egafd.com

He won't mind as long as they are young handsome Brazilian boys who don't mind sucking his choad to avoid deportation.

I'm always gobsmacked at how gullible in general, the British voter is.

Here is a classic example. When Mandelson, a rather disgruntled, ex-senior Labour politician, comes out with something that is viewed as derogatory to the Labour party, his word is accepted as tablets of stone, incontrovertible truth, beyond argument etc. etc. by those like Essex Lad who would bang on endlessly about Labour spin, dodgy statistics, one-sided argument if the same Mandelson had come out with something positive, in favour of the Labour party.

Hilarious! No wonder Nigel Farage must be giggling over his pint.

PS Essex Lad. Were you too embarrassed to answer my questions in the post below? You should have just said "I can't answer your questions because I was talking nonsense" and then I wouldn't have mentioned it again.

Every time you post some meaningless, content-less post full of insult, I can't help thinking of that song.

"You've got me under your skin".

Do grow up Paul.

David Johnson wrote:

> I'm always gobsmacked at how gullible in general, the British
> voter is.
>
> Here is a classic example. When Mandelson, a rather
> disgruntled, ex-senior Labour politician, comes out with
> something that is viewed as derogatory to the Labour party, his
> word is accepted as tablets of stone, incontrovertible truth,
> beyond argument etc. etc. by those like Essex Lad who would
> bang on endlessly about Labour spin, dodgy statistics,
> one-sided argument if the same Mandelson had come out with
> something positive, in favour of the Labour party.
>
I suppose one might also ask what does he have to gain by lying now? Andrew Neather made much the same point 2-3 years back ? or was he lying too?

In any case, what has Mandelson got to be disgruntled about? Little Ed doesn't listen to him in the way that Blair, Brown and Philip Gould did? Mandelson is rich beyond the dreams of avarice; he gets invited to the top table at the best parties; he has a large house (although I would be interested in knowing how he got the money to pay for it) and for some reason people listen to him still...

I suppose also you have to wonder why Mandelson doesn't come out with "something positive, in favour of the Labour party" anymore?

"In any case, what has Mandelson got to be disgruntled about?"

God knows.

"Little Ed doesn't listen to him in the way that Blair, Brown and Philip Gould did?"

Could be. Some people cannot cope with not being in a prominent political position as Mandelson was for a long time and continually give their advice whether it is wanted or not, especially when the Labour leader does not have the same views. Maybe he is turning into the Labour party's version of Norman Tebbit.

?In 2004, as a Labour government, we were not only welcoming people to come into this country to work, we were sending out search parties for people and encouraging them.?

Well if that had really been true, they could have done a whole lot better at allowing people into the country couldn't they? Since the coalition took over even after 3 years of talking about cutting immigration, the net migration into the UK is over 150,000 which was more than most of the Labour government years. In 2011 it was higher than it had ever been. And the main reason that it has come down to 150,000 or so is that the coalition have been trying to discourage students coming here. The drop off in students is the main reason for the fall.

Yet no-one argues that the coalition is sending out search parties to bring immigrants in are they?

The big mistake that Labour made was in not having transitional arrangements in place for the eastern European countries that joined in the EU in 2004 which meant that they only had Ireland, Sweden and the UK to choose from if they wanted to work in the EU. THe Poles were by far the biggest number of immigrants in the next five years.

Having said that the number of Poles who have become naturalised British citizens (it takes at least 5 years unless you marry a British citizen in which case it is 3 years) I would guess (I do not have the figures) is very limited and would have had a negligible effect, if any, on the size of the Labour vote.

So in short, it seems a non-story made out a Mandelson bag of wind.

David Johnson wrote:

> "In any case, what has Mandelson got to be disgruntled about?"
>
> God knows.
>
Hang on, you say Mandelson is disgruntled then when I ask what he has to be disgruntled about, you reply "God knows". So how do you even know he is disgruntled?

> ?In 2004, as a Labour government, we were not only welcoming
> people to come into this country to work, we were sending out
> search parties for people and encouraging them.?
>
> Well if that had really been true, they could have done a whole
> lot better at allowing people into the country couldn't they?

Not necessarily, it could just be another thing that governments (of all hues) are crap at.

>
> The big mistake that Labour made was in not having transitional
> arrangements in place for the eastern European countries that
> joined in the EU in 2004 which meant that they only had
> Ireland, Sweden and the UK to choose from if they wanted to
> work in the EU. THe Poles were by far the biggest number of
> immigrants in the next five years.

True but then Labour lied and lied again saying that only 13,000 would come over when it is more than a million.

>
> Having said that the number of Poles who have become
> naturalised British citizens (it takes at least 5 years unless
> you marry a British citizen in which case it is 3 years) I
> would guess (I do not have the figures) is very limited and
> would have had a negligible effect, if any, on the size of the
> Labour vote.
>
I was under the impression that EU citizens could vote in local elections but not general ones.