This was a bit of an eye opener as well, WTF are they doing with the money ?
A Department for International Development programme that was supposed to create 29,000 jobs in Sierra Leone by this year has created just 16.
In a crowded field, that's going to be a very strong candidate for 'the most stupid point made by any journalist in 2015'.
I mean, I know Gerald Warner is a nutcase of the highest order, but, really? Sierra Leone? This guy is a journalist, and therefore you might think he'd have at least a passing acquaintance with what newspapers have been reporting over the last year or so, and yet no neuron fires in what passes for his brain when he hears that there has been a bit of a problem with creating jobs in Sierra Leone?
Because if his reply is broadcast, the electorate will recognise the name of Salmond as the big bad farmer Jones - and we don't want Jones back do we? (c) J Orwell Animal Farm
Eh? If you're going to crowbar in an Animal Farm analogy, you presumably accept Cameron & Milliband as Napoleon & Snowball, and a denoument where pigs & humans come to an 'arrangement'.
The voters outside looked from ConLibLab to Nat, and from Nat to ConLibLab, and from ConLibLab to Nat again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Because if his reply is broadcast, the electorate will recognise the name of Salmond as the big bad farmer Jones - and we don't want Jones back do we? (c) J Orwell Animal Farm
If all goes well for the SNP and badly for labour than Salmond will be the one dealing in Parliament with Miliband - unless we vote Tory.
All those ifs buts and maybes. Mr Salmond is not the party leader in Scotland and will not necessarily be the party leader in the Commons - Angus Robertson is.
Mr Salmond is being used as a deliberage bogey figure to whip up hysteria. As seen on PB today, as Dr Spyn rightly comments.
Just read the Wings Over Scotland "10 Good Reasons" article and in particular the comments sections.
Parties are to used to getting away with this sort of rubbish and expecting the idiot electorate to buy into it.
One thing the indyref has probably achieved more than anything is to engage the electorate enough to smash historic tribal voting habits and get voters to choose based on facts not BS propaganda.
Would love a similar process to happen here. Could see it happening in the midlands and North during the next parliament if Labour are not in opposition.
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
Isam can answer for himself - but I think it was about 10 mins ago, when we both agreed that he should have picked Cameron up on the Salmond blunder.
This may be just me, but whenever I hear that hectoring/six-form tone - I imagine having a domestic with him. I go cold and think 'what a pillock'.
He just doesn't sound PMish - just petulant and complaining. I hated it when Tony did the same c1995/96. He annoyed me immensely I turned off the radio when he was on. Then he changed his tone and I was converted.
I hate whiners. EdM is a whiner. Until he changes that and becomes a leader he's media toast IMO. I don't give a toss about the supposed Flashman Cameron - he's a leader and full of confidence, I want someone like that standing up for us as a nation.blockquote class="Quote" rel="chestnut">
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Well it looks like the thread splits down the middle when it comes to Clarkson. Those on the Right-the followers of Guido-think it's OK to smack an underling in the mouth because he hasn't brought your dinner on time and those on the left plus the nicest of Tories such as JohnO disagree
Interesting. Do you have a link to any report that he 'smacked an underling in the mouth'? Everyone else seems to think a punch was merely thrown, without connecting.
It's hardly a 'Prescott', and many on the Left loved that.
(Clarkson is *extremely* litigious BTW).
In the world of meejah, it is well known that "the talent' gets cut slack that others would not get in the workplace. Sport is the same. Football players who punch or kick others in front of thousands of witnesses get a brief suspension even when inflicting severe injury , but then are welcome on BBC MOTD as pundits.
Politics is not far behind. In what other business are people who have cheated on expenses rehabilitated so quickly to the front line, or even peerages.
Clarkson can be a dickhead but a bit of handbags should not be a hanging offence.
Various people, MPs Lords, are in jail or went to jail for illegally claiming expenses. No one actually claimed for duck houses or moat cleaning. The one other obvious blatant lie I can immediately recall was Smith claiming her sister's back bedroom was her first home. But even here this was allowed by the expenses office. So called 'flipping' was allowed by the expenses office. As I recall when the drunken Labour MP punched someone the police were called in and he was sacked from the Labour Party.
