[Closed] Harriet

[url= http://dizzythinks.net/2009/08/just-fancy-that-harriet.html ]Harman didn't say she disagreed with the argument, and let's be honest, this Harriet Harman, so it's pretty obvious she did agree with the sentiment otherwise she wouldn't have said it.

Now step in Blythe Masters, a woman, a JP Morgan executive, and generally accepted inventor of the now infamous "credit default swap" that led to banking collapse and which Warren Buffet called "financial weapons of mass destruction" in 2003.

I expect no one will pull her up in this in an interview though.[/url]

😀

And what was JP Morgans exposure to "credit default swap"? pretty much nowt. What did JP Morgan get out of the collapse? For starters they got the $1.2billion Lehman Brothers building for nothing and much much more. So invent your own financial time bomb, get all your competitors involved, run away and wait, then collect the proceeds.

I have a hunch that this kind of aggressive gender politics could do really serious damage to Labour.

(Obviously, so many things are doing serious damage to Labour - "events", incompetence, duplicity, popular boredom and cynicism, lack of vision, a deliberate alienation of activists 10 years ago, micro-management of the national party as avehicle for a few operators' ego's, trivialisation, drift from any apparent message etc etc etc - that it may not really matter much, but personally I would find a party which got seriously into top-down man-hating a fairly uncomfortable spot.)

And I really, really want to say something about the unfairness of the Mash's suggestion, but I just can't. 😐

Stick the boot into her by all means, but try and come up with something a bit more imaginative than "she hates men" or "she hasn't had it in ages". And that Blythe Masters thing is just daft, I think it's a tiny bit more complicated than "ooh, she's a woman and she caused the credit crunch".

But you have to admit that it provides some evidence that it was "bankers" rather than "male bankers" which were the problem. 😀

No-one ever accused the Daily Mash of sophistication either. 😉

The Mash is great, but the perceptiveness of its stories tends to fluctuate a bit. Tiresome stereotypes of ballcrushing femmies running riot tend to be well divorced from reality in this kind of context. Also, I'm really struggling to establish what context these remarks were made in - the original interview seems to have become buried by the endless gleeful recycling by Torygraph hacks.

I admit the Mash doesnt really provide a sophisticated dismantling of her absurdly negative equality agenda. Someone did, however, but I cant find it at the moment.

The crux of the argument was that if she's going to use the argument that feminine characteristics as distinct from some masculine ones are not only different but in the right place preferential then the corollary is also true. There's some holes in that but they were plugged in the original piece. I shall go off a-googlin' and see if I cant find where I read it....

Personally, I particularly enjoy the comments from Harperson about how the evil Tories are sexist because they only have seventeen women MP's...That would of course be the Tory party that of course gave us the first female PM!

Clearly she's trying to position herself as Gordons sucessor, although actually I would have thought that to most Labour supporters, the prospect of another woman PM was more likely to make them vote blue...

far too much education

Stick the boot into her

I've never heard it called a boot before...

catshoe - Member
far too much education

St Paul's Girls is a very good private school, as it happens. Not cheap either. Lots of posh people go there.

There would have been uproar if a woman was PM and a man had said "I dont agree with all woman politics". Equality of the sexes? I dont think so, theres too much political correctness for men to have any chance in society. I've got 2 words for Harriet, the second ones off.

theres too much political correctness for men to have any chance in society

You are so right - we men have absolutely no chance at the top of the Judiciary, the Legislature, the Armed Forces, and the Civil Service; established religions like Islam, Jewry, the C of E, the Catholic Church; national institutions such as the NHS, banking, industry, education

Thank God we still dominate social work, primary school teaching, nursing, care for the elderly and fashion magazine production - from these bases we can surely dominate the world!

"I don’t agree with all-female leaderships,” he said. “Women cannot be left to run things on their own. I think it’s a thoroughly bad thing to have a women-only leadership.”

How does that sound?

Also, I'm really struggling to establish what context these remarks were made in - the original interview seems to have become buried by the endless gleeful recycling by Torygraph hacks.

"There would have been uproar if a woman was PM and a man had said "I dont agree with all woman politics"."

Absolute cobblers.

Lets not forget early in the first Blair government, HH was sacked for being rubbish. She'd been pretty popular amongst the unions for a long time but like the rest of us decided she had to put her kids first, sent them to posh grammar schools miles from home in Peckham where they thrive to this day. Her pals on the Labour left didnt like that, leaving the door open for her to be pushed out by guess who? Yes G.Brown! Same day that Frank Field was sacked and my very short lived membership of New Labour came to a halt. No kidding, back then I really believed all that stuff about a new dawn of liberalism.

Crack on Harriet, you tell us who knows best. In a funny kind of way I really quite like her, no malice with her, I think she does think she's doing the right thing. But no question, she's thick as shit.

She'd been pretty popular amongst the unions for a long time....

To quote from Rod Liddle beating around the bush as usual in this week's Spectator 🙂
[url= http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/5244693/harriet-harman-is-either-thick-or-criminally-disingenuous.thtml ]Harriet Harman is either thick or criminally disingenuous[/url]*

I don’t suppose it will hurt Harriet very much that her husband is the treasurer of the Labour party and the deputy leader of Unite’s TGWU branch, Jack Dromey. And I don’t suppose the irony will smack her in the face if the trade unions, in deciding who will be the next Labour party leader, alight upon Harriet Harman. She’ll have got there all by herself.

* tip-off from bigdummy 😉