We have become dangerously close to accepting the homeless situation as a problem that we just can't fix- Linda Lingle

Hitting the nail on the head... Sort of

When I think of quotes for these blogs, I often find many weird, wonderful and inspiring quotes that fit the story perfectly. Today however, was a different story. Because for the first time, I find that the quote matches the hopelessness of the situation, but also the guilt that I feel that we'll never fix it. David Cameron has brought us this far, to deny that it was his influence on the economy and on the UK has improved our live, would be foolish. And to say it was Clegg's impact would be about as foolish as voting for them in May. But the classic question still remains..... What have the Romans ever done for us?

To think a quote so infamous from John Cleese would influence our political future is barbaric to many, but it does raise questions on the welfare and living standards whilst the Conservatives have been in power, and assess their credentials before May. The economy is theirs, end of. There is no evidence to support otherwise. But Labour have hit back, as have the Lib Dems and UKIP over what these savings doing. Have the British public been forced to save and not reap their rewards? Well David Cameron came out today and answered... The wrong questions.

Instead of NHS, welfare and budgets, Cameron talked around the issue in typical politician style and instead talked solely on pension schemes... Which in my books is about as safe as being a lifeguard in a desert. Recycling old speeches and policies, Cameron reiterated his dedication to leaving bus passes, TV licenses and winter fuel allowances alone for any "better off" pensioner. This splits them apart from Labour and Lib Dems, wanting to get rid of it, citing it as rightist policy. 

"Which in my books is about as safe as being a lifeguard in a desert."

So what's wrong? I agree with the policy myself even, but it's what Cameron doesn't mention that worries me. A recent poll was done by the BBC, which confirmed that the most important agenda in the upcoming election was the NHS, and I've seen/heard every party play their cards in the matter... But the Conservatives. I know the NHS is in a supposed crisis, and that's justified, furthermore being the party in control in such a state would be naturally regretful. Yet, to not even mention a plan for the NHS, a guideline for budget, or even a hint is preposterous. For Cameron to have not put this high on his agenda is worth ridiculing, because I think it will cost him the General Election. 5 years ago, the economy was the big one, now times have moved on, and welfare is the name of the game, with Cameron still guessing in a game of charades.

Jordan Ifield (One Nation Tory here...)   

We are all here on earth to help others, what on earth the others are here for I don't know- W.H.Auden

John Prescott- Here we go again...

Returning from the dead can only be performed once, especially in politics. Look at Gordon Brown as a good example, fell into the abyss of economic failure in 2010 and came out last year to save his "beloved" Scotland from the cruel flippers of Alex Salmond's SNP. And Prescott has already made a return in the past, having been a member of "good old Labour" (even though I'm certain "good old" doesn't exist), he made a return as deputy prime minister under Tony Blair. But having rightfully resigned in 2007 over a suspected affair and an egg throwing incident, he's back. And not is all that it seems...

He's back.... And boy, don't we regret it

Many have presumed Precott's appointment as Miliband's unofficial environmental advisor as wise, bringing in old labour voters and warding them away from UKIP. However, I suspect that Prescott has more than meets the eye in this role, because whilst he has an environmental background in the EU, he isn't exactly Mr. Green. And whilst the Conservatives and Lib Dems have a strong image (but the Lib Dems is a bad strong image), Labour have the image of a weak old salad. Step in Lord Prescott.


Here's a man who has smacked both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown together and made them work, and has deep left ideologies. Perfect as far as Miliband is concerned. He gets a stronger image, as well as Labour's rotten image and he'll (hopefully) keep Miliband's feet on the ground, otherwise we're all buggered. Control our economy and tax Miliband, and I'll be happy, but with the introduction of Precott, I already think we're doomed.


There's a reason Tony Blair thought it was a good idea to rebrand the party, because it had the same image and left wing policies as Stalin's Communist Russia. Even when Thatcher's mixed reign ended, old Labour couldn't capitalize on that. Prescott is part of a dying regime, like petrolheads, there is no place for them in society anymore. And as far as I'm concerned, Prescott's appointment will give Labour some old voters back from the dark side of UKIP, but it does give the rest of us the impression that Labour has run out of ideas.... And dignity for that matter.


Jordan Ifield (why I wouldn't vote Labour reason #756)

I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you- Friedrich Nietzsche

Lord Kinnock- If you must lie, at least lie well

Lord Kinnock- Praise the hypocrite who will have to pay
the mansion tax

Labour do know how to cock up as it seems, and none more than a Lord to justify why I wouldn't vote Labour. As usual, Labour are getting slack over their proposed mansion tax, and it's impact on election day. Not being a clear cut policy yet, Ed Balls said that those earning between £2-3 million would have to pay £250 a month in mansion tax. However, as many have pointed out, most notably some Labour MP's, in a capital with such wealth in it as London, many would be "disappointed" to lose £3000 a year over an unpopular Labour policy. It doesn't get much worse than that. 

Whilst many have justified the policy for saving the NHS through extra funding to GP's nurses and doctors etc, however Kinnock seems to have the wrong end of the stick, as does the future of the proposal. Using the analogy that mansion tax would only "cost a lunch" is inappropriate to say the least, unless they are eating golden covered cheesecakes in the Savoy every day. £3000, is not cheap, not for anyone's wallet, and it's at this point, where I state that it gets worse.... 

"Can you make me an economic policy worthy of Stalin?"

In terms of the economy, which this is supposedly set to help, Labour are going the wrong way about it. I know in terms of ideology, Labour increase taxes on the rich and all that, but just when the country is getting back on it's feet, having halved the deficit from the previous Labour government, their economic policies become crude and half hearted. It was as if Ed Miliband said to Balls, "look, I need to look more like a left win Labour Leader,,, Can you make me an economic policy worthy of Stalin?" It's a short term bomb if put in practice, Labour will not only lose votes come May because of the policy (especially in London, the most densely populated area in the UK), and if enforced, will only tax the people further, and because of that, increase public spending to the extent of putting our deficit back up.... MERRY COMMUNISM EVERYONE

Jordan Ifield (guess who I'm not voting for...)