UKIP 1st 100 days Documentary Channel 4 documentary

[Above&Beyond]

I have no issues about the Golliwog, I grew up with them on the marmalade jar!

But you have to realise if someone is in PR then it is their job to understand about 'Public Relations' and in todays social media driven world, how things are perceived is important (even if the actual issue isn't that important)

So for a UKIP PR woman to have a golliwog in view, no matter how innocent it actually is, is a bit of a big faux pas in the context of her work.

The public has grown tired of spin and image and hypocrites. That's why UKIP are on the march. You are advocating spin, image and hypocrisy.

 

[elmarko]

And playing devils advocate, she never said she 'hated' black people, from what she describes it seems to be some kind of mental phobia over features that a lot of black people don't even have, in which case i think she would have a problem with my girlfriend as although she's Chinese she has that type of nose as well and probably wouldn't have a problem with someone like Beyoncé. I think she just needs professional help from a mental health expert.

I honestly don't think you would be apologising anywhere near this level for another's behaviour were they not a member of your preferred political party? (taking into account how quickly you lay into anything remotely scandalous about Labour).

This is comically bias behaviour when you take into account your posting history.

The public has grown tired of spin and image and hypocrites. That's why UKIP are on the march. You are advocating spin, image and hypocrisy.

No they are not, they will be lucky to get 6 seats.

 

[robgmun]

I honestly don't think you would be apologising anywhere near this level for another's behaviour were they not a member of your preferred political party? (taking into account how quickly you lay into anything remotely scandalous about Labour).

This is comically bias behaviour when you take into account your posting history..

No worse than anyone else here, everyone will have a level of bias especially those posting in thread on politics. Take for example Mr Jack and MrMoonX who are more extreme in their bias then i am to the right and even yourself who are an extreme apologist for Labours mishandling of the economy (Which i will always find frankly bizarre)

 

[Freakbro]

You are advocating spin, image and hypocrisy.

I'm not advocating it, I am acknowledging that as much as we can all decry it, it exists.

Politics is all about spin, image and hypocrisy.....and if you think that's why UKIP are on the rise because the 'everday Joe down the pub' image Nigel tries to portray is actually how it is...then just.....

 

[estebanrey]

You are playing the offence card, that's why you mentioned it, that's why I rebuked it.

No, I'm playing the 'common sense' card. Please post direct quotes where i stated I was 'offended' (or used any synonym of it)...don't worry, I'll wait....


...



....


........




...........


No? OK, then let's move on.

My reading comprehension is fine thanks, your cheap smear tactics aren't though and they are part of the problem of why UKIP is gaining momentum.

Advising someone who's just told a group of people they should be aware of the party image that having Golliwogs on display when a film crew comes round isn't "smearing them", if anything I'm trying to help.

Taking a few golliwogs out of context of 1,995 clowns in a woman's collection, who as far as I could tell was actually quite pleasant and moderate, and using it to pour scorn on her is underhanded. Hiding them or airbrushing therm from history not to offend your or others delicate sensibilities is what the likes of New 'don't rock the multicultural boat' Labour would attempt to do.

How many times do I have to say I don't care if people want to keep hold of their childhood toys so how am I 'air brushing' them from history? If you want to keep them then fine, it really doesn't bother me. But don't appear on a TV show primarily to improve your image and show your party isn't racist and then keep them on display. It's damn common sense is it not?

You think Golliwogs are fine, that no one should be offended by them and they have no racist connotation at all. I get that you are entitled to that opinion but just because YOU see them that way doesn't mean you totally disregard everyone else and ignore how they are seen by society as a whole and act accordingly.

 

[robgmun]

How many times do I have to say I don't care if people want to keep hold of their childhood toys so how am I 'air brushing' them from history? If you want to keep them then fine, it really doesn't bother me. But don't appear on a TV show primarily to improve your image and show your party isn't racist and then keep them on display. It's damn common sense is it not?

To be fair she has such a large collection and that one Gollywog is tiny in comparison she may have forgotten it existed because like many here It's nowhere near as big a deal as the anti-kippers would love it to be.

 

[elmarko]

No worse than anyone else here, everyone will have a level of bias especially those posting in thread on politics. Take for example Mr Jack and MrMoonX who are more extreme in their bias then i am to the right and even yourself who are an extreme apologist for Labours mishandling of the economy (Which i will always find frankly bizarre)

What a load of rubbish, my 'defence' of Labours management of the economy has always been based around the fact that debt & economic growth are in no way better or worse on average with the Conservatives or Labour.

Neither is blaming a single political party for the global finical crisis useful or factually accurate. If you think that stating statistical facts is defending Labours poor track record then you are beyond hope.

I'm happy to criticise Labours failings (which there are many), just that on this forum The Conservatives get a free pass for basically doing pretty much exactly the same as Labour over the last 20 years.

Not that I expect you to reply with any cogent reasons as to why Labour specifically failed more than any other party, or as to why you have a blind-spot for the failings, mismanagement & scandals within the political entities you support.

