"How would you describe an unemployed single mother, with moderate depression, who can’t afford new shoes for her children, and whose roof is leaking? The Prime Minister calls her a “neighbour from hell”, and argues that she, and people like her, are part of a “culture of disruption and irresponsibility.”"
Cameron is not evil: just lazy, stupid and irresponsible.

Goebels lives and is a speech writer for the Tories.

Where's your reference to what he said Jeremy ?

I found this

http://blogs.independent...pology/comment-page-14/

where they report

"Late last year, the Prime Minister made an important speech about “troubled families”:

“That’s why today, I want to talk about troubled families. Let me be clear what I mean by this phrase. Officialdom might call them ‘families with multiple disadvantages’. Some in the press might call them ‘neighbours from hell’.

---

i.e. he didn't call them neighbours from hell.

Where are these poor people you mention? The hard working lowly paid or the stay at home depressed.
Regards,
lestrem.

Hi,
'Depression' and 'bad back' syndrome epitomise the 'give me disability payments culture' so prevelant in todays welfare society. 'Poor people' are living in Somalia and starving to death. Not here while they drink their extra strong lager whilst watching their huge televisions before jumping in their motor cars to drive to the airport to catch a plane to sunnier climes. I feel sorry for the people who are working hard to subsidise these con merchants.
Regards,
Graham.

Peter,

I agree with cutting waste and excessive payments as do most sane people. The 9 billion figure is one I can not find supported.

To put it in perspective (for Graham also). David Cameron said the benefits fraud and errors costs us 5.2 billion a year. What he did not break down was the split which does not flatter his government or the previous. Between 1 and 1.5 billion in fraud and 3.7 and 4.2 billion in errors made by the benefits agencies. Both these should be reduced as they are a waste.

There again between 56 and 70 billion goes in tax evasion and avoidance. The Lidem backed Tories are demonizing the working class, not as unbelievably as Graham does talking about the working class in terms extrapolated from individuals. When do you here them criticizing the privileged class in the same way - should they be demonized as all like Lord Ashcroft who avoids billions in tax and has shady dealings both in and outside the UK .

Who do I sympathise most with the single mother who works a few hours in the black economy for food and clothes that her benefits can't cover or Lord Green who avoids millions of tax by transferring all assets outside the UK to his wife or the privileged few who keep illicit offshore bank accounts. Where is the biggest payback for society.

Ian,

You embarrass yourself by such hideous comments.

Now, for a quote, how about the Cameron one from the press (I think the Mirror or was it the Sun) after some of his mistruths were identified from checking Hansard - "More whoppers than Burger King" far more accurate, not made up and just amusing even if you don't agree!

Lets keep out of the gutter.

Foggiest

You see - there you go again. Its clearly OK to use fictitious quotes but lampooning those that use them is clearly beyond the pale.

You were probably one of the people who complained about Jeremy Clarkson's remark that strikers should be shot.

Ian,

Read the two quotes - others will and draw their own conclusion.

Please stop embarrassing yourself.

Oh and I don't think Jeremy Clarkson warranted anyone giving him any serious consideration personally so I was not one of the complainers.

Now will you be big enough to apologise (as you suggested to Jeremy) for accusing me of "fictitious" quoting having read the following?

This is the source (a little long but I am sure you will want to verify it all)
http://www.mirror.co.uk/...three-lies-in-30-287770
David Cameron was accused of “playing fast and loose with the truth” yesterday after he was caught out misleading MPs THREE times.
He told all three whoppers in the space of just 30 minutes during Prime Minister’s questions earlier this week.
Mr Cameron wrongly claimed that more people were in work, denied that disabled children would have their benefits cut, and duped MPs about support for NHS reforms.
The PM told the Commons there “are more people in work now than at the last election”.
But recent employment figures from the independent Office for National Statistics show that the number in work has fallen by 26,000 since May 2010.
Total employment for full-time, part-time and temporary workers in May-July 2010 was 29,145,000, but the number fell to 29,119,000 for September-November 2011.
Mr Cameron then went on to bluntly deny that the Government’s welfare reforms would slash benefits to disabled children.
He told Labour MP Anne McGuire she was “just plain wrong” when she asked: “Is reducing benefits for disabled children by over £1,300 a year something that reflects the Prime Minister’s often repeated mantra that we are all in this together?”
Yet the Department for Work and Pensions’ assessment on the new universal credit says the rate paid to disabled children will fall from £53.84 to £26.75 a week.
And independent fact-finders Full Fact has said: “Ms McGuire is correct to state that some disabled children’s benefits are being reduced by over £1,300 a year.”
Mr Cameron then quoted Doncaster GP Dr Greg Conner to defend his NHS reforms.
But he failed to mention that Dr Conner’s remarks were made when he was chairman of the Doncaster clinical commissioning group – a position he no longer holds.
The PM’s misleading comments could fall foul of the Ministerial Code.
Shadow Minister Michael Dugher said: “You get more whoppers from David Cameron than from Burger King.
“He either can’t be bothered to get his facts right or, as The Mirror reveals, he just plays fast and loose with the truth. It goes to show how arrogant and out of touch he is.”

I think that the reference to 120,000 families to be a massive underestimate.

Jeremy has set out an example with no detail of background or circumstance.

I agree that the leaking roof is down to the landlord, a local authority perhaps, otherwise the LA would have been after a private landlord quicker than you could say Jack Rob(inson).

Foggiest

You show the impressive arrogance combined with naivety by first suggesting - twice - that I should be embarrassed by expressing a view and second by expressing shock horror at politicians' economy with the truth.

The arrogance I can overlook by attributing it to bad manners. I can't explain the latter as your ability to spew out quotes and statistics is impressive - or is it ability with the copy and paste facility and The Guardian's website?