Alaistair Campbell often appears on the BBC. A far more dangerous and offensive man than Clarkson.
And how many Nokias and printers sufferred under the Brown regieme?
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Because if his reply is broadcast, the electorate will recognise the name of Salmond as the big bad farmer Jones - and we don't want Jones back do we? (c) J Orwell Animal Farm
Eh? If you're going to crowbar in an Animal Farm analogy, you presumably accept Cameron & Milliband as Napoleon & Snowball, and a denoument where pigs & humans come to an 'arrangement'.
The voters outside looked from ConLibLab to Nat, and from Nat to ConLibLab, and from ConLibLab to Nat again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Well Napoleon (Stalin) came to an agreement with the humans - Snowball (Trotsky) was run out of town. And Jones (The Tsar) was never actually in the final scene as he had died earlier. So you're not quite correct. Perhaps UAF can take the part of the dogs, the WWC as Boxer/ Clover and Rowan Williams as Moses.
I think you are reading too much into the allegory - Jones is symptomatic of all scapegoats used by politician to muster their support.
Just read the Wings Over Scotland "10 Good Reasons" article and in particular the comments sections.
Parties are to used to getting away with this sort of rubbish and expecting the idiot electorate to buy into it.
One thing the indyref has probably achieved more than anything is to engage the electorate enough to smash historic tribal voting habits and get voters to choose based on facts not BS propaganda.
Would love a similar process to happen here. Could see it happening in the midlands and North during the next parliament if Labour are not in opposition.
That's why the potential SNP involvement in English politics is so interesting, if the SNP can get past the media blockade to demonstrate some of their thinking and policies to southron voters and initiate a shake-up. There's more than one way to skin a cat, and some are more cunning than others - especially those who leave the opponent to make the mistakes.
Telling that Ed didn't seem to notice. Should have called him out for it straightaway. i.e. he takes so much notice of Scotland that he doesn't even know who the leader of the SNP is.
Yeah he should have pulled him, shows he doesn't think on his feet quick enough
Bad error by Cameron
Don't be daft. Everyone has heard of Salmond and links him with the SNP. No one has heard of the other wee lady. Bad errors are when a leader blames immigrants for traffic jams going to Wales when in fact the ratio of car ownership has shot up over the last 20 years - with more women driving than ever.
Ah ok, the prime Minister deliberately makes mistakes to mislead the public I get it
Get your tongue out of his bum ting tong, everyone makes mistakes
You are the @rse licker. Glad to see you repeating the kipper racial slur of choice. The Tory election poster makes use of Salmond and its Salmond that would be calling labour's shots in Westminster.
Umpteen attacks on the SNP by Cameron and another henchman at PMQs but not a single SNP member called by the Speaker. Still, the attacks on the SNP are already an attack on about half the people of Scotland, so the end of the Union becomes ever more likely.
I can see the elite already working on the excuses to deny the SNP (if they are the third party) the privileged treatment the LibDems enjoyed for their leader when they were on the Opposition side of the house.
Because if his reply is broadcast, the electorate will recognise the name of Salmond as the big bad farmer Jones - and we don't want Jones back do we? (c) J Orwell Animal Farm
Eh? If you're going to crowbar in an Animal Farm analogy, you presumably accept Cameron & Milliband as Napoleon & Snowball, and a denoument where pigs & humans come to an 'arrangement'.
The voters outside looked from ConLibLab to Nat, and from Nat to ConLibLab, and from ConLibLab to Nat again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
easy peasy, Nicola's the which :-)
White which with tartan trimmings, preferrably not on a wrecking ball though.
Telling that Ed didn't seem to notice. Should have called him out for it straightaway. i.e. he takes so much notice of Scotland that he doesn't even know who the leader of the SNP is.