 

[Adam Holland]

UKIP in power lmao. Looking at the lay of the land tho there really are not any solid choices, we have blatant cowards, lairs and the weak.

 

[deuse]

I used to collect the gollywog tokens from the Robertson's jam jars. This is now banned.
I liked watching The black and white minstrel show that's also banned.
Love Thy Neighbour and It Ain’t Half Hot Mum would have been banned if made today. Al Joson would have been banned to.


Shame really. But I'm glad that Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons survived

 

[Above&Beyond]

I'm not advocating it, I am acknowledging that as much as we can all decry it, it exists.

Politics is all about spin, image and hypocrisy.....and if you think that's why UKIP are on the rise because the 'everday Joe down the pub' image Nigel tries to portray is actually how it is...then just.....

The political correctness you crave UKIP to adhere to and adopt the mainstream spin and image is a reason why they are doing well. To deny that is fundamentally misunderstanding them.

 

[Above&Beyond]

No, I'm playing the 'common sense' card. Please post direct quotes where i stated I was 'offended' (or used any synonym of it)...don't worry, I'll wait....


...



....


........




...........


No? OK, then let's move on.

You screencapped and hosted an image that you thought would be good to use as a stick to beat someone who appeared quite moderate with. You then used weasel words about 'others that might be offended'. Who are these others and on what authority do you speak for them?

Advising someone who's just told a group of people they should be aware of the party image that having Golliwogs on display when a film crew comes round isn't "smearing them", if anything I'm trying to help.

How many times do I have to say I don't care if people want to keep hold of their childhood toys so how am I 'air brushing' them from history? If you want to keep them then fine, it really doesn't bother me. But don't appear on a TV show primarily to improve your image and show your party isn't racist and then keep them on display. It's damn common sense is it not?

You think Golliwogs are fine, that no one should be offended by them and they have no racist connotation at all. I get that you are entitled to that opinion but just because YOU see them that way doesn't mean you totally disregard everyone else and ignore how they are seen by society as a whole and act accordingly.

If it doesn't bother you then why raise it as an issue if not because it is a cheap smear tactic? The woman seemed moderate and her concern was the EU was not what we signed up for and seemed distressed at the racism of the UKIP councillor making her question her alignment with the group. To try and drag her into the mire for a few childhood artifacts taken out of context in her massive clown collection is poor.

You might not like it or other might not, but then so what? The world doesn't revolve around what you or others like.

 

[estebanrey]

You screencapped and hosted an image that you thought would be good to use as a stick to beat someone who appeared quite moderate with.

Yes because she is the PRESS OFFICER for UKIP and therefore should be held to a higher standard (as her job involves dictating to others how they should portray themselves) than just a UKIP voter being filmed in her home.

You then used weasel words about 'others that might be offended'. Who are these others and on what authority do you speak for them?

Two words, Carol Thatcher.

I don't know why you keep pretending that Golliwogs being offensive is some myth made up by the left-wing media. If you seriously don't recognise there are issues with them then you must have lived in a hole for the last 70 years.

If it doesn't bother you then why raise it as an issue if not because it is a cheap smear tactic?

The woman seemed moderate and her concern was the EU was not what we signed up for and seemed distressed at the racism of the UKIP councillor making her question her alignment with the group. To try and drag her into the mire for a few childhood artifacts taken out of context in her massive clown collection is poor.

Again, I simply think it is a bit stupid for the PRESS OFFICER to have them on display whilst doing a piece designed to show how moderate and balanced they are.

I'm smearing her naivety, not her choice of toy.

You might not like it or other might not, but then so what? The world doesn't revolve around what you or others like.

Nor does it revolve around your opinion either. I'm the one suggesting a PR officer should consider the general societal attitude and put her opinion second. It is you who thinks people should be selfish by not considering how others might interpret something and to just counter any criticism by playing the victim card.

 

[Above&Beyond]

Yes because she is the PRESS OFFICER for UKIP and therefore should be held to a higher standard (as her job involves dictating to others how they should portray themselves) than just a UKIP voter being filmed in her home.

So put them away when the camera is there and take them out when they aren't there? So become a hypocrite to suit you or 'others' who might get offended?

Two words, Carol Thatcher.

I don't know why you keep pretending that Golliwogs being offensive is some myth made up by the left-wing media. If you seriously don't recognise there are issues with them then you must have lived in a hole for the last 70 years.

Again you are overreaching. She had a few golliwogs in a collection of thousands of clowns and entertainers she has collected over the years and you freeze frame it and make out she's some foaming at the mouth racist.

Again, I simply think it is a bit stupid for the PRESS OFFICER to have them on display whilst doing a piece designed to show how moderate and balanced they are.

I'm smearing her naivety, not her choice of toy.

Are all press officers supposed to be beamed down from the moral high ground so that you, sorry, 'others' don't get offended? Of all the smearing running up to the election this has to be one of the most petty yet.

