Sith Lord, or PM of England?

Found on Facebook (praying that this attachment works):

Look CAREFULLY at the lower-right.

considering he's a politician, i'm betting he's both sith lord and prime minister

Why anyone voted conservative totally evades me. The current economic situation arose thanks to Thatcher era rules and policies (or lack of them actually...). I know Gordon is unpopular, but I think that he did quite alright considering the situation he inherited. Not to mention cameron is a complete t**t (I mean, all he does is repeat whatever comes out of rupert murdoch's mouth), someone like Boris Johnson would have been a better fit imo.

Rupert Murdoch.... *shudder*

This is the man who thinks that the internet should be owned by the highest bidder... and who has repeatedly demonstrated that he despises any sort of free thought or speech.

If Cameron's a mouthpiece for Murdoch, then Force aid us all!

Yeah well British people read his newspapers (the Sun, the Times), watch his TV (sky). His biggest competitor in the UK is the BBC. Great. Anyway he's responsible for the UK's public opinion, the reason why I wish people would vote UKIP, so that the rest of europe can be freed from that man's influence.

And to set the record, he's the only man on earth I would be happy to kill, as he obviously is a greater threat to my people than some terrorist bomber/pilot/president-of-Iran/North-korea-as-a-whole/etc.

so that means that murdoch is the sith lord and cameron is his apprentice...one has all the persuasive skills to subliminally push his agenda from the shadows while the other holds a public office to make the agenda effective....

i never vote conservative...it always seems to me that the conservatives always have a secret agenda to push that usually revolves around their own religious ideals. not to mention clinging to the past prevents progress towards the future...i'm a firm believer that church and state should absolutely remain seperate. look at some of the issues we have here in the states...many of them are tied to some religious groups influence, thus violating that very concept

so that means that murdoch is the sith lord and cameron is his apprentice

Not even apprentice... Think about it, darth Vader was an apprentice AND a pretty cool bad guy. There's nothing cool about Cameron: Even when he seats on a quattro's bonnet he looks like an idiot

sometimes a puppet looks the part :laugh:

LOL, I can *totally* see Cameron singing \"I got no strings\" (the Pinocchio song of Disney fame)!

with murdoch in the background smiling like stewie griffin saying \"dance puppet, dance\" :laugh: :laugh:

Had i not been attached to machinery and unable to vote - id have voted UKIP

Reasons are thus - Brown was a bad leader - he had a bad track track record, ignorant, arrogant - calling the people he SERVES and is EMPLOYED by 'bigots' - let alone leading the biggest criminal organisation in recent history (ministers expenses scams) - and final point - he was NEVER elected leader by the UK populous. For the record, i dont think labour did a terrible job in some cases, they probably did as well as well as any other party in the same circumstances, with the exception of the war in iraq - once it was realised that was wrong - something should have been done.

Lib Dems - well, I live in Torbay and they ran the area as a unitary authority and to cut a long story short, they balls it up - if they cant run a town, no way can they run a country

As for the the conmen - or conservatives - ok, they have a bad track record, but which party doesnt? Its all well n good harping back to the day of Magic Maggie - no matter what you think of her - she got things done and she sure as hell made sure the United Kingdom defended its territory - do you imagine cameron n co fighting argentina again (outside of the world cup btw).

I think the 'hung' parliament maybe a good thing if its allowed to develop - sure gonna be problems and arguing - whats new there? but maybe, just maybe, in the long term, the government will actually function as its supposed to and thats for the people and not a few rich old people who buy/steal their way to power - and hopefully the house of lords will also see a clean sweep.

What many fail to appreciate is that democracy is always an illusion and it nearly always only works in favour of the rich and powerful.

MTFBWY - A

Go to europe. See how people there directly elect their leader, often through two runs (making sure that it's the voters who decide of coalitions, not party leaders) instead of some dodgy parliamentary system that's even worse than america's college system. And did I mention? Citizens from other countries don't have a say in politics over there.
I'm not saying that the UK should adopt a presidential system, but when the labour party gets 258 seats with 29% of the votes and the Libdems only get 57 seats with 23% of the votes, you have to realise there's a serious problem, that the people's will isn't being fairly represented, and most importantly that gordon brown should have never been PM in the first place. And cameron shouldn't be PM either. When no majority was reached, they should have made a new run between the torries and labour (as both got most votes), so libdem, ukip, bnp, snp, pirate, etc voters could decide who they'd rather see as pm, instead of letting the party leader resell the vote (which is exactly what clegg did, and fear of this is probably why people didn't vote for him as much as was expected). Cameron would have probably won anyway, but still, it's about doing things the right way.

The processes of democracy only work when transparent.

The only reason that the \"rich\" people get into office is that they rely on the lack of transparency in the system, combined with the fact that they have enough money to make anything negative spin in their favour.

True democracy is very difficult to implement, because of the tendency for people to try to show just how \"weak\" it is because it's slow. Delegating power to more local areas works well, so long as everyone is fairly elected. And in appearance, the only real difference between a pure democracy and pure communism is the fact of individual ownership.

I'm in favour of democracy, all the way.

Kana Seiko Haruki wrote:

What many fail to appreciate is that democracy is always an illusion and it nearly always only works in favour of the rich and powerful.

MTFBWY - A

how tragically true, this goes back to the modified golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules...

nowhere is this more apparent then in the states, look at how many billions get spent by \"special interest groups\" in order to get a favorable vote. that's part of the reason for the economic collapse...businesses getting their way for far too long...sooner or later it had to catch up, now congress is putting on a series of puppet shows in an attempt to shift blame from thier policies to those that benefitted from them...much like the oil spill in the gulf...the public didn't want oil drilling to occur in the gulf, but congress approved it...now that the feces has hit the fan, congress is putting on a puppet show to blame bp(who should share the blame, but not be blamed solely)....

congress: \"here kiddies watch my left hand\"(grabs a bunny with their right hand and places it in a hat)\"that's right keep watching the left hand\"(reaches in the hat with their left hand)\"ta da, a bunny rabbit\"
kids: \"oooh, aaaah\"(clapping)

I reserve the right to disagree.