Naughty Bob Piper

Bob’s been a naughy boy!

sortitrr.jpg

‘Dave’ gets down and gets with it in the ‘hood. Ministry of Truth has a suggestion for a tosser-style campaign to allow ‘Dave’ to connect with his inner ethnicity.

Posted by bobpiper on December 7, 2006, 9:08 PM  |  view comments (63) or add another

Trackbacks

TrackBack Link: http://www.bobpiper.co.uk/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1024

 

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference There’s votes in them thar ethnics:

Tracked on: December 10, 2006 10:38 AM
Linked from: Tim Worstall
Posted in: Bob Piper, Unity and Prague Tory
Excerpt: Not quite sure what the fuss is here. Prague Tory takes exception to something posted up by Bob Piper, created by Unity. I wouldn’t call it the most biting or incisive of witticims, to be sure and yes, as Tom
[read more from this website]

Comments (or post a new one)

Hammer said:
December 8, 2006 2:41 AM | permalink
I saw this Petition having read the relevant blogs for the last year or so and as a Labour voter whose father was Labour and his father before, having many dealing with the Police for more than 30 years, I’m afraid I am now totally disolutioned with your party and will never vote for them aagin unless people like you can reverse this idiotic and rapid decline in lack of common sense of politicians who are destroying this country with utterly stupid red tape and stopping Police, teachers and NHS front line staff from doing the job expected of them by the public and what they signed up for.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 8, 2006 8:59 AM | permalink
Perhaps you should vote Tory, eh? Sensible policing… no policemen.As for teachers, the ‘front line’ staff are almost totally free to do what they want under the extensions\ to local government of schools, passported funding etc, so I am a bit confused about how the government are stopping them doing their jobs

 

Praguetory said:
December 8, 2006 3:40 PM | permalink
Bureaucracy Bob – Home Office and Dept of Education and Dept of Health edicts driving people who want to nurse, educate or catch criminals out of their chosen profession. Just take a look at any of the police bloggers in my blogroll that the authorities are trying to silence.

 

Kaz said:
December 8, 2006 4:06 PM | permalink
I don’t like this posting and I am surprised that you have used this picture.

 

mens sana said:
December 8, 2006 5:47 PM | permalink
“not new labour, not old labour, just labour”Is this sort of distasteful crap “just labour?” I would love to see the look on some of your constituents’ faces if you used this poster for a local election campaign! Come on there are plenty of ways you could argue with and abuse Cameron, but this is not going to do you any favours

“I am a bit confused about how the government are stopping them doing their jobs”

The government is paying vast armies of beaurocrats to stop all sorts of people from doing their jobs in a myriad of different ways-talk to any policeman or doctor, for instance. Its good for the employment figures but not so good for innovation and progress in the public sector

 

Bob Piper said:
December 8, 2006 5:59 PM | permalink
I don’t have to read police officers blogs or take advice from bloggers about teachers and doctors. I meet regularly with the police, and yes, they do complain about too much paperwork. But it is paperwork required by the CPS to ensure prosecution, not by “The Government”… and the police willingly acknowledge the vast amount of additional funding put in by Labour compared to the dreadful days pre-1997.I’m a school governor at a scool where in 1995 we were having to do everything we could to avoid making cleaners or catering staff redundant. Now, yes they complain about OFSTED, although they say it is immeasurably better than 10 years ago, but they are very happy about the extra teachers, new classroon building, IT etc (Oh… and the cleaners and catering staff are happier too.)

Hospitals are certainly over regulated too (difficult to measure efficiency without a profit/loss market approach if you don’t regulate) but Foundation Trust status will probably resolve that one too (although I’d rather not comment too much about FT status, thank you).

As for Kaz and mens sana… perhaps you are happier about the Tories calling working people tossers, but frankly, the more people who ridicule this publicity seeking nonsense the better.

 

Unity said:
December 8, 2006 6:51 PM | permalink
Should just point out that ‘Kaz’, from info provided by PragueTory, is Lib Dem councillor for Perry Barr, Karen Hamilton.Bit busy right now, but I’ll get back to this one over at MoT later on.

