Are all the SNPers watching the Sainted Eck on Marr?
He has just confirmed again he is feart to debate Alastair Darling
I thought he said his preference was to firstly debate the Prime Minister and then Alastair Darling ??
Indeed - so when Cameron refuses (as Eck knows he will) will he debate Darling?
Cameron can only hide for so long, as the publicity gets worse and the unionists get taunted he will need to come out the bunker. Alex can wait and mock him and Flipper until then. Cameron should not be sending a boy to do a mans job.
Actually, no Cameron does not have to do what Salmond says.
Just as NATO, the EU and the Bank of England don't.
If the referendum was UK wide, then yes, the PM of the UK should debate with the FM of Scotland.
But it isn't.
Its a Scottish matter, for Scots, much as Salmond would like to have a 'posh English bloke telling the Scots how to vote', it ain't going to happen.
Cameron is Prime Minister of the UK. That includes Scotland.
No excuses. Cameron should debate Salmond.
And the First Minister is the leading politician in a small region. He's quite welcome to debate with the head of NI or the Welsh region if he wants.
Salmond has continually (even pre-debate) been pushing the line that he is Cameron's equal.
He's not. One is the leader of a country. Until the referendum the other is not.
There speaks a true toff and shows the same arrogance as Cameron, "a leading politician in a small region", you could not make it up. What a stupid arse you are , he has been pushing as you put it that he as the Head of the Scottish Government should debate with the head of the UK government , not an opposition back bencher. You show exactly why Tories are hated the length and breadth of the country, an ignorant pompous arse who believe him and others like him are above the majority of the people in the country solely down to the fact that they were born with a full set of silver spoons in their mouths.
We may need ALP to clarify the statistics, but I wouldn't take them at face value.
Londoners are younger than average Brits and more likely to be University graduates. Both these groups pay more income tax than average. The same people are likely to retire to the coast and pay less income tax, so the raw figures are quite misleading.
Similarly a lot of the money being earned in London is by commuters. Does this get attributed in GDP terms to London or to the Stockbroker belt? Likewise a company with HQ in London but branches all over the UK, does the companies earnings get attributed to the branches or to head office.
London's GDP cannot be meaningfully from the rest of the UK and the SE in particular.
But the next election will be won or lost in Loughborough and Broxtowe, not London.
I mention all this because I was reflecting about how strong Labour is in London. In today's Yougov they have a lead of 15% which is fairly typical. So strong economic growth (no one could pretend that London is not already booming)
London is sucking the rest of the country dry and it is down to government policy. Other than the SE and a few specific areas the boom will not happen. They are trying hard to make the UK the most unequal country in the world as they line their pockets.
Explain how London is sucking the rest of the country dry. (From a non-Londoner)
If you had read Davidl's post it was clearly shown , the growth there due to mainly government money is bleeding the rest of the country dry.
I didn't say that Malcolm and the truth is the reverse. A free standing London would have a budget surplus of about £20bn a year according to the article. I have no idea if the figures are right but if they pay 25% of all the IT in the country they may well be.
I mention all this because I was reflecting about how strong Labour is in London. In today's Yougov they have a lead of 15% which is fairly typical. So strong economic growth (no one could pretend that London is not already booming), high paid employment, fairly fantastic (compared to the rest of us) public services and high public investment in things like Crossrail and the Olympic sites are not winning the tories votes there. Even moving 2,000 BBC luvvies to Manchester has not made any difference.
Why not? I suspect that gross inequality is one of the reasons. Given the higher cost base being poor in London is being really poor and many live in really squalid housing conditions on incomes where they would be quite comfortable elsewhere.
The broader lesson is that an economic recovery that is very unequally shared may not garner as many votes for the tories as optimists like me wish to assume. The economic performance of London may be matched by the rest of the country by 2015 (at least in terms of growth) but it is a lazy assumption that this will turn the country blue. London is at least an example of how it won't.
London is sucking the rest of the country dry and it is down to government policy. Other than the SE and a few specific areas the boom will not happen. They are trying hard to make the UK the most unequal country in the world as they line their pockets.
Explain how London is sucking the rest of the country dry. (From a non-Londoner)
If you had read Davidl's post it was clearly shown , the growth there due to mainly government money is bleeding the rest of the country dry.
I didn't say that Malcolm and the truth is the reverse. A free standing London would have a budget surplus of about £20bn a year according to the article. I have no idea if the figures are right but if they pay 25% of all the IT in the country they may well be.
David, I put that badly , I meant that if he had read your post he would have seen that London was booming. The next bit was my opinion and not meant to represent you. Sloppy grammar , I apologise for any harm to your reputation.
I agree with JackW that Cameron should debate with Salmond. As PM of the United Kingdom he needs to show a commitment to the Union. I also think that Salmond's ability as a debater is somewhat overrated as a result of the numpties he has in competition with him in the Scottish Parliament.
On the other hand I do not see why debates with Darling should in any way conditional on the debate with Cameron taking place. That is just cowardice.
In fact Salmond performs badly at FMQs. He is regularly mauled by Lamont .
Salmond needs to debate Cameron because his Yes campaign is failing , therefore Cameron should refuse.
TBH I rarely watch it but the bits I hear on Yesterday in Parliament frequently include elected representatives who are incapable of framing a sentence, let alone a question. Salmond, who can do both, rather stands out in such company.