Yeah he should have pulled him, shows he doesn't think on his feet quick enough
Bad error by Cameron
Don't be daft. Everyone has heard of Salmond and links him with the SNP. No one has heard of the other wee lady. Bad errors are when a leader blames immigrants for traffic jams going to Wales when in fact the ratio of car ownership has shot up over the last 20 years - with more women driving than ever.
Ah ok, the prime Minister deliberately makes mistakes to mislead the public I get it
Get your tongue out of his bum ting tong, everyone makes mistakes
You are the @rse licker. Glad to see you repeating the kipper racial slur of choice. The Tory election poster makes use of Salmond and its Salmond that would be calling labour's shots in Westminster.
They were talking about who will be in the debates, Cameron said SNP and Salmond.. If the SNP were in them it would be Sturgeon.
A simple factual error from Cameron which you can't accept is possible so have to crowbar in an attack on Ukip
Because if his reply is broadcast, the electorate will recognise the name of Salmond as the big bad farmer Jones - and we don't want Jones back do we? (c) J Orwell Animal Farm
Eh? If you're going to crowbar in an Animal Farm analogy, you presumably accept Cameron & Milliband as Napoleon & Snowball, and a denoument where pigs & humans come to an 'arrangement'.
The voters outside looked from ConLibLab to Nat, and from Nat to ConLibLab, and from ConLibLab to Nat again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
easy peasy, Nicola's the which :-)
White which with tartan trimmings, preferrably not on a wrecking ball though.
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Poor research Flix
Newsflash - not everyone can waste their time reading your current rubbish let alone the older ones. And it hardly qualifies against the substantive point. you worship Ed because you think it will help your other idol Nige.
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
Yet the BBC suspends their most popular presenter, who earns the BBC £300m - thus subsidising the license fee - for "aiming a punch" at a producer.
Most employers would suspend staff for a fracas. Arguably, in another world, you would criticise the BBC for not suspending JC, giving him special treatment because he is such a cash cow.
Lots of people will always hope for the best and plan for the worst. And, if you're a man, divorces seem bloody lopsided and really rather sexist, [the case today is indefensible and against all common sense].
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Poor research Flix
Ok - so we don't have a shared sense of time ...
Ha I had to be accurate else he would have tried to use that as a distraction rather than admit defeat!
But thanks for backing me up, I appreciate it.. a rare occurrence!
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
'And thus spake Sunil unto his PB disciples: "Know ye that the Lord God was NOT married to the mother of His only begotten Son!"' - Psunils, 11:3:15.
Ed name calling at PMQs, what will his wife think?
Again, I don't get this approach from Ed with all the Flashman / bully stuff. We have been told this for 6 years about Cameron and the public don't really go for it.
I suspect most voters don't understand the Flashman reference since it's fairly antiquated. The last time I saw Tom Brown's Schooldays was in the seventies, I can't recall seeing it since.
Are younger voters are more likely to confuse it with Flashheart from Blackadder which if anything has vaguely positive connotations.
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
I can see the elite already working on the excuses to deny the SNP (if they are the third party) the privileged treatment the LibDems enjoyed for their leader when they were on the Opposition side of the house.
The SNP could come sixth in national UK vote share, and certainly won't come higher than fourth. I would imagine that would have something to do with it, after all the Short money is already calculated on the basis of a combination of votes and seats.
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Poor research Flix
Newsflash - not everyone can waste their time reading your current rubbish let alone the older ones. And it hardly qualifies against the substantive point. you worship Ed because you think it will help your other idol Nige.
If you can't be arsed to even check up on a basic fact you are criticising someone for then don't bother posting in the first place.
But of course given that you don't want facts to get in the way of your idiotic postings then it is hardly surprising you can't be bothered to check them.
so around 60 million people in the UK have not signed it and around 6 billion people worldwide have not signed , not a lot of support for Clarkson about is there ?
so around 60 million people in the UK have not signed it and around 6 billion people worldwide have not signed , not a lot of support for Clarkson about is there ?
Ed name calling at PMQs, what will his wife think?
Again, I don't get this approach from Ed with all the Flashman / bully stuff. We have been told this for 6 years about Cameron and the public don't really go for it.