 

Harry Barnes said:
December 8, 2006 8:00 PM | permalink
Bob,Thanks for the message on my blog. I will contact Dennis. I also replied via my blog before I read your old blog properly and saw that you had moved.

 

Kaz said:
December 8, 2006 8:07 PM | permalink
Bob not complaining about you having a go at the Tories, just the way that you and the Ministry of Truth have done it.Don’t like the ministrel thing and the wording…it’s insulting. Ask a couple of black people what they think. Let me know what they say. I stand to be corrected.

Plus that Praguetory person has given you dodgy information about who I am.

 

Unity said:
December 8, 2006 8:32 PM | permalink
Thanks for that info – so PragueTory is basically shit-stirring.Good, that’ll make my upcoming remarks even more interesting.

BTW – as the point seems to be escaping you entirely, yes that image is offensive…

…because I devised it specifically to cause offence and with a clear purpose in mind.

 

Praguetory said:
December 8, 2006 8:50 PM | permalink
Unity, you jumped to your own conclusions about Kaz’s identity. As I have blogged, I think it is perfectly understandable that she is offended. The words and images you and Bob have used to score a political point are disgraceful.There is a wider point. You Socialists in Birmingham seem very quick to accuse Tories of being racist. This doesn’t contribute to good race relations and actually drives a wedge between communities. I am afraid these postings are a typical example and if this is what you are prepared to say in public, God knows what you say in private.

 

Kaz said:
December 8, 2006 9:10 PM | permalink
So Unity who exactly are you trying to offend?
You need to explain it to me.Do you think the Tories are going to be bothered about what you have done?

 

Ral said:
December 8, 2006 9:13 PM | permalink
So Bob is your middle name Norman, Neville, Nigel or Neil perhaps?

 

Unity said:
December 8, 2006 9:15 PM | permalink
Guess what – I’ve got plenty to say and its going to get said in public – and don’t think I haven’t spotted the edit on your post, either.

 

Praguetory said:
December 8, 2006 9:28 PM | permalink
You guys made the guess that Kaz is Karen Hamilton. Before you pointed the finger, I had no idea who Karen Hamilton was. I can understand that Kaz wants to protect her identity – why not – why should she reveal her identity. Her points remian valid – as do mine. Stop bullying people.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 8, 2006 9:40 PM | permalink
Ral… if you think this image is designed to attack black people you need to study the art of satire, because it has clearly passed you by. Unity’s image is designed to show the way in which Cameron trys to adopt a chamelon-like approach to ‘get with it’ with young people, black people, wimmen, environmentalists in a totally false way. This is the man that wrote the last conservative party manifesto banging on about immigration. He is a wealthy, right-wing, reactionary Etonian trying to fool people into thinking he feels their pain. In other words… he’s a con man.If you feel lampooning him makes someone a supporter of the bnp you’re sad.

 

John Moss said:
December 8, 2006 10:27 PM | permalink
If nationalism is the last refuge of a cornered scoundrel, is the cry of racism the last refuge of a defeated socialist?

 

Morag the Mindbender said:
December 9, 2006 12:20 AM | permalink
As a ‘this is not fake I was born with this tan’ female Tory I must express my felicitations to Mr.Piper. I have taken an enormous amount of flack from my Lovely Leftie friends about walking away but seeing this post confirms for me that I did the right thing. Yes we Tories are not perfect, and we may have issues to address but at least we don’t sell ourselves as holier-than-thou and beneath-such-behaviour. I find that photograph offensive, as well as the entire concept. But I shall take my leave and go to the source to expand on my disappointment. When I first came to this country 14 years ago I was proud to be Labour…..posts like this one make me ashamed. Oh that’s right! I’m not Labour anymore! YIPPEE!!!!!!Good luck to you all. Respectfully yours, Miss Mindbender

 

mens sana said:
December 9, 2006 12:30 AM | permalink
“If you feel lampooning him makes someone a supporter of the bnp you’re sad.”No more sad than implying all tories are racists

But I agree that the tosser ad is almost as bad as your post

 

michael said:
December 9, 2006 7:19 AM | permalink
as a member of my local racial equality executive i find this totally offensive & will be reporting it to the local monitoring officer at your council & the SBE

