I don’t think I have heard the use of the words “forces of progressiveness” deployed on the BBC as much as in recent days. It seems to me the BBC is establishing a new post election meme, namely that Labour is opposition is the distillation of “progressiveness”. And of course there is the oh so subtle implication that IF Labour is “progressive” then what does that make the new Government?
THE FORCES OF PROGRESSIVENESS…
Bookmark the permalink.
Important to flag this up DV. I’d like to see the Tories countering along the lines of, they’re the same old socialists who frittered all your money away, but they think you’re stupid enough to let them try again if they call themselves progressive next time.
Labour the party that took us into numerous wars, brought suicide bombers to the streets of England and bankrupted the nation. Oh and turned us into the cesspit of Islamic extremism.
They should NEVER be allowed power again.
And then Labour types have the nerve to get all huffy when one points out ones desire not to become an Islamo-nut house caliphate thank you very much…
Have black-sheeted, black masked “women” (but who knows) roaming our streets with their 8 trainee suicide bomber brats in tow…
Have Sharia Law as an “alternative” to our odd adherence to Magna Carta, western jurisprudence, bill of rights, et al…
Or build a frackin’ mosk bigger than St Pauls in our capital city.
Because that makes me BIGOTED!!!!!! According to Labour.
No doubt they would argue that St. Paul’s should be converted to a mosque as it already looks like one !
Brown didn’t take us into any wars. He just starved Her Majesty’s Armed Forces of the funding necessary to fight them properly. Britain’s military deploymente were soley the responsibility of Blair, and they were a responsibility that as far as this dyed in the wool Tory is concerned he exercised with 100% correct judgement.
Odd syntax. Why not progressive forces or forces of progress?
Oh whenever I hear the word “progressive” I think of the early 1970s of scruffy, greasy longhaired “prog” rockers playing 10 minute drum solos in between long meandering guitar solos, bass solos, organ solos.
Sure… “progressive” is so “modern”.
Ah, nice one. I’d forgotten all about that “progressive rock” phenomenon. Weren’t they the university educated types who, in addition to the fad for tediously overworked music, gave their groups strange names based on literary references? Pretentious? Oh no. 😉
Oh dear, I was quite a fan when I was younger !!!!!
Liebour are stuffed. I really don’t understand Liebour people. take the negotiations with the Lib Dems. The Tories were totally upfront and honest in their dealings. All of the people involved were known (Hague, Letwin for example) but look at Liebour, it was hidden away, Mandelson, Campbell and Adonis were the lead for them not one of them elected and Campbell was just an ex media hack why were Liebour MPs not demanding a meeting with Brown?
Until the real decent Labour MPs (like Kate Hoey, Frank Field etc) get rid of the Mandelson/Campbell scum Liebour will never be trusted.
The “progressives” are, of course, in actuality…
THE REGRESSIVES
This is Call Me Dave’s fault. He referred to a “progressive coalition” in his first appearance with Clegg. He’d be a LibDem if not for an accident of birth anyway.
I noticed that, but the press conference was on Wednesday. I noticed the constant repetition of the word “progressive” on Monday night’s Newsnight. I think it was Alastair Campbell, bigging up the idea of a Lib Lab coalition. The same theme was continued on Tuesday night. Kirsty Wark really loves the idea.
I was wondering if Cameron had noticed the meme, and tried to appropriate the word on Wednesday.
The is much about this coalition government I am getting my head around, but I’ve decided to watch and wait awhile beofre making my mind up.
Meanwhile I seem to be subjected to the shrill cries of those who have already made up theirs, and are determined I should get in step pronto.
Not so much aided by the national broadcaster, but mainly, it seems, through being the national broadcaster.
Take this 55% effort. Not sure myself yet.
However, as I was driving about today, the radio headlines, either from tame readers or brain-dead DJs, suggests a near civil war in the offing, citing senior outraged bods and MPs left, right and centre.
Actually… make that left, left and left.
It’s only in the follow-up do you hear that the ones with their knickers most in a twist are unelected creeps such as “Lord’ Adonis or internet guru and gob for rent Prescott of…. The Labour Party.
Do they, and their PR department the BBC, think we are daft?
