Why Is Maggie The Hate Victim?

[DangerUXD]

Surely the unions themselves begat the need for someone like MrsT to take action. If not her then it would have been necessary for someone else to sort the problem. So perhaps they should reserve their death partys for the likes of Scargill and Red Robbo, they wrecked the country.

[TWR]

My Views Em, instead of all these Tory's / that other shower with the nodding dog at the healm Libs, the Labour, started putting THIS FECKING country first instead of point scoring, This is Britain, Once was called Great Britain, Concern themsel'ves in putting things right here & sod the rest of the world, the likes of the so called 3rd World, this country is catching the 3rd world very quickly. Right Do gooders, lets have your views.

[naomi24]

Maggie is the hate victim because people tend to conveniently forget that prior to her premiership the population was sick of the unions continually holding the country to ransom to the extent that mounds of rubbish were left rotting in the streets and, most disgracefully, the bereaved were unable to bury their dead. That’s why Mrs T won three elections – and was never ousted by the electorate.

[jackthehat]

TWR - Maggie *did* put this country first.........and you don't appear to like her much, either!

[modeller]

TWR //she made people rich. //
Yes she made 2 million working class families rich by enabling them to buy their homes at knock down sale prices. Something Labour voted against again and again . Who were the first in the queue to buy these houses ?
The Labour councllors as soon as their council was conservative.!

[tiggerblue10]

Red Robbo did an excellent job of losing money.

//According to the BBC, "between 1978 and 1979 Mr Robinson was credited with causing 523 walk-outs at Longbridge, costing an estimated £200m in lost production".//

[jake-the-peg]

//That’s why Mrs T won three elections – and was never ousted by the electorate//

Like Tony Blair then?

[ummmm]

People are failing to look at the bigger picture. Their opinion are based on them, what she did to them, how she effected them....

Sod all to do with the country she was trying to run.

[sir.prize]

Sod all to do with the country she was trying to ruin.

Corrected your typo, ummmm.

[jake-the-peg]

She wasn't trying to run the country - she was trying to change it

That's the problem

[TWR]

TWR - Maggie *did* put this country first.........and you don't appear to like her much, either! Is this the reason why the majority of So called British Companies are Owned by Overseas? Is this why we are importing Gas from abroad, Is this why we are getting coal from Oz>> Argentina> Yes she did put British Millionaires first, & feck the rest.

[jackthehat]

Does anyone have a brick wall handy...........?

[ummmm]

I have quite a few, Jack.

[ummmm]

Now I've just read TWR's answer and errrrrrrr lol

[Baldric]

Thank you TWR, you illustrate the point perfectly that the Havenots will always envy the Haves without a moments thought of the time and effort that goes into becoming a Have, something that MT made possible for anyone who could motivate themselves for long enough!

[tiggerblue10]

Yes, she was trying to change the country.....for the better.

[Bazile]

So far i've refrained from posting on the death of Margaret Thatcher .

However it seems to me that people fall into two obvious camps .
Those who hated her and those worshipped her .

Which side of the fence you are leaning against, it would appear, is dictated by how her policies affected you , or your family / relatives / friends .
There were winners and losers under her premiership and resultant effects of her policies .

What's not in dispute is that she had her views on particular issues and pursued policies robustly to bring about what she beleived in - in a lot of cases appearing not to care about those who fell by the wayside - and a lot did so fall along the wayside .

There are those on here who will have nothing bad said about her , and that is their right to have that opinion - however equally there are those who reserve the right to voice their criticisms and their voices should not be stifiled .

Clearly those who think that MT was the best thing since slice bread are not going to have their opinions changed by those who think that she was an incredibly devisive premier - and vice versa .

Last time i checked , we remained a democracy and are still allowed to voice our political opinions .

Long may it remain that way .

Incidentally , what is the difference between a state funeral and the one that she will be having - giving that we are told that she will not be having a state funeral ?

[sir.prize]

Bazile - it seems there is very little difference between a state and ceremonial funeral.
A state funeral usually means exactly that - the body will lie in state prior to the funeral.

We certainly don't want that - Thatcher has been around long enough.!

[ummmm]

Being realistic....can one person run a country and please all the occupants?

No...!! so get over it people.

[chaptazbru]

Good post Bazile ...

[LazyGun]

@bazile - the difference is subtle, I think, and comes down to lying in state for 3 days or not, pretty much..

I would agree that many who argue either for or against Thatchers legacy will be doing so largely through personal experience - but of course, that is pretty much what informs all of us when we go into the ballot box.

And it is indisputable that she was a divisive figure - the comments here attest to that...