paper they will not back the tories or they will lose half their circulation.

the great benefit laden unwashed who read this comic care more about page 3 boobies than they do about politics.
the tories wrecked scotland, and ghetting labour voters in glasgow to vote tory is just a bridge too far from reality.

if they really believe in the tories for britain, then they need to back the tories in scotland, even if it hits their circulation.

if that happened then it provides lots of ammo for the daily beano, sorry record, would overhaul them and be more popular, as people in the west of scotland in particular are inherently more supportive of labour than they will ever be of the tories.
'A simple proposition' 05:45am on 29 Sep 2009 what is intriguing is the link gray made to the tories and the snp and some nasty nazis from the estern bloc.
the rest of it was waffle for ean english audience who clearly ahd no idea who he was.
when will labour say what they have achieved in the last 15 years and will achieve instead of scaremongering.
labour has a cre vote of 24% in england, and 29% core vote in scotland, which with benefits, the daily record and the beeb being their source of sanitised news means that people will vote for a red rosette and it will take another generation to change.
the headline should say, labour scared to have a referendum in case result goes the wrong way, fotr that is the reason.
to say a vote for the snp is a vote for the tories is more silly stuff and may not work as well as it did on the great unwashed 20 odd years ago.
tongue in cheek, i think, if cameron said he was giving a 500 quid bonus to all disabled people with bad backs in scotland when he got in, the tories would win glasgow east and north east nae bother.

labour supporters may come out more for a GE than a local election, as long as eastenders is not on, so to avoid total annihilation linking the two elections on the same day will hide those catastrophic losses.

it may mean that people vote for labour the local election party and lend brown their vote as well, as subliminally they are tempted to vote labour in both. having the local elections first and labour getting thrashed with big liberal and tory votes across pomgolia would not be good for brown or whoever follows him.

as soon as ainsworth announces that the carriers are not being built on the clyde and are being cancelled brown and murphy are toast in glasgow, so that needs to be clarified by brian, not just trident spending.

the decision has i understand already been made at whitehall based on cost cutting, but is being delayed as an announcement until after bain gets elected. can you confirm brian, and get a straight answer from those labour chappies that a rveersal on that has not taken place?
Lib Dems pina colada blues 4:21pm on 22 Sep 2009 so he has said to the labore and tory groups, either support me on calman and do something before 2050 or i walk away and pretend i have a policy.
if he had a policy rather than waffkling about wishing he had one (but we do not so shoosh...) means we might take him seriously.
12% and dropping so needs to do something, sitting on the fence and being seen as the naughty shollboy has done nothing to instil any confidence in him and the cleggites.
a cleg is something that sticks to a sheep's backside, acting as a protector, and i feel may have a better use than the leader of the liberals of the same name.
'Knives out' for SNP budget 05:15am on 18 Sep 2009 was the decision to cancel the edinburgh rail link anti edinburgh?
was the decison to transfer lottery money from scotland to feed the olymic dream in london anti glasgow and edinburgh?
was the decision in real terms to cut 500 mill from the scottish budget anti glasgow and edinburgh.
was the decision to buy the banks out and put them under their mates' control anti edinburgh.
is it me, or is the answer simple. labour's glasgow lackeys can get the 500 mill printed and used to pay for the glasgow rail link. after all with the defence cuts and the need to cut trident and the new carriers (albeit yet to be admittrd fully) they need to say something positive about glasgow.
finally, glasgow gets more pro rata than other scottish cities. perhaps the big 4 cities should get the same per person and we shall see then how effective glasgow is in running its business,as anything other than a welfare basket case.
clearly the bbc has an agenda. the decision to follow this press release line taken by purcell fools no-one. brian back to his disappointing best.
and it should be noted that if purcell and his public purse mates had not voted for the trams then this could probably have been built.
United financial kingdom 10:40am on 15 Sep 2009 corporation tax at the rate of ireland, an oil fund the size of norway, a rebuilt financial busines where london is not the aim bit alevel of aptitude to avoid, and no talk about the arc of insolvency now.
scotland may have people who feel they are better off under the union, but the argument has hollow legs woth a ratio of debt to gdp that is laughable and beyond a joke
write about debt and pfi and the benefits they bring to the union. it will be a short comment.
Three tales of our times 03:41am on 05 Sep 2009 with company tax at 12% in ireland and 28% in britain, and scotland unable to vary it downwards to atrract jobs, this will continue until the option to compete with other countries on a level playing field is achieved.
accountants care about money, not sentiment.

it is the fact the companies are profitable and making money that is the problem to the accountants, they want more for themselves!
Different perspectives 01:14am on 02 Sep 2009 labour in scotland should have a different viewpoint to labour at wastemonster. we complain they are puppets and simply follow what they are told, but when gray courageously? has a different opinion, rightly or wrongly, then he is blamed for not spouting the party line.

oppostion to a view in a political party is healthy, the view of the leader should not be repeated verbatim as correct, as happens in north korea.
gray should be able to explain that yes, he does not have the same view as brown but a party should be allowed to have different viewpoints.
all the fudging so a blurred repsonse which does not contradict anyone is given as a standard policy clearly suggests a different problem.

all th posters simply wnat to confirm that gray ahs a different view to brown. clearly that is the case. whetehr he believes it or said it to bring about political mischief making is now a factor.

the more we hear, with bklair and brown committing their colours to the mast, as did mandelson recently, then the less likely gray would have done anything different. whilst labour in scotland was previously a rubber stamp for wastemonster, on this issue i would expect no different in private discussions and dealings had labour won in scotland in 2007.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

redcliffe62