Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Mr Cameron, you are a hypocrite of the highest order!

So, today we learn that Cameron, the man who has been banging on so sanctimoniously for weeks about the MP’s expenses scandal, who says, ‘I don’t care if it was within the rules. I want them to claim what is reasonable to do their job, not the maximum they can get away with’, got the tax payer to pay the £350,000 mortgage on the home he bought in his constituency in Oxfordshire in 2001. And, within 4 months of taking out this taxpayer funded mortgage he pays off the £75,000 mortgage on his London home.

The obvious issue raised in the papers today is that if he had used this £75,000 to reduce the amount he needed to borrow to buy this luxurious second home in Oxfordshire he would have saved the taxpayer over £22,000. Surely, an additional question Mr Cameron needs to answer, in the light of his blatant attempts to use this scandal to curry favour with the voters and paint himself whiter than white, and his rants that MPs should only claim what is reasonable to do their job, exactly how does he justify asking the taxpayer to buy him a luxury second home in Oxfordshire? Firstly, does he need a second home in Oxfordshire? The last time I looked Oxfordshire is well within a 2 hour commute from London; a commute that is performed by thousands, at their own expense, 5 days a week. Secondly, if he does need a second home to perform his duties adequately, does it need to be such a luxurious and expensive home or is it the case that he is taking the opportunity to fleece the taxpayer for as much as he can get away with?

Mr Cameron, please sit down and shut up! You are as much a sleazebag and a thief as all the rest of them!

Comments

  • I'm fed up with this board becoming dominated with threads like this.

    Rather than making a point on a sperate thread - why can't it go in one of the MP expenses threads?
  • Maybe Cameron was in tune with his erstwhile leaders sentiments when Thatcher said: 'There's no such things as society, only individual men and women, and families'.
    With this every man for himself philosophy, Cameron is surely looking out for number one, himself (and his family), fits in perfectly with Thatchers stated Tory philosophy. I know Cameron is not the only one on the fiddle, and the Tories not the only party. However as the Tories have clearly stated everyone for themselves and bugger society, they are less hypocritical than the 'socialist' Labour MP's on the fiddle, who are members of a party that is supposed to be for communities and society.
    When Cameron and his cronies win the next election most of us are **cked, but if you're strong, young, selfish, healthy, and live in a gated community and drive an armoured car to a gated workplace, whilst having your goods delivered to your home you should be ok.
  • [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]I'm fed up with this board becoming dominated with threads like this.

    Rather than making a point on a sperate thread - why can't it go in one of the MP expenses threads?

    It is a separate and new point (Cameron's hypocrisy) and therefore it requires a separate thread!
  • But it's still part over the overall discussion of MPs expenses, so it doesn't require a separate thread. If it was a political forum then it might do, but it's not, so it doesn't.
  • Nothing Charlton to talk about so does it actually matter !!!!!! ffs
  • [cite]Posted By: aliwibble[/cite]But it's still part over the overall discussion of MPs expenses, so it doesn't require a separate thread. If it was a political forum then it might do, but it's not, so it doesn't.

    The point being raised in this thread is nothing to do with MPs expenses. It is about Camerons hypocrisy. Therefore, it requires a separate thread.

    As one of the numerous Rangers fans that post on this board stated when people expressed irritation at the number of threads dedicated to expressing support for Rangers FC, the clue is in the title, if it is of no interest to you don't read it.
  • Why would you want to talk about Rangers on a Charlton forum anyhoo? Surely there are plenty of Rangers forums out there? If its going to happen more often, can we have a seperate heading for Scottish football, so i can avoid it like the plague. Ta.
  • [cite]Posted By: KBslittlesis[/cite]Why would you want to talk about Rangers on a Charlton forum anyhoo? Surely there are plenty of Rangers forums out there? If its going to happen more often, can we have a seperate heading for Scottish football, so i can avoid it like the plague. Ta.

    I think I worded my posting badly here and I can see why you might think I am a Rangers fan! I actually detest Rangers. And, I agree with you, I think there are too many posts on here expressing support for them.
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: KBslittlesis[/cite]Why would you want to talk about Rangers on a Charlton forum anyhoo? Surely there are plenty of Rangers forums out there? If its going to happen more often, can we have a seperate heading for Scottish football, so i can avoid it like the plague. Ta.[/quote]

    JOCK FOOTBALL SHOULD BE HEADED "THE PUB LEAGUE"!
  • I'd have more time for Cameron if he actually had some ideas. He seems to be just sitting back, watching everything labour does turn to shit, and expecting to walk into power. Personally I don't like the man.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Three words for you all, Vote Nick Clegg
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: Valley_floyd_red[/cite]I'd have more time for Cameron if he actually had some ideas. He seems to be just sitting back, watching everything labour does turn to shit, and expecting to walk into power. Personally I don't like the man.[/quote]

    Thats what oppositions do. They never win elections, Governments lose them. The same could be directed at both Blair and Thatcher.



    [quote][cite]Posted By: SE7[/cite]Three words for you all, Vote Nick Clegg[/quote]

    Just find him irritating,not a scratch on Charles Kennedy (when sober) or David Steel.
  • Three words for you all, Vote Nick Clegg
    Hmmm.. I don't know, he doesn't impress me at all. The Government is in crisis, we are a country at war and given what is happening in Europe at the moment this should be one of the most exciting periods in British political history. Unfortunately parliamentary and constitutional reform (no matter how overdue and important) doesn't capture the public imagination. Where are the ideas?

    Cameron seems to be a bad Tory impersonation of Tony Blair.

  • Thats what oppositions do. They never win elections, Governments lose them. The same could be directed at both Blair and Thatcher.
    True, a good point but you seem to forget that it was John Major that lost the election for the Tories, not Thatcher. The Conservative government that "New" Labour took over from was in as bad a state as the current government is now. I would suggest that there is a difference in the way Labour packaged themselves and sold the New labour idea compared to the way Cameron is just arseing about, waiting to come to power at the oppositions expense.
  • I met a black postwoman the other day, she works in a nearly all white workforce, she told me her manager didn't get her to do any deliveries of the BNP leaflets, because he was a decent, sensitive and good bloke. Big up the GPO (are they still called that ?), yeah I know the BNP have manoevered themselves into a position where they can take advantage of election rules, and they have rights blah blah blah, but I find them to be a direct threat to myself and my family, and i get a great deal of comfort from the actions of that sorting office manager.
  • saw 'cameron' and thought our own legend colin cameron was being dug out!!
  • is this one of those threads where we just add nothing but random comments?
  • [cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]she told me her manager didn't get her to do any deliveries of the BNP leaflets, because he was a decent, sensitive and good bloke.

    So either someone else has to go round and do her job for her, or he just decided that laws surrounding elections are less important than his morals.

    Either way it's wrong.
  • [cite]Posted By: Stu of HU16[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]she told me her manager didn't get her to do any deliveries of the BNP leaflets, because he was a decent, sensitive and good bloke.

    So either someone else has to go round and do her job for her, or he just decided that laws surrounding elections are less important than his morals.

    Either way it's wrong.

    No, it's a 100% correct decision.

    It's calling being a good manager and all round top egg.
  • [cite]Posted By: Stu of HU16[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]she told me her manager didn't get her to do any deliveries of the BNP leaflets, because he was a decent, sensitive and good bloke.

    So either someone else has to go round and do her job for her, or he just decided that laws surrounding elections are less important than his morals.

    Either way it's wrong.

    I'm sure the white post men/women don't want to deliver that rubbish either. I think it's a sensitive decision and one well made.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!