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 9:21 AM | permalink
I’ll ignore most of this stuff, but Michael deserves a reply. What Unity is doing here is, I suspect, not unlike what Baron Cohen does with Ali G. (The ‘is it ‘cos I’s black’ is the clue). If you feel that way, report it to whoever you wish. People reported Ali G and are now reporting Borat for the same reason… but that is because they fail to understand who is being lampooned. When Mel Brooks got Richard Pryor to threaten his own life in Blazing Saddles and say “If anyone moves, the niggah gets it” he wasn’t making a racist statement, he was exposing a racist set of attitudes.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 9:24 AM | permalink
… by the way, just for John Moss’s benefit, your nationalism quote is misquoted and no-one is accusing Cameron of racism. I repeat… it is lampooning his trendy jumping on bandwagon approach. I have no evidence of Cameron being racist… but the Conservative Party record does bear examination.

 

Annny Nominus said:
December 9, 2006 10:10 AM | permalink
Truly wonderful Bob. Please continue to post this sort of stuff!

 

Unity said:
December 9, 2006 11:49 AM | permalink
Spot on, Bob, although with Cleavon Little not Richard Pryor who appears in the film.Pryor was originally set to play the Sheriff and worked with Brooks on the screenplay, but was pulled from the cast by the Studio, who thought him too controversial, which is a real shame because as a stand-up he really was as the height of his considerable powers.

So yes, this is a Ali G/Borat gag, and one that has worked even better than I had hoped, thanks to PragueTory’s efforts to manufacture a Daily Mail-style outrage out of this, which I’ve been tracking and documenting all along.

The people the image is intended to offend are…

Tories.

And more to the point, its purpose was/is to expose the faux nature of their new found ‘liberalism’ and abject ignorance of nuances and subtleties of the wider debate around race, ethnicity and identity.

That’s right folk – you were supposed to be offended and try to make an issue of this image – and I’ve been carefully tracking and recording your comments (and using screenshots) all along, just to ensure that I have a proper record of your reactions – precisely because your faux outrage displays just how little you really understand the nuances of the debate.

Tell you what, Bob, I’m really going to enjoy writing this one up, especially when the screenshots of PT’s stealth edits of his blog post come into play – he can kiss any credibility he might have had as a blogger good bye.

 

john said:
December 9, 2006 11:57 AM | permalink
I’m sure Alistair Campbell approves.
A crap post from a crap poster. Why don’t you spend a little more time looking after the poor deluded sods who voted you in?

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 12:06 PM | permalink
Absolutely, Unity. Some of the commenters may have been non-tories and genuinely been offended, although they would have to have a fairly low threshold, frankly. PragueTory is a sort of Iain Dale wannabe (who says he doesn’t engage in political gossip, and then does). OK, he says he was offended. So, what does he do? Yes, you’ve guessed it…he refers people to both sites in order that they can be offended, not once, but twice…. like a News of the World reporter sneaking out of a brothel, he will no doubt claim he was doing it in the public interest, and exposing the sleazy side of life…. but with about as much political credibility.Well, am I bothered. Offending Tories is a not unpleasant way to spend your time. But this fake moral indignation stuff just won’t work. I find the BNP site offensive, and I certainly don’t refer people to it…. unless… that is, I’m looking to make a bit of political capital out of it.

So Praguetory, by all means do that… but to start peeing your pants and claiming you are “offended”… get real.

 

Praguetory said:
December 9, 2006 12:53 PM | permalink
I note that the MacPherson report definition of a racist incident is in the eyes of the victim and indeed several BME people have been offended. You have both made a rod for your own back.People can make up their own minds about whether what you prepared is offensive. I am not the only blogger to remove Bob from their blogroll. And I have heard on the grapevine that a writ is heading in your direction, Unity.

 

Praguetory said:
December 9, 2006 1:06 PM | permalink
Guys – this is well out of my control now – you are the story, not me.PS – Unity, I’m looking forward to your future “piece” on my edits. Other than the section titled update, I made no significant change.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 1:42 PM | permalink
Oh no! PragueTory has taken me off his blogroll… and other Tories might too? What will I do?If anyone, anywhere can point to me asking a single Tory to link to my site I’d be more than pleased to see it. I never asked you to link son, and I couldn’t give a toss if you don’t. As Iain Dale so superbly put it in his comment box a couple of days ago… if you don’t like it, don’t come here, there’s 20 million other blogs out there for you to go to.

