Shattered man of steel goes home
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1375644,00.html

One customer at the Methodist's lunch club (nick-named Food for Thought) had surfed the city's Sheffield Forum website, where pro- and anti-Blunkett comments run neck-and neck. Repeatedly, messages took the MP to task for his hard-line approach at the Home Office, one saying: "We can only hope he's blown it - then the chances of us living in a police state in the near future may just decline a bit."

That quote was made on the forum by the user 'evildrneil', see the original at this link (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=224908#post224908)

You can read the full story at the link above or if you have the print edition it's in there too I believe.

PS. Thanks to the sandal wearing teacher who informed me about this - j/k :P

And did I get a mention in the paper - I bet not :p

Personally I would have prefered they used http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=237439#post237439 instead!!!!

Shame it wasn't a t020 post quoted instead, I bet he would have been thrilled to be quoted in his favourite newspaper!!

I'm not sure whether some of his comments (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=231592#post231592) are printable... but hey, let's not get off-topic - let's enjoy the 15 minutes of fame!

You can`t moan about free advertising, I bet that put a smile on your face seeing that Geoff!

You and your band of trusty followers will soon be ready for world domination! :heyhey:

It's on page 8 of the main newspaper, top of the page.

(Finally managed to get my hands on a copy)

Originally posted by nuf_said
Today I met a Guardian journalist at Firth Park - he was canvassing public opinion about David Blunkett. He said he hadn't found anyone with a bad word for him.
Of course I referred him to the Sheffield Forum as an easier way to get public opinions than pounding the streets in Firth Park.
I think his article is published tomorrow (Friday).

I wonder if it was me talking to the Guardian Journalist, that lunchtime, that got him to look at the Forum site.

Originally posted by Geoff
Shattered man of steel goes home
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1375644,00.html

One customer at the Methodist's lunch club (nick-named Food for Thought) had surfed the city's Sheffield Forum website, where pro- and anti-Blunkett comments run neck-and neck. Repeatedly, messages took the MP to task for his hard-line approach at the Home Office, one saying: "We can only hope he's blown it - then the chances of us living in a police state in the near future may just decline a bit."

That quote was made on the forum by the user 'evildrneil', see the original at this link (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=224908#post224908)

You can read the full story at the link above or if you have the print edition it's in there too I believe.

PS. Thanks to the sandal wearing teacher who informed me about this - j/k :P

typical grauniad going for the most hyberbolic reactionary post :D

I did actually write a response the the article (well to the use of the quote) but they weren't interested so I'll post it here for your interest, edification and to give y'all a laugh!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was with somewhat mixed feelings that I read about the resignation of David Blunkett. Yes, this is the same person who some weeks ago wrote “We can only hope he’s blown it – then the chances of us living in a police state in the near future may just decline a bit”. So why do I have this ambivalence over the resignation? Am I backtracking on my earlier, admittedly rather hyperbolic, statement; bowing to a wave of sympathy or even worrying that not being a fan of Mr B in Sheffield may not be a great popularity trait?
The answer to all these questions is a resounding no.
While I will quite happily admit that I found Mr Blunkett (along with the rest of the current junta) to be excessively autocratic and authoritarian, his leaving was a result for no one but the tabloid media. While it is tempting to claim that those who live by the tabloid should die by the tabloid, this isn’t really how I would want to see things done in a democratic country.
My, possibly naïve, view of social structure is that the populace should hold ultimate political power, with politicians elected to represent their constituents and the media informing the public on current events to allow them to make informed choices on how effectively their employees are performing. However the more I look at the current state of society, the less like this ideal it seems to be. The media is not an impartial source of information but more and more a source of politically partisan commentary. The politicians pander to the lowest common denominator tabloids with populist and reactionary schemes. Long term planning, vision and integrity have been sacrificed in the scramble for headlines. Is it any wonder then that with no reliable and impartial information and a monolithic political system that all but ignores populace, apathy and disenchantment with the current political system are rife? After all if “no matter who you vote for the government gets in” then why bother voting at all?
How does this general, and rather bleak, political view relate back to my earlier ‘police state’ hyperbole? It all boils down to one simple word – responsibility. A political system that continually tries to control and contain its electorate takes away both its freedoms and just as importantly its responsibilities. Indeed the two concepts are irrevocably linked in my mind, as without responsibility you can never have true freedom. One of the most important freedoms we have is the freedom to fail. By failing at something we learn and progress, by blaming some outside body for our failings we stagnate and become more and more reliant on these outside bodies. If there is a reliance on some outside body to take responsibility for the smooth running of society, then society loses all internal cohesion and rather than being a structure of the people it becomes a structure imposed on the people. This only increases the distance between the individual and society, and if individuals have no stake in society why expect them to work to support it.
Responsibility is also required within the parliamentary process. Politicians are elected to represent their constituents not their party of affiliation. If a government, especially one with over sixty percent of the seats in parliament, needs to use whips and guillotine motions to force through their policies in a rather patronising “we know what’s best for you” manner, what hope have they of convincing a sceptical public that their policies are the right ones? These activities simply change the ideal of government that is of the people, for the people and by the people to a government that is of the state, for the state and by the state, and that is a very dangerous road to travel.