:w00t: :cheers:
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/Oddities/091111/K11119AU.html
QuoteOTTAWA - A brief message about a felled feline really caused the fur to fly this week, prompting erroneous rumours about the demise of no less than Margaret Thatcher.
The brouhaha at a gala Toronto tribute to Canada's military is a cautionary tale about how modern instant messaging and good old-fashioned gossip can combine to shake things up at even the highest levels.
Some 1,700 luminaries, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper, were in the middle of dinner Tuesday night when smart phones throughout the room began to buzz with the news: "Lady Thatcher has passed away."
Dinner chatter abruptly veered to expressions of shock and reminiscences of Margaret Thatcher, the 84-year-old former British prime minister, as news of her apparent passing spread like wildfire.
It eventually reached the ears of Harper, or someone close to him. Harper aide Dimitri Soudas, back in Ottawa, was dispatched to confirm the news and start preparing an official statement mourning the death of the Iron Lady, an icon to many in Harper's Conservative party.
Soudas immediately emailed his contacts at Buckingham Palace and in British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's office.
They had no idea what he was talking about. Lady Thatcher, they informed an embarrassed Soudas, was still very much alive.
About 20 minutes after the rumour mill started churning, a corrective email message began to circulate among the diners at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.
Turns out it was Transport Minister John Baird's beloved 16-year-old cat - whom he'd named Thatcher out of admiration for one of his political heroes - who had ceased to be.
Soudas is said to have quipped since: "If the cat wasn't dead, I'd have killed it by now."
:face:
:lmfao:
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
:yes:
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Kinda strange to think about it after so many years, but you are probably correct.
The same fate awaits Tony Blair, unless he blots his escutcheon somehow in the future.
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
I thought that was Attlee.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2009, 08:37:31 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
I thought that was Attlee.
You thought wrong.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2009, 08:37:31 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
I thought that was Attlee.
Who named their cat "Attlee?" :unsure:
Quote from: grumbler on November 13, 2009, 10:25:26 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2009, 08:37:31 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
I thought that was Attlee.
Who named their cat "Attlee?" :unsure:
Yeah, he strikes me as more of a dog-type.
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Yup.
For a brief, shining moment, she made Britain relevant again. If only for a while.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 13, 2009, 10:38:37 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Yup.
For a brief, shining moment, she made Britain relevant again. If only for a while.
She made Britain appear relevant. Her role in breaking Old Labor and forcing the creation of New Labor should not be underestimated. Britain is politically a far, far different place than it was when I lived there, thanks to her and most especially to the reaction to her.
"Catalyst" is a word too often used for politicians, but it applies to her.
Ronald Reagon was a non-entity compared to her.
Quote from: grumbler on November 13, 2009, 10:43:49 PMShe made Britain appear relevant. Her role in breaking Old Labor and forcing the creation of New Labor should not be underestimated. Britain is politically a far, far different place than it was when I lived there, thanks to her and most especially to the reaction to her.
"Catalyst" is a word too often used for politicians, but it applies to her.
Ronald Reagon was a non-entity compared to her.
I would agree. She was the first of the wave of modern western conservatism.
And she fought the last colonial war. So hawt.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 13, 2009, 11:04:50 PM
I would agree. She was the first of the wave of modern western conservatism.
And she fought the last colonial war. So hawt.
I think her role in defending British sovereignty, like GWB's in defending US sovereignty, will be a mere footnote. Her impact on history will be seen as what she did to Britain, not what she did to the junta in Argentina.
Quote from: Tyr on November 13, 2009, 07:36:14 PM
:w00t: :cheers:
Fuck you you pinko commie bastard.
Quote from: Barrister on November 14, 2009, 02:57:35 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 13, 2009, 07:36:14 PM
:w00t: :cheers:
Fuck you you pinko commie bastard.
I thought Canadians were always friendly and kind to everyone :(
Along Jeanne d'Arc, my favourite woman of history. :bowler:
Quote from: grumbler on November 13, 2009, 10:43:49 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 13, 2009, 10:38:37 PM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Yup.
For a brief, shining moment, she made Britain relevant again. If only for a while.
She made Britain appear relevant. Her role in breaking Old Labor and forcing the creation of New Labor should not be underestimated. Britain is politically a far, far different place than it was when I lived there, thanks to her and most especially to the reaction to her.
"Catalyst" is a word too often used for politicians, but it applies to her.