 

Unity said:
December 9, 2006 4:04 PM | permalink
Give it up, PT. I’ve got screenshots of the edits.As for getting a writ, who from? Cap’n Freedom? Dave the Chameleon? Ray the perpetual motion man? The CRE? Tony Blair?

Hahahahahaha!

 

Praguetory said:
December 9, 2006 4:57 PM | permalink
You 2 are freak shows. I haven’t even seen a single “comrade” defend your racist literature. Next time pick a fight that you can win.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 5:04 PM | permalink
This is a fight???? Wimp!

 

Unity said:
December 9, 2006 5:13 PM | permalink
Oh dear, there goes PT’s toys right out his pram…

 

BobG said:
December 9, 2006 5:27 PM | permalink
I’m fed up of all these left wing, politically correct do-gooders always crying racist. Err hang on a second….

 

Archbold said:
December 9, 2006 7:17 PM | permalink
As a long-term labour activist, recent paliamentary candidate and ethnic minority, I find your picture and words offensive, But it is your political nievity that concerns me. Your an idiot. Get rid of the picture before the party has to get rid of you.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 8:22 PM | permalink
Say what you think Archbold, say what you think. Perhaps instead of using insults you would tell me why it is offensive. I know the words used are deemed by many to be offensive, but the context that Unity uses them in is important. If you look at the Richard Pryor site linked elsewhere, you will know he used the word a lot. Does that make him racist? I don’t think so, nor do I believe for one nanosecond that the person who created this, who has excellent anti-racist credentials, was being racist. He did intend to offend Conservatives… and that is why they are getting wound up about it.

 

Archbold said:
December 9, 2006 9:21 PM | permalink
Sorry I have just re-read my last comment and I think that was too offensive. I dont care who put the image together but I do care that a Labour Councillor has it on his site It could be interpreted that Labour endorses this type of material and they simply don’t. The Black and White Minstrel image is seen by many as racist for what I hope are obvious reasons.
Nigger is a nasty derogatory word. I remember the first it was spat at me, really aggressive, and when you are twelve years old it hurts. Now that I am older and maturer I can cope with it, but there is a whole generation of people in Britain who will never forget what it means, no matter who is using the word.
In America, it is slightly different. There are people like Murphy and Prior and some rap musicians use it and perhaps young people hearing that don’t realise what it means. But the older generation remember. In Britain it has always been an insult and it always will be a terrible thing to say to someone. There is no point in trying to make nigger into a nice word when there are already nice words that people can call each other. We should use them instead and throw nigger away.
Once again I am sorry for my earlier comment.

 

blamerbell said:
December 9, 2006 9:24 PM | permalink
If it’s supposed to be ‘satire’ it’s a very clumsy effort that pushes all the wrong buttons.This sort of thing needs to be done with great care and guile, neither of which are particularly evident in this case.

 

Archbold said:
December 9, 2006 9:29 PM | permalink
I should add that I dont normally read your blog and the only reason I am here is because your blog is posted on a Labour party site and has created much discussion!!! I am concerned that it will not be long before it is carried by the media. If it does – it will backfire!

 

Bob Piper said:
December 9, 2006 9:50 PM | permalink
Archbold, that’s better, it is about dialogue. I’m not sure whether you are familiar with the Tory ‘Tosser’ site that Unity was taking the micky out of when he created the image, but it was a site designed to describe working people who get into debt as tossers. OK, I accept the image Unity used shocks, and it may even be clumsy as blamerbell says… but I don’t think its racist for one second. The use of the ‘N’ word was something that I thought about before deciding to post it, but it is intended to portray someone who is trying to talk to black people in the ‘hip’ language that they think a black person would use… it is not an insult being thrown at a black person. I repeat, the clue is in the Ali G reference… ‘is it cos I’s black’.. a phrase used by a white person to lampoon attitudes.Sorry if you didn’t get it Archbold, but at least I think you were genuine as opposed to the fake concern from certain Tories.

