Opinion of George Galloway

[Phony Moderate]

Since he's just won the most incredible by-election victory in the UK for decades.

[Redalgo]

FF! Well... mostly.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Which dictator is he cosying up to at the moment? I lose track.

[TNF]

An apologist for dictators...nuff said.

[Pingvin]

An apologist for dictators...nuff said.

[k-onmmunist]

FF.

I'm still having trouble absorbing the news of this by-election. 15,000 vote swing. Jesus...

[dead0man]

HP, clearly.

[homelycooking]

Galloway won the by-election? Incredible. They just can't get rid of him.

I thought he was done after he came in third in Poplar & Limehouse and didn't show up to the count.

[Gustaf]

Truly vile person. How anyone can vote FF for scum like that is beyond me.

[Kushahontas]

HP (normal)

[Hash]

Which dictator is he cosying up to at the moment? I lose track.

Bashar, maybe? He seems like the latest hero for the "anti-imperialist/anti-colonialist" idiots.

[minionofmidas]

Does a good cat impression, which is always a plus in a politician.

[Oakvale]

Horrible, horrible person (H, HP).

EDIT: Somewhere's elected him again? Oh Jesus.

[Redalgo]

Truly vile person. How anyone can vote FF for scum like that is beyond me.

In my case it was out of ignorance concerning some of his statements on the USSR, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, Hezbollah, and Western leaders who were in support of the Iraq War. My initial stance was won over by qualities of his I consider FF’esque (e.g. being socialist, environmentalist, anti-imperialist, pro-Palestinian, anti-WMD, and pro-choice) and because I lack sufficient knowledge to know what to make of the old Oil-for-Food controversy. Having read a little more about George now, however, I am somewhat more inclined to assume a neutral position and wait to see what else folks have to say about him.

[© tweed]

would have voted for him in this latest contest, say whatever you may like about the more cinematic stuff.

[Marokai Backbeat]

From what I've seen, I'm not a fan.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

He's a truly vile creature.

The total swing away from the coalition in the by-election was greater than the swing away from Labour. Tory tactical voting, perhaps?

[© tweed]

again the left-liberal airheads can't understand the concept that in these situations, it's not about George Galloway.


my main man Richard Seymour summed it up well.
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2012/03/galloway-wins.html

Harriet Harman, who is far from the worst in Labour's leadership, showed the paucity of Labour's analysis when she insisted that 1) this result in Bradford a purely regional phenomenon, with no wider ramifications, and 2) this has nothing to do with Labour's failure to oppose, since "We've had a completely different argument from the Tories, arguing that they are cutting too far, too fast."  The latter, of course, is not "a completely different argument".  It is an argument which accepts the principle of austerity; which is to say, it is an argument which accepts that working class people have to put up with a generation being lost to joblessness, with tuition fees, privatization, service cuts, benefit cuts, and the evisceration of local infrastructure. The real problem is that Labour has no sense of how to oppose the coalition, because it has preemptively conceded most of the territory.  This is because Labour's leadership knows that if the party wins a general election, they have no intention whatever of adopting a fundamentally different course or of significantly reversing anything the Tories now implement.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The above post is pretty amusing.

[You kip if you want to...]

again the left-liberal airheads can't understand the concept that in these situations, it's not about George Galloway.


my main man Richard Seymour summed it up well.
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2012/03/galloway-wins.html

Harriet Harman, who is far from the worst in Labour's leadership, showed the paucity of Labour's analysis when she insisted that 1) this result in Bradford a purely regional phenomenon, with no wider ramifications, and 2) this has nothing to do with Labour's failure to oppose, since "We've had a completely different argument from the Tories, arguing that they are cutting too far, too fast."  The latter, of course, is not "a completely different argument".  It is an argument which accepts the principle of austerity; which is to say, it is an argument which accepts that working class people have to put up with a generation being lost to joblessness, with tuition fees, privatization, service cuts, benefit cuts, and the evisceration of local infrastructure. The real problem is that Labour has no sense of how to oppose the coalition, because it has preemptively conceded most of the territory.  This is because Labour's leadership knows that if the party wins a general election, they have no intention whatever of adopting a fundamentally different course or of significantly reversing anything the Tories now implement.

Yes! That's exactly why Labour lost the other 5 by-elections this parliament as well. They just can't oppose. They are the Conservatives.

Oh, wait.

Labour's spin on this sounds poor, yes, but it's true.

[© tweed]

The above post is pretty amusing.

getting tired of your act bro.  you sit there and say nothing for months on end with a smirk on your face.

[bgwah]

Galloway is back? LOL!!!

[Gustaf]

Truly vile person. How anyone can vote FF for scum like that is beyond me.

In my case it was out of ignorance concerning some of his statements on the USSR, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, Hezbollah, and Western leaders who were in support of the Iraq War. My initial stance was won over by qualities of his I consider FF’esque (e.g. being socialist, environmentalist, anti-imperialist, pro-Palestinian, anti-WMD, and pro-choice) and because I lack sufficient knowledge to know what to make of the old Oil-for-Food controversy. Having read a little more about George now, however, I am somewhat more inclined to assume a neutral position and wait to see what else folks have to say about him.

Neutral? The guy is an open anti-semite who supports slaughtering innocent people as long as it's done as a stand against liberal democracy. I don't see how his views on the environment matters at all in that context. He is one of few Western politicians who openly supports anti-semitic conspiracy theories, military dictatorship and murder of political opponents.

[they don't love you like i love you]

again the left-liberal airheads can't understand the concept that in these situations, it's not about George Galloway.


my main man Richard Seymour summed it up well.
http://leninology.blogspot.com/2012/03/galloway-wins.html

Harriet Harman, who is far from the worst in Labour's leadership, showed the paucity of Labour's analysis when she insisted that 1) this result in Bradford a purely regional phenomenon, with no wider ramifications, and 2) this has nothing to do with Labour's failure to oppose, since "We've had a completely different argument from the Tories, arguing that they are cutting too far, too fast."  The latter, of course, is not "a completely different argument".  It is an argument which accepts the principle of austerity; which is to say, it is an argument which accepts that working class people have to put up with a generation being lost to joblessness, with tuition fees, privatization, service cuts, benefit cuts, and the evisceration of local infrastructure. The real problem is that Labour has no sense of how to oppose the coalition, because it has preemptively conceded most of the territory.  This is because Labour's leadership knows that if the party wins a general election, they have no intention whatever of adopting a fundamentally different course or of significantly reversing anything the Tories now implement.

That might be why he won and thus that the election result is not about Galloway really. It doesn't make Galloway not a Horrible Person.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It occurs to me that I can't post my full and genuine opinion of the Honourable Member for Bradford West here or anywhere else on the internet. Of course it probably wouldn't be noticed, but I'm not going to take that risk. And neither should anyone else.

getting tired of your act bro.  you sit there and say nothing for months on end with a smirk on your face.

This isn't an act, it's just the way I am. In this particular case there's really nothing worth saying; people who refuse to see Galloway for what he actually is and his electoral appeal for what it actually is are not going to be convinced by any degree of argument because it is their choice to be so blind.

The hilarious part is that he's more or less given up the far-left part of his act this days, but his remaining friends out there (generally they have trust funds) don't seem to have noticed.