Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

And your point is?

It is surprising that Mr Cameron did not refer to Toby Young whom Mr Balls was making the point to. I think Mr Hunts attitudes were visible in the TV programme last week which is still available to view. Personally I want an education system in which schools make is possible for every child to reach meet their aspirations while respecting each other. I engage in a sport where you try to best you personal best. That's when I'm a winner.

FROM BUDDHA TO BALLS TO THAT OTHER B

The Lord Buddha pointed out that the problem with winners is you have to have losers. Westminster, of course, avoids the problem by being made up entirely of losers.

Re Cameron's speech...

YOUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU!

Kitchener's Army were 'lions led by Donkeys'....is this a good metaphor for Cameron's 'leadership' of the British people?

I think so....

Gawd 'elp us!

Answer: yes!

I'll help you out by putting down what he should have said if he didn't want to play right into David Cameron's hands;

"The danger is that there will be losers with this policy,but it would be dishonest of me not to acknowledge that there would be winners as well."
However he clearly gave the impression that the danger lay not with the possibility of losers but with the likelihood of winners. It couldn't be more clear to me that the meaning of his remarks was exactly as the Prime Minister stated. But then I'm not a Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú News die-hard Labour/TUC supporter.

"And today I can announce International Citizen Service, to give thousands of our young people, those who couldn't otherwise afford it, the chance to see the world and serve others.

Last century, America’s Peace Corps inspired a generation of young people to act, and this century, I want International Citizen Service to do the same."


I didn't expect the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú to acknowledge David Cameron's announcement of the creation of a British Citizen Service, a UK version of the US peace core, which will allow less well off young people to have a gap year like spell of doing aid work overseas like their more well off peers have been able to up till now. Sounded like a good idea to me. No surprise then that Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú News aren't going to even mention it! Aren't you at least embarrassed about being so pitifully predictable?!

Ava78 - can you not see what the point is?!!!!

I'm not sure I understand.

Cameron quotes Balls as saying that the policy will create winners ...

... and Balls is quoted by Crick as saying that the policy will create, er, winners.

'to say the danger is of winners' is in keeping with the dominant philosophy of 'equality' [as the highest idea of the mind] which demands human sacrifice.

equality is the policy of lowest common denominator. which, in education, means dragging everyone down to the level of the bad lads at the back of the class who don't do their homework and go around demanding everyone's dinner money. People who enjoy learning are name called swots, eggheads etc. The same kind of name calling we see on NN blogs when people who posses knowledge are called 'anoraks' and lets not forget all that anti web stuff JP and kirsty 'the website slayer' used to do.


there is a culture of reinforcing stupidity which the media gleefully participates in and like puppies who leaver poo in the middle of the carpet think its something to be proud about.

8
...I'm not sure I understand...

if one says that NN is dominated by leftists, ex leftists, crypto leftist does that help?

see how deep the hatred of the good is in political society. Fairness is an antonym of excellence. Hands up all those who hate excellence.

In debate it is not what you say but the way you say it. In this case Mr. Balls said ` The danger is that there will be winners in this policy...'.

Firstly, people focus on the first part of the sentence, and secondly, the sentence construction associates danger with winning.

It is not what you say but what people hear.

When speaking I try to structure my sentences in a clear and grammatical manner so that the reason for speaking is understood. On occasion I can stumble. It is the stumble people note, not the message. You are media people and should know that.

Anyway, why are we so upset about Balls being misquoted? If he told me it was raining I would have to go outside and get wet before I believed anything he said.

Now present us with, let's say, the last year of the Labour government,and all the lies and half truthes told in their presentations, and answers to questions. Not got time ? not surprising, you ignored them then and you will continue in the same vein until a complete change of culture takes place at the Guardians favourite broadcaster.

'2. At 9:55pm on 06 Oct 2010, cping500 wrote:

It is surprising that Mr Cameron did not refer to Toby Young whom Mr Balls was making the point to.'

Maybe worth adding this from another person present:



It therefore seems to fall to the presets of those who heard/hear it.

Natural in all people; inevitable in commentators, but not so desireable in objective, impartial broadcast vie... er.. news editors, perhaps?

'Which is very different to how David Cameron quoted Mr Balls today.'

Maybe a remake of the 'Boys from Brazil' is suggested, with Helen Boaden as its heroine? 'The Boys from the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú'.

I must also confess that the lack of an apostrophe and an unfortunate word break quite gave me a fit of the vapours.

I am sure it was unintentional.

"very different" Michael?

"The danger is that there will be winners in this policy" vs "...the dangers of our schools policy was that it would create 'winners'." Seems pretty similar to me...

Also worth pointing out to you (and Mr Balls) that if there is a winner, there is always some other party that will fail to win....we call this party a loser. It kind of goes without saying...

@normandee.

Do you mean the lies and half truths in Cameron's speech? I thought that was what you meant.

And politicians and media do not selectively quote. Yeah, Right!

"There is no such thing as society, there are families, individuals and businesses, which, together, make up the thing we call society."

Ed Balls point was that there would be entire schools that would lose out as a result of the policy, what Cameron did was misrepresent that as being a comment about individual pupils in an 'everyone's a winner' culture, which wasn't what was being said. Unless of course Cameron was saying 'whole schools will lose out...so what'?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.