Page 1 of 2
Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 11:53 am
by Malcolm Armsteen
It seems that the Jezzites are completely unprepared to let Labour win the next election. Chief rat-inna-sack seems to be Dianne Abbot.
She has attacked Wes Streeting (as have many Jezzmaniacs) over health. Her attack is because he encourages pharmacies to offer vaccinations (like they do now, but more); that will ease some pressure on GPs and be a good thing.
Not according to Dianne. It will bring back polio and iron lungs. (I can't believe I just wrote that)
This is utterly dishonest, designed only to damage the party moving towards the next election. I reckon she should get slung.
And I don't think she made that graphic herself, this is organised...
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:06 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
My first COVID vaccinations were done at Malvern Showground. What’s her point?
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:11 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:06 pm
My first COVID vaccinations were done at Malvern Showground. What’s her point?
To cause dissension and harm Starmer's chances.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:13 pm
by Watchman
The only thing I could make of it, is that she thinks “chemists” are not sufficiently qualified to give vaccinations. Yet most people are aware that fully qualified pharmacists have been doing such things for years
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:26 pm
by Andy McDandy
I got my first Covid jab at a football stadium (Anfield), and the booster at a Mosque. Does that mean Dianne is shitting on the memory of the Hillsborough dead and being Islamophobic?
In fact, I remember getting a vaccination as a kid at school, in the waiting area outside the head's study.
In all seriousness though, what the fuck?
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:40 pm
by Crabcakes
That’s such a disjointed argument, it’s basically a Chewbacca defence (
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense).
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:55 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:26 pm
I got my first Covid jab at a football stadium (Anfield), and the booster at a Mosque. Does that mean Dianne is shitting on the memory of the Hillsborough dead and being Islamophobic?
In fact, I remember getting a vaccination as a kid at school, in the waiting area outside the head's study.
In all seriousness though, what the fuck?
Ha ha.
Don't they do vaccinations in schools, or was that just my private school?
Either way, Diane is shitting on Rab Butler, and Tony Crossland, I'm sure of it.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:06 pm
by Andy McDandy
Oldswinford bog standard state primary. 1982ish.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:18 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:55 pm
Don't they do vaccinations in schools, or was that just my private school?
Spent many a happy morning (well, morning) supervising queues of kids waiting to be vaccinated in the medical suite. One half trying to spook the other half with tales of blunt needles, mad visiting nurses and blood. BCG and Rubella mostly, when parents still trusted doctors.
I was doing that from the 70s through to 2008.
I had my polio vaccination (and many others) in school. It was a major factor in improving the nation's health, like free milk and orange juice.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:20 pm
by Oboogie
Watchman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:13 pm
The only thing I could make of it, is that she thinks “chemists” are not sufficiently qualified to give vaccinations. Yet most people are aware that fully qualified pharmacists have been doing such things for years
Diane's timing is appalling as people are even more aware of that now than pre-COVID. My vaccinations were done in a football stadium, a sea-cadet hall and Boots. My GP was not involved so they were free to get on with the work that only they can do.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:25 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Dianne's timing is deliberate. And may be as a result of consultation with other members of her group...
Streeting has made comments which suggest that the present leadership is unhappy with the structure of the NHS - hardly surprising since Jeremeny Cunt's fuckup of a reorganisation. Ignoring the fact that the Tories broke it and we have to have some plan to put it back together the left have simply decided to attack.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:27 pm
by kreuzberger
I am practically a human dart board. I don't recall ever being vaxxed by a doctor.
Indeed, Queen Bee, my GP, once tried to fish some stitches out and met such limited success that the practice manager took over and stopped my whining.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:41 pm
by Andy McDandy
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:25 pm
Dianne's timing is deliberate. And may be as a result of consultation with other members of her group...
Streeting has made comments which suggest that the present leadership is unhappy with the structure of the NHS - hardly surprising since Jeremeny Cunt's fuckup of a reorganisation. Ignoring the fact that the Tories broke it and we have to have some plan to put it back together the left have simply decided to attack.
Yeah, it's pretty much "Doctors and nurses, little kiddies at Great Ormond Street...".
Seems that the hard left's fetish for martyrs extends to NHS staff too.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 2:28 pm
by Crabcakes
The left’s love for the NHS is admirable. However, they also love a thoroughly overloaded bureaucracy at times. Tory NHS reforms and deliberate underfunding are bollocks aimed at increasing its saleability for privatisation. Not all Blair’s NHS policies were great either. However, that doesn’t automatically mean the best solution is a single, nationalised behemoth either that you just throw money at because it’s a sacred cow.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 2:35 pm
by Spoonman
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:55 pm
Don't they do vaccinations in schools, or was that just my private school?
I recall getting my polio booster in secondary school, preceded by getting a "pin prick" a few days prior that I presume was to indicate wherever the booster was required or not.
In my memory all my vaccinations have been carried out by nurses except for when I received a meningitis vaccine shortly before starting uni, which my GP gave me.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 2:47 pm
by Oboogie
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:25 pm
Dianne's timing is deliberate. And may be as a result of consultation with other members of her group...
You think she's deliberately setting out to make the Socialist Campaign Group look ridiculous? Wow!
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 3:29 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 2:47 pm
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:25 pm
Dianne's timing is deliberate. And may be as a result of consultation with other members of her group...
You think she's deliberately setting out to make the Socialist Campaign Group look ridiculous? Wow!
I think that's an effect, not an intention...
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 4:24 pm
by davidjay
Every time this shit happens they say they should start up a proper socialist party. And they never fucking do.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 4:50 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
davidjay wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 4:24 pm
Every time this shit happens they say they should start up a proper socialist party. And they never fucking do.
I was thinking Corbiyn might this time. Then again, "Independent" might help him hide some of the crank nonsense better than if he was in a party with a whole bunch of other people who keep banging on about "NATO sabre rattling" or whatever. He can be Jez the nice chap who just talks about free stuff vaguely paid for by someone else.
Re: Rats in a Sack
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2023 5:09 pm
by Oboogie
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 3:29 pm
Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 2:47 pm
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 17, 2023 1:25 pm
Dianne's timing is deliberate. And may be as a result of consultation with other members of her group...
You think she's deliberately setting out to make the Socialist Campaign Group look ridiculous? Wow!
I think that's an effect, not an intention...
Obviously.
I don't think she's at all well.
I've thought this for many years now, if she had any friends, they'd tell her to retire.