Ronald Reagon was a non-entity compared to her.
it's something that'll vex many britons for generations to come :D
Quote from: grumbler on November 13, 2009, 10:43:49 PM
"Catalyst" is a word too often used for politicians, but it applies to her.
Well, you could say the same about Hitler. "People hate you so much, it changes the world" is not exactly the most ringing kind of endorsement.
She smacked the unions and Labour around. Good enough for me.
Quote from: Martinus on November 14, 2009, 06:01:12 AM
Quote from: grumbler on November 13, 2009, 10:43:49 PM
"Catalyst" is a word too often used for politicians, but it applies to her.
Well, you could say the same about Hitler. "People hate you so much, it changes the world" is not exactly the most ringing kind of endorsement.
People don't hate Thatcher, except for maladjusted retards.
Her rise to power just goes to show you that a woman can change the stars.
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Wrong.
If people these days weren't so lazy and were perhaps a bit meaner there would be street parties at the news.
Quote from: Tyr on November 14, 2009, 09:48:26 AM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Wrong.
If people these days weren't so lazy and were perhaps a bit meaner there would be street parties at the news.
I agree.
Trouble is the only people who would throw a street party are under 35, and most Brits under 35 don't have a clue who she was....note I said "Most" not "all"
I'm familiar with the case for Thatcher. What's the case against her?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 03:25:06 PM
I'm familiar with the case for Thatcher. What's the case against her?
She wasn't hot.
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 03:30:50 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 03:25:06 PM
I'm familiar with the case for Thatcher. What's the case against her?
She wasn't hot.
She wasn't Clement Attlee.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 03:25:06 PM
I'm familiar with the case for Thatcher. What's the case against her?
What is the case for her, again?
and don't just parrot the "she busted the unions" thing. I want to know how she did that, and what were the immediate repercussions and how that's made Britain a better place to be today.
500 wds or less...due on my desk Monday morning. ;)
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 04:35:00 PM
What is the case for her, again?
and don't just parrot the "she busted the unions" thing. I want to know how she did that, and what were the immediate repercussions and how that's made Britain a better place to be today.
500 wds or less...due on my desk Monday morning. ;)
I asked first. ;)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 04:41:50 PM
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 04:35:00 PM
What is the case for her, again?
and don't just parrot the "she busted the unions" thing. I want to know how she did that, and what were the immediate repercussions and how that's made Britain a better place to be today.
500 wds or less...due on my desk Monday morning. ;)
I asked first. ;)
Indeed, and I suspect the reason Jos was weaseling out of answering you is that he really doesn't know the case against her, he just knows "Thatcher bad, m'kay?" :P
However, he has assigned himself 500 words or less by Monday, so i expect he can find some anti-Thatcherite diatribe he can crib in that amount of time. I rather respect he will ignore his own instructions to include how she did that, and what were the immediate repercussions and how that's made Britain a worse place to be today.
You got it wrong. Admiral Yi said "I am familiar with the case for her"
I, seriously, want to know what that is; before I can make my counter argument. In other words, I am not familiar with the case for her. Please explain. I am an idiot. Thanks.
One other thing: I can't be arsed to "crib some anti-thatcher diatribe" although there is a lot out there. In my opinion, she isn't worth the time and effort it takes. I don't know that much about her. I didn't live in England at the time. I never studied her in school. I do remember hating the sound of her voice, and turning off the TV when she came on.
I'll throw in a couple bones though, because contrary to popular opinion here, unlike the majority of you, I am not blinded by ideology.
Although I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil, and know that a large population of Britons, espcially in the north had everything including the kitchen sink taken away from them, I'll admit this:
1. She had the Balls to stick it to the Argies. I love a good war.
2. I"m not sure if I'll agree with Neil and say that she'll go down as the greatest leader after Churchill, I'll concede that at least she will go down in history as being one of the most powerful and influential British PMs. Unlike many other politiicans, she won't be quickly forgotten.
But I will have a beer when she dies.
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 06:51:49 PM
I am not blinded by ideology.
Although I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil,
:lol:
Quote from: citizen k on November 14, 2009, 07:00:13 PM
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 06:51:49 PM
I am not blinded by ideology.
Although I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil,
:lol:
I had the same reaction. Hilarious.
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 06:26:05 PM
You got it wrong. Admiral Yi said "I am familiar with the case for her"
I, seriously, want to know what that is; before I can make my counter argument. In other words, I am not familiar with the case for her. Please explain. I am an idiot. Thanks.