Nor does it revolve around your opinion either. I'm the one suggesting a PR officer should consider the general societal attitude and put her opinion second. It is you who thinks people should be selfish by not considering how others might interpret something and to just counter any criticism by playing the victim card.

You getting offended at a freeze frame of a golliwog in a woman's extensive clown collection has nothing at all to do with politics and is a blatant and poor attempt at a smear.

The interview was in her home. You telling people how to decorate their home in case you freeze frame and take it out of context is arrogant and uncalled for.

 

[elmarko]

Are you suggesting that leaving a Golliwog in the background while doing an interview as a politician on TV isn't stupid? (even if it isn't racist).

If so then this highlights perfectly why debating UKIP supports is a waste of time, bias to the point of delusional, but please continue - this indifferent attitude towards the countless members, councillors & officials in scandals is effectually reducing your changes of ever gaining any power. (thank goodness)

Never change & stay on the sidelines.

 

[estebanrey]

....blurb

Can't be bothered any more. I've explained numerous times I'm questioning her intelligence and not her choice of toy and every time you come back with strawmen about how I am calling her an awful racist and implying that I'm sat here crying with offence they even exist (something else I've clarified as not being the case many times).

I'm not going to fall into your trap by discussing this any further. You are hoping you can drag me down to saying that anyone that own a Golli is a horrendous human being and should be imprisoned so you can point at say "look, it's the left wing Nazis that want to destroy your childhood memories", when in reality I'm just saying it is common sense to put them away if you're the PR officer of a party with a race problem. Most people reading this will see that clear distinction, but sadly not you.

As Elmarko said above, there's really no point debating with people who constantly ignore what you say and respond by debating talking points you haven't even made.

 

[Above&Beyond]

So the fact she used clearly racist terminology & hates black people is irrelevant?.

Criticising a racist for being a racist & having other factors highly correlated with racism is a cheap tactic?, you sir are one massive apologist.

Are you suggesting that leaving a Golliwog in the background while doing an interview as a politician on TV isn't stupid? (even if it isn't racist).

If so then this highlights perfectly why debating UKIP supports is a waste of time, bias to the point of delusional, but please continue - this indifferent attitude towards the countless members, councillors & officials in scandals is effectually reducing your changes of ever gaining any power. (thank goodness)

Never change & stay on the sidelines.

I'm suggesting you watching the show instead of going off half-cocked again. I dare say UKIP won't be aiming themselves at people like yourself who go out of their way to become offended at something they can't, or won't contextualise to suit their narrative or prejudice.

 

[elmarko]

I'm suggesting you watching the show instead of going off half-cocked again. I dare say UKIP won't be aiming themselves at people like yourself who go out of their way to become offended at something they can't, or won't contextualise to suit their narrative or prejudice.

I'm not offended personally, I just think she's a massive idiot at best or a racist idiot at worst.

Of course they won't be aiming at people like me, we already know the demographic they attract (old male unskilled & uneducated ex BNP voters & Conservatives unwilling to accept the shame of voting for BNP).

FYI this isn't my view, but an amalgamation of polls, surveys & studies.

 

[Above&Beyond]

Can't be bothered any more. I've explained numerous times I'm questioning her intelligence and not her choice of toy and every time you come back with strawmen about how I am calling her an awful racist and implying that I'm sat here crying with offence they even exist (something else I've clarified as not being the case many times).

I'm not going to fall into your trap by discussing this any further. You are hoping you can drag me down to saying that anyone that own a Golli is a horrendous human being and should be imprisoned so you can point at say "look, it's the left wing Nazis that want to destroy your childhood memories", when in reality I'm just saying it is common sense to put them away if you're the PR officer of a party with a race problem. Most people reading this will see that clear distinction, but sadly not you.

As Elmarko said above, there's really no point debating with people who constantly ignore what you say and respond by debating talking points you haven't even made.

Your going out of your way to find offence reminds me of a story Christopher Hitchens told:

When Dr. Samuel Johnson had finished his great lexicography, the first real English dictionary, he was visited by various delegations of people to congratulate him including a delegation of London’s respectable womanhood who came to his parlor in Fleet street and said, 'Doctor we congratulate you on your decision to exclude all indecent words from your dictionary.' And he said, 'Ladies I congratulate you on your persistence in looking them up.'

You freeze framing her clown collection and making it sound sinister is the same as you desperate to become offended or worse, offended on the behalf of others. You'll crave to be offended by something or other and you don't mind if you take it out of context. It's transparent and petty.

 

[platypus]

Your going out of your way to find offence reminds me of a story Christopher Hitchens told:

How cute.

And utterly irrelevant.

 

[platypus]

Can't be bothered any more. I've explained numerous times I'm questioning her intelligence and not her choice of toy and every time you come back with strawmen about how I am calling her an awful racist and implying that I'm sat here crying with offence they even exist (something else I've clarified as not being the case many times).

I don't think you're the only person that can see it.

As Elmarko said above, there's really no point debating with people who constantly ignore what you say and respond by debating talking points you haven't even made.

No there isn't. Unfortunately he's allowed to vote..