 

Scrybe said:
December 9, 2006 10:28 PM | permalink
aight yall, this is a post I feel obliged to comment on. For the record I should preface my comments with the points that I am (a) a BME (part-nigerian) (b) someone who has faced racial discrimination in the past (including four years between ages 10-14 where my family were physically attacked, robbed at knife point, had racist graffiti daubed on our house, and were the victims of arson attacks), and (c) a MEMBER of the LABOUR PARTY.
Now, for this post. Its funny. Damn funny. And accurate in that it depicts Cameron’s sycophantic and disingenuous attempts to “cross” culturally with groups he doesn’t understand (blacks, women, the working class, etc) in a humourous way. It also amusingly, yet understatedly, ties in with Papa Lazarou off the League of Gentlemen, whose catchphrase is “you’re my wife now Dave,” although I doubt that this was intended.The use of the term “nigger” is not offensive. The intent of the maker of this shot is not intending it to be, from my black-skinned perspective. To those who do find it offensive, I would point out that it is exactly your proclivity for a stringent form of political correctness which “divides communities” to paraphrase an earlier post, since such p.c.ness inhibits attempts to understand other cultures (I’m talking generally here, although this ad does demonstrate an understanding of other cultures, since it is a successful attempt at “crossing” which correctly identifies some of the stereotypes which black people feel subjected to). Further, if one wishes to argue that the term is offensive irrespective of intent, may I direct you to the many rappers, black people generally, etc., who use the term freely – if it is racist are they not therefore being racist against themselves (a rather perverse accusation)? Also, had I been responsible for the ad, it probably would have been much more “racist” than its present incarnation since I would probably have pushed those stereotypes further than the maker of the ad.

Archibold may disagree with my comments, but I subscribe to the joke apparently told by Lenny Bruce which went “I wish more people would use the word nigger, like if everybody used nigger, tv reporters could say ‘now, we are speaking to the nigger who set this social welfare programme up’ and sport commentators could announce ‘the race was won by a nigger’……….because that way, some eight year oldkid wouldn’t run home to his parents in tears because someone called him a nigger.” The point is that words can be reclaimed, their meaning evolving over time. I’m not suggesting that we go as far as that suggests, but whereas we can take the potency out of the term by reclaiming it, if we ban the use of the term everywhere, it will remain potent and there will be more 12 year olds like you and I (at one time) being hurt by it.

I think that a lot of people who posted on here have overreacted, and perhaps this has to do with partisan influences – I’m not convinced that the commenters would be so venomous in their remarks had it, or something similar, been posted by the Tories or a Tory blogger. I would intimate that part of the nature of response to this is purely the fact that it has been done by Labour people, whom you dislike politically with or without this ad – the ad just give you amunition to attack them with. And I think that’s part of the point made by the ad – how many of you found the original “tosser” site as offensive as this? It wasn’t on racial grounds admittedly, but I don’t recall there being such a Tory-led furore over that. Had there been, you might have been a little more jusitifed in how you have posted here.

Finally (yeah, I know its a long one, that why I’m curtailing it here), anyone who wishes to complain to any authority about the post ought to have the courtesy and prinicples to do two things:

(1) While lodging a complaint, also lodge one about the CRE for the titles of the debates in its recents conference (e.g. “Rivers of Blood – Was Powell Right?”), and

(2) Post on here in advance with the details of which authority you have lodged the complaint with, so that I may provide a different viewpoint as evidence in their deliberations. If they then decide that it is offensive and should be removed, so be it. But it would hardly be fair for a BME to petition an authority saying it is offensive to BME’s generally (using their ethnicity as evidence from which to generalise), while knowing that there are other BME’s who feel the opposite. If anything, that’s what I would find highly offensive – since no one has the right to assume a community leader role on my behalf iwhtout my assent (which is, fundamentally, what you would be doing).

 

Nightowl said:
December 9, 2006 11:51 PM | permalink
Yes I agree with Scrybe on this one; perhaps it isn’t in the best taste imaginable – satire doesn’t really work with Cameron as he pretty much does it himself. But Piper is hardly what I would call a “racist” for posting this, it’s just satire gone awry in a similar vain to Sion Simon.The fake concern from some Tories on here it has provoked is amusing though.