I said I'm familiar with the case for her after you had said people should be out in the streets cheering her death. That's not the position of someone waiting to make a counter argument.
FWIW I don't know how she busted the unions. I assume she busted them by simply not giving in to their demands and going ahead with plans to privatize and close money losing mines.
Quote from: Habbaku on November 14, 2009, 07:01:02 PM
Quote from: citizen k on November 14, 2009, 07:00:13 PM
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 06:51:49 PM
I am not blinded by ideology.
Although I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil,
:lol:
I had the same reaction. Hilarious.
You guys take the cake.
Let me dumb it down. Although I hate Thatcherism and consider it bad, I am not as blinded by my ideology as you guys are, so as to not concede the following points (the rest of my comment from which you cropped from)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 07:10:48 PM
I said I'm familiar with the case for her after you had said people should be out in the streets cheering her death. That's not the position of someone waiting to make a counter argument.
FWIW I don't know how she busted the unions. I assume she busted them by simply not giving in to their demands and going ahead with plans to privatize and close money losing mines.
I thought Tyr said people should be out in the streets, Josephus simply agreed. I understand going after josq is like debating Tim, but really, his should be the focus of this - initial post, street dancing, etc.
For what it is worth, I believe that as a symbol she will be remembered as incredibly important.
For the record: I didn't say people should be out on the streets. I said that if street parties were the done thing in this day and age then there would definatly be one for her death.
I nick the words of I've no clue who:
When Thatcher dies there has to be a state funeral. Half the country will want to honour her, the other half will want to make sure the bitch is really dead.
I'm sure if they are out on the streets, they will be in their natural state.
Drunk, with underwear down to their ankles.
Quote from: Ed Anger on November 14, 2009, 08:52:14 PM
I'm sure if they are out on the streets, they will be in their natural state.
Drunk, with underwear down to their ankles.
Getting beaten up by female impersonators.
Quote from: Tyr on November 14, 2009, 08:51:55 PM
For the record: I didn't say people should be out on the streets. I said that if street parties were the done thing in this day and age then there would definatly be one for her death.
I nick the words of I've no clue who:
When Thatcher dies there has to be a state funeral. Half the country will want to honour her, the other half will want to make sure the bitch is really dead.
Fair enough. And the smileys at the beginning of the OP, were you really that happy that a cat died?
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 07:59:41 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on November 14, 2009, 07:01:02 PM
Quote from: citizen k on November 14, 2009, 07:00:13 PM
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 06:51:49 PM
I am not blinded by ideology.
Although I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil,
:lol:
I had the same reaction. Hilarious.
You guys take the cake.
Let me dumb it down. Although I hate Thatcherism and consider it bad, I am not as blinded by my ideology as you guys are, so as to not concede the following points (the rest of my comment from which you cropped from)
It's time to transcend ideology, it has such a 20th century vibe.
So J's dislike is just based on blind ideological leanings?
Quote from: garbon on November 14, 2009, 10:25:44 PM
So J's dislike is just based on blind ideological leanings?
He admits as much. :unsure:
Quote from: garbon on November 14, 2009, 10:25:44 PM
So J's dislike is just based on blind ideological leanings?
Add together:
(1) "I don't know that much about her" and
(2) "I can't stand Thatcherism and think it is highly evil"
and that equals: "he really doesn't know the case against her, he just knows 'Thatcher bad, m'kay?'"
He both denies it and proves it in subsequent posts, and claims that everyone who notices the truth "take(s) the cake." Of his "let me dumb it down" concept, I would say that he needs to go much dumber before he can understand himself. :P The rest of us have no problem understanding what he is really saying even at the dumbness level at which he started.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 14, 2009, 09:03:17 PM
Fair enough. And the smileys at the beginning of the OP, were you really that happy that a cat died?
Oh, I'm certainly well on the side who hates her.
Calling for a party when soeone dies though...well even if it is such an evil bitch its still....wrong.
The case for Thatcher: Conservative.
The case against Thatcher: Conservative.
That about sums it up.
Thatcher gets my love for killing Argies.
Also, for having a boomer nearby just in case. :menace:
Of course people will hate Thatcher. She is a strong woman who was successful in a man's world.
Quote from: garbon on November 14, 2009, 10:25:44 PM
So J's dislike is just based on blind ideological leanings?
No. Sheesh. I said she's ugly and I can't stand her voice. :bowler:
BTW.....I'll give her one other point.
She was the inspiration behind The Final Cut, the last
real Pink Floyd record in 1983.
