Good to hear from you. It would be a far sadder place if we all agreed, all the time Still, a ‘Liberal Conspiracy’ is not the same thing as a ‘Libertarian Conspiracy’. Which some folk, thought, it was, early doors. The liberal left would be a poorer place if it gave up on you too.

I even occasionally agree with things have that are posted too. I haven’t given up on the liberal left yet:)

I kind of find the libertarians that used to infest this site have, generally, pissed off. There seems to me to be no common cause between libertarians and liberals. Perhaps I am wrong and in need of an education? Probably not.

————-

leon- you have a point.

It is all very well making a partisan issue out of this social matter, but until a left-leaning think tank gives anything like the same exposure to these women’s groups as the CSC have, the ‘broad left’ doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

More lazy double standards round here too- you can’t criticise a think tank for proposing their own notion of Britishness when you spend your concluding paragraphs doing the exact same thing.

Especially when you are trying to score tawdry political points instead of focussing on the real women’s issues.

Mail-bashing by sunny is just more LibCon masturbation in the comfort zone. Call me when the Guardian displays similar teeth on this issue.

—————–

That’s pretty much it, last 2 sentences are word-for-word.

There is no personal attack there, only comments on the editorial style of this blog.

Please can someone tell me why the posts were removed??

The bulk of the post was in support of your earlier point leon:

“Isn’t the fact that this report comes from a rightwing think tank (run by a Neo Con) a failure of the left/liberals to address this issue fully…in terms of studies etc.”

There was no personal attack in either of the posts you have (secretly) deleted, and I defy you to prove otherwise.

How can he if the posts have been deleted?

Criticising what you post is very different from a personal attack

The second time I posted, your name wan’t even included.

So why did you pull either of the posts?

Last post? The last thing I can find is a reply to Leon on the Pro-Choice article from a couple of days ago.

There’s nothing been inadvertently pulled into the spam trap, which does sometime throw a false positive either, and I’m not aware that anything has been deleted – we use ‘disemvowelling’ here AFAIK.

All I can say is that if something gone astray then post it again and I’ll keep an eye out to see what happens.

belikebudd:

Whose social engineering schemes?

The report itself is a the work of right-wing think tank, so are you criticising the left or right here or would you just prefer that we go the pogrom route in order to tackle this issue?

That’s you answer to everything.

Surprisingly, the conclusions are better than expected.

The No Recourse to Public Funding issue is HUGE! Lots of women who run away or face domestiv violence and hide in refuges don’t get any financial support because they might not be British citizens. Which means the refuge groups don’t get money for helping them and consequently everyone loses out (apart from the govt of course).

I’m actually surprised a right-wing thinktank made the sensible recommendation that more money needs to go towards womens groups and No Recourse should be scrapped.

The problem is, the Daily Mail and Sunday Times headlines, which profiled the more extreme cases, did not say anything on those issues.