 

Kaz said:
December 10, 2006 12:20 AM | permalink
I am not trying to make a political point nor would I wish to. As bloggers most of us want a good debate. If you think Cameron or anyone else for that matter, is doing anything wrong you have the opportunity to comment but there are better ways than this.If people find it offensive, don’t dismiss it, it’s time to discuss it and to try and understand why.

 

Scrybe said:
December 10, 2006 12:37 AM | permalink
Kaz,I did discuss it – my long point was that I don’t find it offensive, and that there are legitimate reasons for not finding it offensive (e.g. my comments to archibold about the evolution of the semantics of a word).

My suggestion that the reactions on here are in part predicated on the lab-cons divide rather than genuine feelings of racial offensiveness stem from the nature of some of the comments made in ‘shock’ at Bob’s post. And I think it is valid to point this out – it is part of discussing this.

I also defy anyone to hold that this is both offensive to blacks and to the Conservatives.

I’m sorry if you think I’m speaking out of turn with this post, its just that rereading the comment log it appears that your last comment was addressed to my post and the one below mine.

 

Kaz said:
December 10, 2006 12:56 AM | permalink
Scrybe, I did start replyling to your post but found I had written an essay in response so had to change it!! Would like to discuss your comments much further but not enough time or space!

 

Scrybe said:
December 10, 2006 2:34 AM | permalink
Well, my first post was rather long itself, but if you would prefer it you can email me the comments and we can discuss over at my blog. I’m trying to be fair and unbiased on this, and your posts haven’t been at all objectionable. I can post the full thing as a main post, then respond. my email is scrybe_84@hotmail.co.uk

 

Unity said:
December 10, 2006 2:36 AM | permalink
Thanks Scrybe, at last we start to get some intelligent discourse about this.NightOwl: The fake concern from some Tories on here it has provoked is amusing though.

At last, someone sees it!

Kaz: Nightowl has hit on precisely the reasoning behind this image.

Oh, and to everyone.

There are maybe three active bloggers who’ve even met me in the flesh and no images of me online anywhere, so far as I’m aware.

So let me ask three questions you should be pondering.

1. How do you know what my actual ethnic background is?

2. If it’s not what you assume it to be, then how might that alter your perception of that image?

3. And what does that say about your own attitudes to race and ethnicity.

Oh, and Blamerbell – this image isn’t ‘clumsy’ and it has pushed the right buttons in generating the faux expressions of outrage from the likes of PragueTory.

 

John Shaun said:
December 10, 2006 7:15 AM | permalink
Ministry of Truth –1. Based on your website you are a middle-aged white male with wife and sprogs. You were raised in an ethnically homogenous Oldbury council estate. Definitely a traditional white working class background. You went to university in Birmingham, but not straight from school. You have never lived outside the West Midlands. You are not, black, Asian or Jewish.

2. It is what I and everyone else assume it to be, you’re white. What are you on about? As you conceal your identity, the viewer of your ”material” need not consider its provenance in order to condemn.

3. Stop banging on about race. You’ve probably helped your mate Bob lose his job by egging him on to keep this crap.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 10, 2006 8:43 AM | permalink
John, you obviously know more about the chap than me (assuming Ministry of Truth is male). He is not ‘my mate’, and he hasn’t been ‘egging me on’ either. As for my job, the electorate in my Ward will decide that in 2010, and unless you live in the Abbey Ward of Sandwell neither you, nor a bunch of weak-chinned Tories commenting on a blog site will have a say in that.

 

Twining said:
December 10, 2006 11:08 AM | permalink
I am sorry, but wherever the image came from, it is distasteful. Wherever we go, governments have used Black people and Black people in power, who are given a cushy number, have also used marginalised Black people.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 10, 2006 11:20 AM | permalink
Twining, in isolation it is distasteful. As a lampooning of a Conservative Party website which portrays working people who fall into debt as “tossers” I think it works. Wherever we go, governments have used working people, and working people in power who are given a cushy number, have also marginalised working people.I take your complaint, and I hope you have also complained to the Conservative Party about their blatant abuse in categorising working people who go into debt as “tossers”.

 

Unity said:
December 10, 2006 11:29 AM | permalink
John Shaun:Congratulations, you can read!

