Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:55 am  

Leon Ashton wrote:

I'm a foster carer and I am pretty concerned with what i'm seeing.

Suppose i best confess now 2 lads came to live at my house last December, they were massively into football, I converted them to Rugby League and they now follow Huddersfield. Show me to the gallows.

Poor lads.
They'll be fine during the first half of the season but what are they going to do in August?

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:39 am  

cod'ead wrote:

No, in other words: neither you nor any of the other commentators on this case have the first clue about what the real circumstances surrounding the children's removal are.

Disagree. The real circumstances are very well documented.

When appearing live on national television, the lady from Rotherham Council stated that the sole reason the children were removed was the UKIP membership.

Following a entirely justified pasting in the national press, have they since invented a series of reasons to justify the initial decision?

One of the main problems with social work is that any new entrant to the profession has to spend 3 years being indoctrinated with left-wing bullpoop before being let loose on society.

As a result, we end up with people more interested in socially engineering some sort of left-wing utopia, rather than acting in the best interests of those they are supposed to help.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:47 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Disagree. The real circumstances are very well documented.

When appearing live on national television, the lady from Rotherham Council stated that the sole reason the children were removed was the UKIP membership.

Following a entirely justified pasting in the national press, have they since invented a series of reasons to justify the initial decision?

One of the main problems with social work is that any new entrant to the profession has to spend 3 years being indoctrinated with left-wing bullboop before being let loose on society.

As a result, we end up with people more interested in socially engineering some sort of left-wing utopia, rather than acting in the best interests of those they are supposed to help.

Thats FACT is it, all social workers are communist ?

Does that mean that you can't have a right wing social worker by definition ?

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:56 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Poor lads.
They'll be fine during the first half of the season but what are they going to do in August?

I take them to the Shay

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:16 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Thats FACT is it, all social workers are communist ?

Does that mean that you can't have a right wing social worker by definition ?

I doubt many right wingers can bring themselves to utter the word social in any context.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:03 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Thats FACT is it, all social workers are communist ?

Please illustrate at what point I have said that.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:18 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Please illustrate at what point I have said that.

socially engineering some sort of left-wing utopia

How far left would you like it to go before you start calling it communist, FFS the Americans thought Atlee was a communist in 1948


But the finer point is - does your definition of a social worker mean that there can be no right wing social workers, given that they all spend their first three years being indoctrinated in left wing bullpoop in order to establish some sort of left wing utopia ?

I'm not disagreeing with you by the way, I too think its impossible to find a person with right wing views having the right empathy to be a social worker.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:42 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

How far left would you like it to go before you start calling it communist, FFS the Americans thought Atlee was a communist in 1948


But the finer point is - does your definition of a social worker mean that there can be no right wing social workers, given that they all spend their first three years being indoctrinated in left wing bullpoop in order to establish some sort of left wing utopia ?

I'm not disagreeing with you by the way, I too think its impossible to find a person with right wing views having the right empathy to be a social worker.

I was listening to a Tory MP, who is also a doctor on Five Live today and his views on health service provision and making those that need it most either pay or be excluded from treatment because of such things as diet are right out there with Romney and the other right wing nut jobs in America. I reckon even being a doctor is something they should refrain from, seeing as you need a reasonable amount of caring for the role.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 5:09 pm  

rover49 wrote:

I was listening to a Tory MP, who is also a doctor on Five Live today and his views on health service provision and making those that need it most either pay or be excluded from treatment because of such things as diet are right out there with Romney and the other right wing nut jobs in America. I reckon even being a doctor is something they should refrain from, seeing as you need a reasonable amount of caring for the role.

I heard his comments too and unfortunately I've heard them often when conversing with Americans who don't even think themselves to be "very" Republican, just "leaning towards Republicanism", I'm often surprised by just how far right some of their society has moved without even realising it.

Certainly the doctor should have his registration looked into but the current government have been quick to distance themselves from his comments.

Re: UKIP Fosterers : Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:36 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

I heard his comments too and unfortunately I've heard them often when conversing with Americans who don't even think themselves to be "very" Republican, just "leaning towards Republicanism", I'm often surprised by just how far right some of their society has moved without even realising it.

Certainly the doctor should have his registration looked into but the current government have been quick to distance themselves from his comments.

Is this the barmpot who reckons the only people who should benefit from free (at point of use) healthcare are those that don't need it?