For those wondering why so many people feel so strongly about her, even in death, here’s a comprehensive list of Maggie Thatcher’s destructive tendencies. a lot of them are still having a ripple effect on the country now. Being dead does not make you immune from criticism.
1. She supported the retention of capital punishment
2. She destroyed the country’s manufacturing industry
3. She voted against the relaxation of divorce laws
4. She abolished free milk for schoolchildren (“Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher”)
5. She supported more freedom for business (and look how that turned out)
6. She gained support from the National Front in the 1979 election by pandering to the fears of immigration
7. She gerrymandered local authorities by forcing through council house sales, at the same time preventing councils from spending the money they got for selling houses on building new houses (spending on social housing dropped by 67% in her premiership)
8. She was responsible for 3.6 million unemployed - the highest figure and the highest proportion of the workforce in history and three times the previous government. Massaging of the figures means that the figure was closer to 5 million
9. She ignored intelligence about Argentinian preparations for the invasion of the Falkland Islands and scrapped the only Royal Navy presence in the islands
10. The poll tax
11. She presided over the closure of 150 coal mines; we are now crippled by the cost of energy, having to import expensive coal from abroad
12. She compared her “fight” against the miners to the Falklands War
13. She privatised state monopolies and created the corporate greed culture that we’ve been railing against for the last 5 years
14. She introduced the gradual privatisation of the NHS
15. She introduced financial deregulation in a way that turned city institutions into avaricious money pits
16. She pioneered the unfailing adoration and unquestioning support of the USA
17. She allowed the US to place nuclear missiles on UK soil, under US control
18. Section 28
19. She opposed anti-apartheid sanctions against South Africa and described Nelson Mandela as “that grubby little terrorist”
20. She support the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and sent the SAS to train their soldiers
21. She allowed the US to bomb Libya in 1986, against the wishes of more than 2/3 of the population
22. She opposed the reunification of Germany
23. She invented Quangos
24. She increased VAT from 8% to 17.5%
25. She had the lowest approval rating of any post-war Prime Minister
26. Her post-PM job? Consultant to Philip Morris tobacco at $250,000 a year, plus $50,000 per speech
27. The Al Yamamah contract
28. She opposed the indictment of Chile’s General Pinochet
29. Social unrest under her leadership was higher than at any time since the General Strike
30. She presided over interest rates increasing to 15%
31. BSE
32. She presided over 2 million manufacturing job losses in the 79-81 recession
33. She opposed the inclusion of Eire in the Northern Ireland peace process
34. She supported sanctions-busting arms deals with South Africa
35. Cecil Parkinson, Alan Clark, David Mellor, Jeffrey Archer, Jonathan Aitkin
36. Crime rates doubled under Thatcher
37. Black Wednesday – Britain withdraws from the ERM and the pound is devalued. Cost to Britain - £3.5 billion; profit for George Soros - £1 billion
38. Poverty doubled while she opposed a minimum wage
39. She privatised public services, claiming at the time it would increase public ownership. Most are now owned either by foreign governments (EDF) or major investment houses. The profits don’t now accrue to the taxpayer, but to foreign or institutional shareholders.
40. She cut 75% of funding to museums, galleries and other sources of education
41. In the Thatcher years the top 10% of earners received almost 50% of the tax remissions
42. 21.9% inflation
Pledge Of Allegiance of the Day: The Republican Party of Laurens County, South Carolina, last week unanimously passed a resolution requiring members who wish to run for public office to sign a pledge affirming that they were abstinent before marriage, that they are and will continue to be faithful to their spouse, that they are neither homosexual nor in favor of equal rights for same-sex couples, and that they will never again look at pornography.
The so-called “Resolution of The Laurens County Republican Party regarding The Qualifications of Candidates for the Primary Ballot” was approved by all 13 present members of the party’s executive committee at a meeting held last Tuesday.
An unidentified candidate who was present at the meeting said he was “puzzled” by the resolution, but the committee members refused to answer questions following the vote.
According to an unofficial report, a subcommittee consisting of three members will be responsible for ensuring that candidates meet the required criteria. It remained unclear how the party intended to “hold into account” candidates who ran afoul of the pledge.
Reached for comment, Laurens County Republican Party chairman Bobby Smith said the move was necessary to protect the party’s reputation.