I am sure there are others for the political spectrum not sure yet either, but trying to make this a huge issue beyond playing up the rantings of the defeated party’s dinosaurs is plain insulting.
BBC TV News at one yesterday was a relentless attack on the coalition.
When it came to the 55% issue they said many MPs were against it and dragged up a Tory backbencher I had never heard of and never seen before. Presumebly they couldn’t get anyone else.
BBC, scraping the barrel as usual.
Tory Bear flagged up this article from the Beeb’s website, asking “Was this the internet election?”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8677492.stm
In the article the various political parties are represented, however the socialists get two bites of the cherry, as Ellie Gellard is tagged as Labour, while Will Straw is tagged as writing “… the progressive blog, Left Foot Forward.”
Fascinating example of BBC bias. 1 Tory blogger; 2 Libdem; 2 Labour and a Green.
It’s not even worth complaining to Cameron’s Government about this bias, let alone the BBC. Cameron is useless. Dealing with BBC bias is a battle that’s going to be a hard one to fight, so he’d rather duck it instead. Personally I just concentrate on making my complaints against the BBC to politicians in the Churchillian/Thatcher mould and copy the BBC in. When Cameron appoints a BBC suckbutt like Theresa May as Home Secretary you know this Conservative coalition is doomed.
I claim to be ahead of the curve. I launced into a protracted rant against the resurrection of the 70’s euro communist bilge that claims to be ‘progressive’ in an open thread last week. If I recall I pointed out how offensive the term is. It is a typically Marxist trick – an oxymoronic approach – bolsheviks, “the majority” were of course a tiny self interested party wh ended up enslaving and murdering millions upon millions.
I guess ‘progressives’ are really leftist reactionaries and the BBC are their fellow travellers
Well “progressive” is so cutting edge that it will be 100 years old in a couple of years!
US President Woodrow Wilson was a self proclaimed prog. I think he was elected in 1914 wasn’t he?
I would have thought the BBC will be only too keen to lable the current government “progressive” . At present they are all having withdrawal symptoms from the old one and the poor dears are confused. They will soon realise Camclegg is a libleft dream ticket. The licence tax is safe for the forseeable. The jobs and salaries are safe. A few cosmetic changes here and there just to show willing but the 100grand pay packets will not be touched.
Honeymoon period for the Camclegg regime? Not from me. I knew where I was with the Brown junta. This new junta smiles too much.
But their smiles are not quite so eerie as Brown’s !!!
It’s precisely because the BBC know they’re going to be safe under Cameron because he doesn’t have the stomache to fight them that their bias is going to continue unremittingly till they bring his Government down.
Sorry that this is OT, but as often as not I can’t post comments on this blog because of some glitch, so I’m posting this here while I can:
The BBC has just made history, broadcasting an unbiased ten-minute look at the creation of the State of Israel:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p004t1hd/episodes/player?page=1
<i>Witness</i> is proof that the BBC can still produce decent programmes when it wants to.
Great programme. Just let Jewish people tell the story of the birth of their State in their own words. Shows the BBC isn’t yet completely overwhelmed by bias. In fact, there’s still significant pockets of integrity left to build on if somehow Cameron does decide to go to war and purge the likes of Humphrys, Paxman, Naughtie and their editors an producers.
Well, its good to hope. The re-creation of the State of Israel shows miracles can happen.
I hate to disagree with you guys but I posted a comment about this programme on the open thread.
Apart from a brief mention of the UN resolution the impression given is that Israel’s declaration of independence was unilateral… the presenter even uses that very word.
The fact that the surrounding Arab states declared war and attacked Israel is obfuscated and the war against Israel is described as a conflict.
The interview with the American woman in Jerusalem doesn’t make clear the fact that East Jerusalem was illegally occupied by the Jordanians.
I didn’t hear the piece as unbiased at all, in fact it felt like just another attempt by the BBC to rewrite history.
Listen to it again pretending you know nothing about the real facts. *DONT_KNOW*
My previous comment:
http://biasedbbc.tv/2010/05/open-thread_14.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BiasedBBC+%28Biased+BBC%29#jsid-1273832951-654
and they snuck in reference to “hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees – but as usual, no reference to the heavy flow of Jewish refugees from Arab states
But would a neutral much less a gentile Zionist come out of listening to that programme thinking ill of Israel?