What have we done?
Maggie what have we done?
What have we done to England?
Should we shout, should we scream?
What happened to the postwar dream?
Maggie! Oh Maggie what did you do?
Quote from: Josephus on November 15, 2009, 09:19:41 AM
What have we done?
Maggie what have we done?
What have we done to England?
Should we shout, should we scream?
What happened to the postwar dream?
Maggie! Oh Maggie what did you do?
If anything, Maggie rekindled the postwar dream that by the late 70's was in jeopardy of going out for good.
No Thatcher, No Cool Britannia
What happened to the postwar dream? Somehow, I doubt the British people had the 60s and 70s in mind as their ideal world.
The entire period 1914-1950 was pretty grim, at least for the bulk of the population (the 1920s was also a period of recession here, unlike in the US). I think the 1960s came as a relief even though some were disturbed by declining social cohesion.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 15, 2009, 07:49:11 AM
The case for Thatcher: Conservative.
The case against Thatcher: Conservative.
That about sums it up.
The case for: she broke the stranglehold enjoyed by organized labor on economic policy and ended the constant drain on public finances propping up a dying industry.
The case against: she threw hundreds of thousands (?) of Britons out of work and devastated entire communities.
Franco is still dead.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 15, 2009, 05:18:46 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 15, 2009, 07:49:11 AM
The case for Thatcher: Conservative.
The case against Thatcher: Conservative.
That about sums it up.
The case for: she broke the stranglehold enjoyed by organized labor on economic policy and ended the constant drain on public finances propping up a dying industry.
The case against: she threw hundreds of thousands (?) of Britons out of work and devastated entire communities.
Case for: Brought the Britsish economy into the 20th century, beat inflation, passed laws forcing secret ballot on unions before striking thuse breaking their power, defeated inflation
Case against: Permanently and delibrately ruined UK's industrial base to break unions power (talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater), chose to accept high employment to keep wages and inflation down thus creating a legacy of welfare dependence still with us today.
In both cases, it somewhat hard to seperate the UK economy from the ROTW's (e.g. low inflation, high unemployment).
Case for:
Privatised the railways, privatised electricty, broke the unions, liberalised banking practices, developed the city of London, encouragment of rampant capitalism, she created a depressing backdrop which led to some of the best music ever.
...
wait. This was supposed to be case for right?
So...she was only good if you're a banker or other financial person...sort of... we all know where a over reliance on financial services got us.
Case against:
Ruined the unions- not just weakened them as was needed but totally messed them up leaving them in a rather useless purgatory, ruined the economy, ruined society (charvas= her doing), the Falklands War, destroyed communities, privitisations, she didn't want to harm the status quo in Europe, education slashing
Another few points in the "against" box:
- Politicised the civil service
- Was directly responsible for the disastrous defence review that allowed the Argenties to invade the Falklands
- Sold off valuable state enterprises for far less than they were worth.
I am not saying that these are ncessarily true: merely that they are what her opponents also stack up against her.
My own view is that history will likely view Thatcher as a leader who did what was needed, but did not try and soften the social impact of her policies.
As a result, the south east of the country did very well because it was suited for the coming changes. But the north and west fared poorly because the sectors they relied upon were demolished wholesale with little to replace them.
In that, it is possible that the state could have had more of a role in cushioning the transition. But this did not fit in with her strict ideology. As others have said already in this thread, the wholesale destruction of jobs in failing sectors, while ultimately necessary, was handled in such a way to rip the heart out of entire communities. It was not just a case of saying 'on your bike': there were no jobs anywhere in these regions.
I would not claim that such a structural correction could ever be painless, but one does get the sense that the government could have done more to ease, to some extent, the unemployment problem. Unfortunately its focus was inflation, inflation, inflation.
A side point: many of the sectors gutted in the 1980s had actually be uncompetitive on an international scale since the 1920s. That gives some idea of the scale of the problem.
One of her biggest errors, in my opinion, was her failure to dismantle planning restrictions. She dismantled untenable industries in the the periphery; the obvious corrollary of this would be a flood of people to the SE of England to take up the new employment opportunities there. The flood never took place because housing was just too expensive down there; especially for unemployed ex-miners and their ilk, they found it better to sign on, sometimes as unemployed, sometimes as "disabled". Many of the best and brightest could afford the move of course, thus further disadvantaging the periphery.