“The party has been pushing for closed primaries,” Smith told the Clinton Chronicle. “People feel the platform has not been adhered to. We want candidates to believe in and uphold the party’s platform.”
The chairman released a statement today saying that, “due to various legal issues,” the party would not be allowed to force potential candidates who have met state qualifications to sign the pledge. However, the party “reserves the right to vet its candidates and will encourage all candidates to uphold the principles of the party’s platform as well as petition candidates to sign a pledge to do so.”
seriously, america. do these sound like sane, rational people that you want to elect to run your country? SERIOUSLY?
LOOK AT YOUR LIFE, LOOK AT YOUR CHOICES, ETC.
xoxo sassy british friend.
i always feel like the republicans’ definition of intellectual ‘elitism’ is being able to read and comprehend a domino’s menu.
YOU READ A WHOLE BOOK ONCE? ELITIST!

(via masterandservant)
It was freshman year in college, and just after winter break I started to have awful stomach pains. I couldn’t keep food down, yet my pants were a little tight. I thought maybe the freshman 15, but I played a sport and didn’t drink, so what was the deal?
I finally…
jesus. fucking. christ. i was blown away by the “$80 per month for the pill” just as much as i was by the fact that insurance doesn’t cover it. i get it for free currently but if i was paying, i would get a box of about 4months worth of them for £7.20-ish? it just stuns me that a supposedly civilised country would charge so much for something so cheap. this is the way we’re going to be headed if the conservatives continue to dismantle the NHS.
while we’re on the subject, what have conservatives got against poor people getting affordable healthcare? was it because of that dinner party that one time when the poor people didn’t compliment the dessert? jesus, those bitches hold a grudge..
(via brashblacknonbeliever)
Six GOP Co-Sponsors of PIPA Ask Reid to Cancel Vote
In an incredible turn of events, six Republican Senators have asked Majority Leader Harry Reid not to hold a vote onPIPA, the Senate version of SOPA.
They write, “Prior to committee action, some members expressed substantive concerns about the bill, and there was a commitment to resolve them prior to floor consideration. That resolution has not yet occurred.”
And as an amazing validation of the grassroots response to SOPA, led by groups like Fight for the Future, EFF, Public Knowledge, and Demand Progress, they write, “Since the mark-up, we have increasingly heard from a large number of constituents and other stakeholders with vocal concerns about possible unintended consequences of the proposed legislation, including breaches in cybersecurity, damaging the integrity of the Internet, costly and burdensome litigation, and dilution of First Amendment rights.”
Senators Charles Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Jeff Sessions, John Cornyn, Mike Lee, and Tom Coburn signed the letter.
Here’s the text of the letter. PDF is here.
January 13, 2012
Dear Majority Leader Reid:
We write to express our concerns with your decision to file cloture on the motion to proceed to the PROTECT IP Act (S, 968), We strongly believe that the theft of American intellectual property is a significant problem that must be addressed to protect property rights. However, for both substantive and procedural reasons, the process at this point is moving too quickly and this step may be premature.
As you know, on May 26. 2011. the Senate Judiciary- Committee favorably reported the bill by voice vote. Prior to committee action, some members expressed substantive concerns about the bill, and there was a commitment to resolve them prior to floor consideration. That resolution has not yet occurred.
Since the mark-up, we have increasingly heard from a large number of constituents and other stakeholders with vocal concerns about possible unintended consequences of the proposed legislation, including breaches in cybersecurity, damaging the integrity of the Internet, costly and burdensome litigation, and dilution of First Amendment rights. Moreover, in light of potential cybersecurity implications, we believe hearing from the Administration and relevant agencies is imperative, As always, our current fiscal crisis demands we carefully consider legislation that would cost taxpayers up to $48 million according to the Congressional Budget Office, These are serious issues that must be considered in an informed, deliberative and responsible manner. This underscores the need to resolve as many outstanding concerns as possible prior to proceeding to floor consideration.
Furthermore, we want to ensure that S. 968 will be afforded full and fair consideration on the Senate floor. It is important that the bill be fully debated and amendments not limited. We would like a firm commitment that once the Senate considers S. 968, the amendment process will be open, with senators being able to offer their amendments without the filling of the amendment tree, and that cloture will not be prematurely filed on the bin.
