7 November 2010
22:2379015Barry, so the statement is about as useful as mine that, with certain caveats, I am opposed to gravity?
(I was thinking of using this as an election campaign next May. Looks like it's back to the drawing board)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
7 November 2010
23:1279021a point well made bob, in the interests of political balance gwyn promised that all the port workers would be reinstated after an industrial dispute years ago.
john prescott promised him that, he reneged on it.
andrew lansley on a visit here promised us a new hospital, he now is in power.
guess what.
7 November 2010
23:5779024Howard. WADR I think anyone who wants a new full on hospital in Dover is crackers. Having been an in-patient in Dover, Folkestone and Ashford hospitals give me Ashford anytime.
Dover need what we have here in Deal. A decent A+E, X-ray, outpatients + a couple of wards for (mostly old) people as a half way house between Canterbury/Ashford/QEQM and home/mortuary.
This is one of the few cases where big is good as the more practice the buggers have at operating the better (in general) they will be. See graph below for the general trend.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 November 2010
08:2179033As the post has slighty shifted towards a hospital I will make one small point to Bob, and that is if you are not a car owner it's a nghtmare to get to Ashford or Margate hospitals, so if that is the route we go I hope publc transport will improve to these areas.
Im sure Sue will agree on this one
Ask Brian how long it took him by publc transport to get to QEQM
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
8 November 2010
10:3179043I think by reading the front page of this forum today you will see what is happing and it is true.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 November 2010
11:1979050I do have to laugh.
People moan about politicians not giving straight answers and/or not wanting them to be party machine automitans.
This thread and PaulB's very silly front page shows why they are often reluctant to be more open and/or be guarded with comments and answers.
One straight answer from Charlie and we get Howard placing his own incorrect interpretation on the words, the media as represented by PaulB creating a big split story out of nothing and the political opposition egging it on with their fantasies.
We really do get the politicians we deserve.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 November 2010
11:2879052And barryw
you have never done this with Gwyn or the labour party
cum off it mate
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
8 November 2010
11:3979053Well Barry I have added to that now ,so you can Laugh even more,but just one pointI should make about that mate and that is "YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE LAUGHING" what you and I are reading on the front page is very true and you or anyone can not say it is not,it is in your own MP words not mine or my party or the reds BUT YOUR OWN MP.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
8 November 2010
12:2079063I found the Front Page comments by PaulB biased which I do not think is right.
Surely any blurb next to a picture should give the facts not an opinion, that is the what the comment section is for.
Sorry if I have upset you PaulB.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 November 2010
12:3379066Jan
to be fair to paulb
he has never hidden the fact at times he can be a little lefty, hes also said hes probably more labour.
that said look at the forum as a whole and paulb would be lost in a sea of blue.
Paulb does try (as i do) to even the debate up.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 November 2010
12:4779069barry
re; post 46, what did charlie say that i misinterpreted?
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
8 November 2010
13:0579076Strange you should say that Keith. I thought the political balance was fairly even if you take the number of different posters not the number of posts that one poster may make.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 November 2010
13:5479088Howard - your post - 40...
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 November 2010
13:5679090You do come up with some rubbish Vic old mate...
Keith - there was quite enough to legitimately have a go at Labour without any distortion. Look only at the economy, there is no need for anything other than facts to destroy Labour's record on that.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
8 November 2010
14:0179091barry
i stand by every word in post 40, there is no misinterpretation, i have reread the leaflet.
it gives the impression to people that the development could be stopped.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
8 November 2010
14:0279092Barry that is not being back up by the posting that we are seeing.You Blues do love to shot yourself in the foot, but please carry on it is making life alot better for me.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 November 2010
14:0379093Barryw
(me old mucker lol
)
You aSMILEY: you again decide to miss my point, i'm sure deliberatly, but never mind.
What i'm sayng is, this forum(as far as i'm aware)is not a tory web site, and is open for everyone to contribute.
At times this will mean tory MP and cllrs may be/will be challenged.
It appears at the moment that it's okay to slag off Gwyn and the labour party, but when others challenge tory person's yourself and/or peter get out of your prams.
Lets accept we probably won't agree on a number of subjects, that's fine, but let's not give the impresson that only you know best(because you don't lol
)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
8 November 2010
14:0779096Keith - there are challenges and then there are challenges.
We rarely had a straight answer from Labour politicians over the last 13 years.
I include you in that.
I remember at one point challenging you to say whether you were in favour or against the grammar schools when that subject was hot news on the forum and elsewhere.
You avoided the answer.
Now we have had Charlie give a straight answer and look at what happens.....
Howard - Charlie says he is against the development, you interpret that as saying he says he can stop it. You cant wiggle out of that.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
8 November 2010
14:0879097Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
8 November 2010
14:1379100Barryw
Im afraid I will not be misquoted
on the grammar schools I gave a very very long answer on my views on grammar schools.
and the labour parties stand on it.
also my view onb local labour leading lghts sendng there chldren to grammar schools
so please dont mis quote me
thankyou
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