I suspect most voters don't understand the Flashman reference since it's fairly antiquated. The last time I saw Tom Brown's Schooldays was in the seventies, I can't recall seeing it since.
Are younger voters are more likely to confuse it with Flashheart from Blackadder which if anything has vaguely positive connotations.
'Younger voters'? That episode was first aired c.1989 - though admittedly, clips of it were aired again following Rik Mayall's death. But I doubt either Flashheart or Flashman would mean much to anyone in their 20s.
so around 60 million people in the UK have not signed it and around 6 billion people worldwide have not signed , not a lot of support for Clarkson about is there ?
Same can be said for any online petition, so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
Because Salmond will lead the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is party leader but an MSP. In terms of who would prop Labour up in a conspiracy of the damned - that would be Salmond.
They were talking about the debates, and who should be in them. If the SNP are in them it will be sturgeon. Do it was wrong of Dave to reference Salmond
Wrong - your idol Mr. Miliband was talking about debates - while the Prime minister was talking about running the country. Would do you good to think about that.
Haha you shown your mindset for all to see... If you don't worship Dave you must be a lover of Ed
Times have changed old chap, get with it
Remind us the last time you criticized EdM at PMQs.
About 45 mins ago when I said he can't think on his feet
Poor research Flix
Newsflash - not everyone can waste their time reading your current rubbish let alone the older ones. And it hardly qualifies against the substantive point. you worship Ed because you think it will help your other idol Nige.
Nah, I just whacked your argument out of the ground and you can't face it
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
'vast majority' in fact = less than half.
On what basis.
Since I clearly said people "getting married today", and therefore on average getting divorced in 8 years time.
The overall divorce rate is currently 42%, but the average figure includes people in their 60's and 70's which have a very low divorce rate, conversely people who are "getting married today" must have a substantially higher divorce rate to balance the average.
so around 60 million people in the UK have not signed it and around 6 billion people worldwide have not signed , not a lot of support for Clarkson about is there ?
63 million people haven't joined the Lib Dems, and that's just in the UK alone.
Of all the stats to trot out on this issue this one takes the biscuit.
Ed name calling at PMQs, what will his wife think?
Again, I don't get this approach from Ed with all the Flashman / bully stuff. We have been told this for 6 years about Cameron and the public don't really go for it.
I suspect most voters don't understand the Flashman reference since it's fairly antiquated. The last time I saw Tom Brown's Schooldays was in the seventies, I can't recall seeing it since.
Are younger voters are more likely to confuse it with Flashheart from Blackadder which if anything has vaguely positive connotations.
'Younger voters'? That episode was first aired c.1989 - though admittedly, clips of it were aired again following Rik Mayall's death. But I doubt either Flashheart or Flashman would mean much to anyone in their 20s.
1989 was Blackadder Goes Forth.
Flashheart actually first appears in Blackadder II from 1986.
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
'vast majority' in fact = less than half.
On what basis.
Since I clearly said people "getting married today", and therefore on average getting divorced in 8 years time.
The overall divorce rate is currently 42%, but the average figure includes people in their 60's and 70's which have a very low divorce rate, conversely people who are "getting married today" must have a substantially higher divorce rate to balance the average.
Are there no stats which divide the rate into age groups? To me, 'vast majority' implies >90%!
so around 60 million people in the UK have not signed it and around 6 billion people worldwide have not signed , not a lot of support for Clarkson about is there ?
63 million people haven't joined the Lib Dems, and that's just in the UK alone.
Of all the stats to trot out on this issue this one takes the biscuit.
I am not leading a Clarkson love in on here We can be pretty sure that some would still support him even if he had been doing Saville type crimes
Fifth, when you ask people what are the actual advantages to men of being married, nobody can ever cite any that are not, in reality, financial advantages to his dependents when he dies.
Married men tend to live longer.
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
Sadly the average length of a marriage is now only about 8.5 years. In my nephews class of 28 in top juniors in rural England there are only two children that live with both their birth parents, which I must admit was a bit of a gob-smacker for me.
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
'vast majority' in fact = less than half.
On what basis.
