English Green Party leader has a car-crash interviewI

Post Reply New Topic

I know that this is old news now, but I still think it's worth posting for the entertainment value.



I don't think I've ever seen an interview that was quite so funny or hilarious.

I've heard on the grapevine that she cannot think on her feet well, and that this kind of interview is what happens when she is ambushed as seen here.

Is this a reactionary response? When I Googled "ukip green party" (without parentheses):

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=ukip%20green%20party

If you want to be politics, don't make it that easy.

My advice to Ms. Bennett is "Words - use your words," since this is completely adequate:

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2015/02/22/ukips-scottish-campaign-launch-didnt-go-exactly-to-plan/

and it is funnier.

That woman really needs to go back to school.

She stated in the interview itself that she was unwell and coupled with the aggressive questioning style of the interviewer didn't help much. The spin by the Sky anchor at the end was an obvious hatchet job and its clear to anyone who the murdochian media that pays him has a allegiance with.

Perhaps the Green Party of England does need a new leader. Doesn't mean that UKIP have any better solutions.

Don't get too cocky though. Nigel Farage had a pretty shaky interview with James O'Brien where the rubber faced twat started sweating profusely when challenged on his inconsistency on his attitude to Romanians when he has a foreign wife himself.

Last edited by thomas81 on 01 Mar 2015, 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

They are all the same.

Every politician comes up with policies just to get more votes.

"How" they're going to implement those policies is something which they'll think about when elected.

I don't know. I think the Greens are genuinely different. That they aren't the same flavour of careerist politicians with the game show host like ramamataz of figures like Mr Farage probably manifests in their public appearances.

Ordinary British people probably vote for UKIP because they think Nigel Farage is a 'nice fellow'. I doubt most have stopped to consider what will happen when they lose their jobs when their employers begin pulling out of the UK because they start losing their Brussels subsidised incentives to remain here. When that happens though, it wont be important for Farage and co because they'll have their foot in the door of power, we'll be out of the European ship and 'all in it together' while invoking the usual Churchillian BS. Or at least that is how they will try to spin it to us.

Some of their policies are unrealistic. There's no way they can implement their vision. I guess they just want more votes.

But the biggest problem I have with the greens is that they are taking votes away from labour.

In other words they are indirectly assisting the conservatives and I don't like that at all.

No, that's why people used to vote for the LibDems.

People vote for UKIP because they want our democracy back and a vote to limit immigration.



If subsidies are necessary to keep businesses here, we will reinstate them once we leave the EU.

Same with the farmers - they will still get the subsidies once we leave.

As for your James O'Brien/LBC thing: when he mentioned Romanians, I'm fairly sure he was on about gypsies, who unfortunately are responsible for a lot of crime in eastern European countries. I wouldn't have a problem with a non-gypsy Romanian family moving next door.

When you say a 'vote to limit immigration' the rest might say out of a kneejerk fear wrongly perpetuated by UKIP over the so called 'pace of change' that will only go to demonise upstanding members of the community, especially from Eastern European backgrounds.



But UKIP is saying that the main bugbear of Europe is the amount that the membership fee is costing us. Who will pay for these subsidies if not Europe?

I honestly believe that leaving Europe is selling the cow to buy the milk.

Paid for by who?

So Farage hates the Romani-traveller community. That doesn't absolve him of racism, it just moves the target of his racism from one group to another.

What is the role of Labour these days when all they do is capitulate to Conservative ideology anyway?

They are the best out of a bad bunch.

Are they really though? From where i am sitting they are all part and parcel of the SAME bunch albeit under different party names and different coloured rosettes. In practice though they are all the same.

The abolishment of subsidised higher education happened under labours watch.
the selling off of the railways and beginning of wholesale selling off of large swathes of publically owned health infrastructure happened under Labour's watch.
Our shameful role and track record during America's adventures in the middle east and Asia also happened under Labour's watch.
In spite of the cold war being long over, the Blair-Brown administration refused to entertain any sort of debate on the existing need for the trident missile system. All while public infrastructure kept receiving financial gut-punches.

Labour is no longer representative of the interests of the Labour struggle on that it was founded. So with these factors in mind, how on earth does Labour represent the 'best of a bad bunch'. From where i am sitting only the Green party and a few backbenchers who will never get a sniff of cabinet comes close to upholding the values of old labour in westminster.

in any case I can't and wouldn't support Labour on principle, even if they did a 180 on their reactionary policies. Their refusal to contest Northern Irish constituencies stinks of anglo-centricism.

I think labour are being more realistic. Before they were just taking out huge loans and redistributing it . Now they are trying to help the working class but without increasing the deficit. For me socialism should be about redistributing wealth not debt.

There's black sheep in every party though. So many politicians are members of secret societies, some are hired by big corporations (e.g. tony blair) others are in the job to assist foreign countries that have nothing to do with us (e.g. Israel).