We are all in agreement that the online distribution and sale of pirated content and counterfeit goods impose a huge cost on the American economy in terms of lost jobs, lost sales, lost innovation and lost income. We also believe, however, that we need to arrive at the right solution in the right way on this important issue. To do so, we must have adequate time to properly analyze and resolve these concerns to the best extent possible prior to proceeding to the bill.
While we remain fully committed to addressing outstanding issues with S. 968, we believe that, at this point, the scheduled consideration of the bill on January 24, 2012, may not permit Oslo work through many of the concems that have been raised.
Sincerely,
Charles Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Jeff Sessions, John Cornyn, Mike Lee, Tom Coburn
UPDATE: And Sen. Ben Cardin [D, MD] adds his name to the list of co-sponsors walking back their support. Full up-to-date vote tally here.
UPDATE 2: Welcome, Reddit! We love you!
[via opencongress]
Take your pick.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the GOP.
This photoset makes my head hurt. And my heart.
What’s funny is I don’t know a Republican that can defend any of these idiots, like they’ve tried to talk shit about Obama to me and then I ask them about these idiots and they go silent.
Seriously, I knew four year olds with more common sense than these people who think they would be good presidents. I don’t understand how one could logically support any of them.
sighs so hard that my chest forcefully inverts itself and my respiratory system flies out of my mouth and comes to rest on my chest, pulsating like a dying deep sea fish
I’ll be 18 by the time the big election comes up
I think it won’t hurt to wait another four years…
(via runprettyrunaway)
—President Obama, in a statement today urging Republicans in Congress to extend the payroll tax cut (via barackobama)
(via twelvefootmountaintroll)
(via adistinguishedvillain)
News that Republican hopeful Newt Gingrich thinks child labor laws are “truly stupid,” and ‘poor kids’ have no ‘work ethic’ (rich kids, of course, are familiar with working their fingers to the bone in Newts world) and should be put to work as school janitors. Truly, the GOP presidential debate has been beyond parody.
What…?
and this is the front-runner, ladies and gentlemen.
america, for the love of all that is good - look at your life, look at your choices. the tories are already trying to bring in unpaid forced labour here, don’t let the republicans do the same there.
(via adistinguishedvillain)
Fox News has a new poll up. I think you know what to do.
TUMBLRRRRRRR BOOOOOMMMMB
(via agentlemanbastard)

![thedailywhat:
Pledge Of Allegiance of the Day: The Republican Party of Laurens County, South Carolina, last week unanimously passed a resolution requiring members who wish to run for public office to sign a pledge affirming that they were abstinent before marriage, that they are and will continue to be faithful to their spouse, that they are neither homosexual nor in favor of equal rights for same-sex couples, and that they will never again look at pornography.
The so-called “Resolution of The Laurens County Republican Party regarding The Qualifications of Candidates for the Primary Ballot” was approved by all 13 present members of the party’s executive committee at a meeting held last Tuesday.
An unidentified candidate who was present at the meeting said he was “puzzled” by the resolution, but the committee members refused to answer questions following the vote.
According to an unofficial report, a subcommittee consisting of three members will be responsible for ensuring that candidates meet the required criteria. It remained unclear how the party intended to “hold into account” candidates who ran afoul of the pledge.
Reached for comment, Laurens County Republican Party chairman Bobby Smith said the move was necessary to protect the party’s reputation.
“The party has been pushing for closed primaries,” Smith told the Clinton Chronicle. “People feel the platform has not been adhered to. We want candidates to believe in and uphold the party’s platform.”
The chairman released a statement today saying that, “due to various legal issues,” the party would not be allowed to force potential candidates who have met state qualifications to sign the pledge. However, the party “reserves the right to vet its candidates and will encourage all candidates to uphold the principles of the party’s platform as well as petition candidates to sign a pledge to do so.”
[chronicle / wlbg / tpm.]
seriously, america. do these sound like sane, rational people that you want to elect to run your country? SERIOUSLY?
LOOK AT YOUR LIFE, LOOK AT YOUR CHOICES, ETC.
xoxo sassy british friend.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0g0p45Dvn1qzpwi0o1_500.jpg)