As I see it she sorted one half of the problem, the inefficient industries, but then failed to provide the conditions for the remedy, ie the restructuring of where people live. So we end up with the chavs and the hopeless, with the situation set in stone by the housing problem and certain other rigidities (eg national pay agreements for teachers and nurses).
Point against: in a case of budget cuts she more or less kicked psychiatric patients out of the institutions and onto the streets
Quote from: Gups on November 16, 2009, 04:37:19 AM
Case against: Permanently and delibrately ruined UK's industrial base to break unions power (talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater),
:lol: Love this one!
Did Thatcher permanently and deliberately ruin the baby, too, before before she threw it out with the bathwater?
Quote from: Warspite on November 16, 2009, 06:54:27 AM
My own view is that history will likely view Thatcher as a leader who did what was needed, but did not try and soften the social impact of her policies.
Absolutely agree.
QuoteAs a result, the south east of the country did very well because it was suited for the coming changes. But the north and west fared poorly because the sectors they relied upon were demolished wholesale with little to replace them.
The North and West fared poorly because their economies were based on endless subsidization of their inefficiencies by the rest of the economy. Once there was a rational hand on the economic tiller, the guild sysytem was doomed.
QuoteIn that, it is possible that the state could have had more of a role in cushioning the transition. But this did not fit in with her strict ideology. As others have said already in this thread, the wholesale destruction of jobs in failing sectors, while ultimately necessary, was handled in such a way to rip the heart out of entire communities. It was not just a case of saying 'on your bike': there were no jobs anywhere in these regions.
Agree that Thatcher was disinterested in ameliorating the effects of rationalizing the economy. The destruction of jobs in these sectors, of course, had occurred decades before, under the disastrous administrations that preceded Thatcher. Once she pointed out that the Emperor had no clothes, of course, people stopped getting paid for their non-existent jobs and entire communities who had been dependent on a non-existent industry were devastated. Most of the workers who lost their non-existent jobs lacked a decent education and so preferred to go on welfare rather than move a hundred miles to where the jobs were. Luckily, enough immigrants moved thousands of miles to take those jobs and pay taxes that Britain could afford to pay these welfare queens until a new generation of people replaced them as wage earners.
QuoteI would not claim that such a structural correction could ever be painless, but one does get the sense that the government could have done more to ease, to some extent, the unemployment problem. Unfortunately its focus was inflation, inflation, inflation.
Agreed. The great mark against Thatcher is that she lacked balance. I don't think she even tried to investigate a policy that would steer between generalized suffering (inflation) and specific suffering (unemployment). [/quote]
Quote from: Gups on November 16, 2009, 04:37:19 AM
Case against: Permanently and delibrately ruined UK's industrial base to break unions power (talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater),
Is there any merit to this? Were any profitable babies thrown out?
Quote from: BVN on November 16, 2009, 11:10:24 AM
Point against: in a case of budget cuts she more or less kicked psychiatric patients out of the institutions and onto the streets
Every politician from JFK to Reagan has done that.
Quote from: citizen k on November 16, 2009, 05:15:04 PM
Quote from: BVN on November 16, 2009, 11:10:24 AM
Point against: in a case of budget cuts she more or less kicked psychiatric patients out of the institutions and onto the streets
Every politician from JFK to Reagan has done that.
Two wrongs don't make a right...etc.etc.
Quote from: Josephus on November 14, 2009, 10:25:17 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 14, 2009, 09:48:26 AM
Quote from: Neil on November 13, 2009, 07:39:21 PM
You know, when the real Thatcher dies, she's going to be remembered as the greatest Briton since Churchill.
Wrong.
If people these days weren't so lazy and were perhaps a bit meaner there would be street parties at the news.
I agree.
Trouble is the only people who would throw a street party are under 35, and most Brits under 35 don't have a clue who she was....note I said "Most" not "all"
And if they did they would celebrate her for taking Briton out of the economic dark ages and making their current standard of living possible.
Quote from: Josephus on November 16, 2009, 05:49:11 PM
Quote from: citizen k on November 16, 2009, 05:15:04 PM
Quote from: BVN on November 16, 2009, 11:10:24 AM
Point against: in a case of budget cuts she more or less kicked psychiatric patients out of the institutions and onto the streets
Every politician from JFK to Reagan has done that.
Two wrongs don't make a right...etc.etc.
Or, if everyone does it, it can't be wrong.
Quote from: Neil on November 16, 2009, 07:24:42 PM
Or, if everyone does it, it can't be wrong.
More likely, if everyone does it it can't be right.