Now how many people do you think have take the time and trouble to go through MoT to get a picture of who I am and what my background might be before simply making assumptions about my ethnic background.

 

john kingston said:
December 10, 2006 1:37 PM | permalink
This is not the behaviour I would expect from a councillor – in short this is unacceptable. I lived in Abbey Ward for over 30 years, and regret to say Bob is the worst councilor I have known. You are always speaking about working men, but seem reluctant to actually do some work yourself.John Speller is no better – pls tell me what have you actually done for the people of the area….

 

Twining said:
December 10, 2006 1:57 PM | permalink
I am not complainining. At least we agree on one thing.

 

Bob Piper said:
December 10, 2006 3:21 PM | permalink
Mr Kingston, I think you will find I refer to working people. Women, who constitute half the population, work too, you know. You would probably have to ask the people who voted for me what I have done, but having won elections in Abbey in three of the last four years I assume they don’t all share your views. Let me add, this is not a Labour ‘rotten’ Ward. When I moved here 25 years ago it was the safest Tory seat in Sandwell with three entrenched Tory councillors. Perhaps you should have stood for election yourself and tested your views.What have I done? A good question actually because often it is difficult to establish your achievements as an individual councillor rather than as part of a much wider body.

But… I see a steady stream of casework from our weekly advice surgeries, and one thing they do know is that they will get an early and polite response to all of their enquiries. Frankly, I didn’t join the Council or the Labour Party to run a business, and helping people (including those the Tories dismiss as Tossers) with their day-to-day problems is much more satisfying to me.

 

Sam Beau said:
December 10, 2006 5:46 PM | permalink
LABOUR’S RACE HATE SHAME.PS: We had the Black & White Minstrel Show under Callaghan.

 

Mike said:
December 10, 2006 5:48 PM | permalink
It is difficult to imagine off hand a way that someone could criticise a patronising and irritating campaign and come off looking worse for it.Congratulations on succeeding where perhaps few others would have managed.

What you could do is point out that reckless extravagent spending isn’t the sole preserve of the young people so excellently patronised on that site.

You could point out that middle class people who bought the house years ago for nothing and have just remortgaged are in fact some of the worst culprits.

 

John Green said:
December 10, 2006 5:52 PM | permalink
Seems another pitiful labour comment from a government that cons the people amd robs everyone. Whatever their class to win points hoewever they can. Get real see the evil and rid the country of this evil group.
Here to rip everyone off.

 

Twining said:
December 10, 2006 5:59 PM | permalink
I am left wondering why “race” is deemed a game.

 

Unity said:
December 10, 2006 6:03 PM | permalink
Sam – we had the Black and White Minstrels under Churchill, Eden, MacMillan, Wilson, Heath and Thatcher as well, so your point is?John Green: Here to rip everyone off? Very funny from a spammer whose site claims to offer sure fire ways to win the lottery.

Sam – just seen you post over at my place – yes I see your point (kind of). Situationist trolling, very nice.

Oh, and the real reason I’m here is this…

http://www.ministryoftruth.org.uk/2006/12/10/the-curious-tale-of-kaz/

 

dizzy said:
December 10, 2006 6:29 PM | permalink
*shakes head*doesn’t look good Bob.

 

Disillousioned said:
December 10, 2006 6:35 PM | permalink
Oh dear, the Labour Racists are at it again, after the flying pigs and fagin. Deary me, so much for the party for the common man, where are you helping the common man? Taxes that hurt the poor more than the rich, closing grammar schools that had let advanced children from poorer backgrounds get an equal footing with Public Schools, crushing our Military to something that wouldn’t hold its own against France!Oh and took the Nation to an illegal war, and lied to the country to do it, even at Suez we were at least given the information as to why.

This party has let down Britain, more interested in so called Human Rights that do nothing for the common man, they help the criminals and illegal immigrants, and the wealthy use them to get out of breaking the law. How do you sick racists sleep at night?

 

Gary said:
December 10, 2006 6:40 PM | permalink
This racist posting astounds me but it seems that it has caught the media eye. Is it a bid for early retirement? I suspect that you will not be long in office!Don’t give up your day job 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.