Since I clearly said people "getting married today", and therefore on average getting divorced in 8 years time.
The overall divorce rate is currently 42%, but the average figure includes people in their 60's and 70's which have a very low divorce rate, conversely people who are "getting married today" must have a substantially higher divorce rate to balance the average.
There used to be a Labour Cabinet Minister who every time she appeared on TV or in spoke in parliament the most tedious of tedious Tory posters would refer to her shocking dress sense or some other sexist stuff for which PB Tories -of a certain type --used to enjoy. Fortunately since the rise of UKIP this has largely stopped. The UKIPers don't do it and most of those Tories are embarrassed to look more old fashioned than the UKIPers. But one or two of the posts today particularly referring to lisps remind me that one or two are still around
Comments
Ah, Tim "Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are not anti-intellectual" Stanley of the ever-slapworthy chipmunk-face, bless...
I mean, I know Gerald Warner is a nutcase of the highest order, but, really? Sierra Leone? This guy is a journalist, and therefore you might think he'd have at least a passing acquaintance with what newspapers have been reporting over the last year or so, and yet no neuron fires in what passes for his brain when he hears that there has been a bit of a problem with creating jobs in Sierra Leone?
Parties are to used to getting away with this sort of rubbish and expecting the idiot electorate to buy into it.
One thing the indyref has probably achieved more than anything is to engage the electorate enough to smash historic tribal voting habits and get voters to choose based on facts not BS propaganda.
Would love a similar process to happen here. Could see it happening in the midlands and North during the next parliament if Labour are not in opposition.
Poor research Flix
I checked - that does seem to be the approved spelling. But I forgot the rest - "... until I'm thick!"
And how many Nokias and printers sufferred under the Brown regieme?
If you are thinking ahead to the implications of divorce when you are contemplating getting married then you clearly shouldn't marry.
I think you are reading too much into the allegory - Jones is symptomatic of all scapegoats used by politician to muster their support.
Not sure where Mr Farage fits in, in all this.
The Tory election poster makes use of Salmond and its Salmond that would be calling labour's shots in Westminster.
"Kick the SNP day"
What a democratic farce Westminster is:
Umpteen attacks on the SNP by Cameron and another henchman at PMQs but not a single SNP member called by the Speaker. Still, the attacks on the SNP are already an attack on about half the people of Scotland, so the end of the Union becomes ever more likely.
I can see the elite already working on the excuses to deny the SNP (if they are the third party) the privileged treatment the LibDems enjoyed for their leader when they were on the Opposition side of the house.
.
A simple factual error from Cameron which you can't accept is possible so have to crowbar in an attack on Ukip
Pathetic ting tong
Whilst I agree completely in principle with what you say, the reality is that the vast majority of people getting married today, will get divorced at least once in their life.
I suspect they will work it out.
Mr. Me, really?
Lots of people will always hope for the best and plan for the worst. And, if you're a man, divorces seem bloody lopsided and really rather sexist, [the case today is indefensible and against all common sense].
But thanks for backing me up, I appreciate it.. a rare occurrence!
Are younger voters are more likely to confuse it with Flashheart from Blackadder which if anything has vaguely positive connotations.
But of course given that you don't want facts to get in the way of your idiotic postings then it is hardly surprising you can't be bothered to check them.
Though perhaps Hammond and May would have refused to do it (May could carry a couple of episodes I reckon)
Then announce his comeback to large hurrah and fanfare.
Who would, with the glowering PC eye watching your every move, and the possibility of a big fat offer from another network?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-31832177
Since I clearly said people "getting married today", and therefore on average getting divorced in 8 years time.
The overall divorce rate is currently 42%, but the average figure includes people in their 60's and 70's which have a very low divorce rate, conversely people who are "getting married today" must have a substantially higher divorce rate to balance the average.
Of all the stats to trot out on this issue this one takes the biscuit.
Flashheart actually first appears in Blackadder II from 1986.
The idea is loco. ; )
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/divorce/10622297/Marriage-stronger-than-for-a-generation-despite-increase-in-divorces.html