Lamont is ok but the idea that Cameron who copes pretty well with PMQs every week, has much to fear from Salmond as a debater is fairly ridiculous.
What this is about is playing the tory card in Scotland and making it seem that voting for the Union is a vote for the tories. The quality of debate has got nothing to do with it.
To declare an interest, my younger son lives not far from SeanT. When I stay with him, I meet his friends who are a multinational set aged 25-45 who are occupying a lot of the top jobs in London as they are mobile, aspirational and more competent and capable that many of the UK applicants. They are also multilingual and are ready to move and take their families to where the next best opportunity will be.
This multinational set create an aspirational buzz which is very motivating and so evident in contrast to the depressing "why wont the jobs come to us" attitude found in so much of the UK.
London is also the financial heart of the UK and Europe - where else will I find merchant banks that will back large trading ventures, without me contributing a penny.
All capital and successful cities have richness and poverty living cheek-by-jowl - it was always thus. However, this success can be collapsed by over-taxation which would make the wealth creators depart and so leave tens of thousands of people who they employed without jobs.
What large trading ventures do these merchant banks back? I am genuinely interested as I see some private equity/VC activity in certain sectors - more than in most other parts of Europe, but nothing like levels in the US - but very little banking investment in anything other than new financial instruments and the like. This certainly creates wealth for a few folk, but doesn't do much for the wider economy.
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
As the referendum gets closer, and the yes campaign seems stuck at 40%, Alex will need to debate Darling. He will need to shake it up a bit. It is those who are losing in the polls that are most likely to benefit from a debate.
I thought he said his preference was to firstly debate the Prime Minister and then Alastair Darling ??
The question was "will you debate Alistair Darling" to which the reply was "only after some other thing that will never happen"
If he is happy to debate Darling, why the caveat? Get on with it. Or is he feart?
And reality is that as yes are rising in the polls
Links?
would you like a wager on whether Yes will rise in the polls over the next 300 days
Certainly! I've no doubt 'Yes' will rise in the polls over the next 332 days - indeed, post the SNP conference I expect it will get a bit of a boost. Whether that's enough to see 'Yes' over the finish line is another matter altogether.....
Which is what I was clearly stating in my earlier post
John Rentoul has a sudden rush of blood to the head:
"The sudden emergence of Tristram Hunt as the next leader of the Labour Party has been one of the most amazing transformations of modern politics.
....One Labour frontbencher told me that Ed Miliband had promoted the "telegenic" Hunt as a way of building up a rival to Chuka Umunna. If so, it worked about as well as making Stalin general secretary of the Communist Party as a counterbalance to Trotsky."
I thought he said his preference was to firstly debate the Prime Minister and then Alastair Darling ??
The question was "will you debate Alistair Darling" to which the reply was "only after some other thing that will never happen"
If he is happy to debate Darling, why the caveat? Get on with it. Or is he feart?
No matter how many times you lie Scott, he has clearly stated he will talk to Cameron first and will then debate with Darling or anyone else that cares to. Where is Dave , why is he scared to debate the break up of the UK. His position that it is for a Labour back bencher to discuss the UK position is rubbish and even a blinkered sheep like you know that so have to keep lying to deflect from it.
Scottiah independence is a matter for the scots
So you think that an opposition Labour back bencher should be put forward as the person to represent HMG on the debate over the dissolution of the union. Why not the only MP in Westminster or even the SoS as a sop. The Government and Cameron in particular are scared to debate the dissolution of the UK.
Darling isn't representing HMG.
He is representing Better Together / all those Scots who want to remain in the union.
What a cop out , UK government not involved , let's leave it to that failed labour back bencher , we can then claim it was not our fault and say if only Flipper had told them to put another jumper on the union would have been saved.
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
(OT) Since the 2010 general election, there have been 16 parliamentary by-elections:
The BNP vote (%) has gone down in 8 of them, and up in 0. The Green vote has gone down in 1, and up in 4. The UKIP vote has gone down in 1 and up in 11.
[not counting constituencies where they didn't have candidates in 2010].
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
He has stepped up on many occasions, to say why he wants the Union maintened to continue with good relations.
He knows that it is up to the Scottish voters who live in scotland to decide their future. He also knows the reaction if he became too involved. He remembers the over reaction to Blair and parish councils.
I say this as someone that if I lived in Scotland would vote for Independence, but would then question the SNP choice of keeping the same head of state system, and tied to the Bank of England with the pound, which is an odd type of true Independence.
To declare an interest, my younger son lives not far from SeanT. When I stay with him, I meet his friends who are a multinational set aged 25-45 who are occupying a lot of the top jobs in London as they are mobile, aspirational and more competent and capable that many of the UK applicants. They are also multilingual and are ready to move and take their families to where the next best opportunity will be.
This multinational set create an aspirational buzz which is very motivating and so evident in contrast to the depressing "why wont the jobs come to us" attitude found in so much of the UK.
London is also the financial heart of the UK and Europe - where else will I find merchant banks that will back large trading ventures, without me contributing a penny.
All capital and successful cities have richness and poverty living cheek-by-jowl - it was always thus. However, this success can be collapsed by over-taxation which would make the wealth creators depart and so leave tens of thousands of people who they employed without jobs.
What large trading ventures do these merchant banks back? I am genuinely interested as I see some private equity/VC activity in certain sectors - more than in most other parts of Europe, but nothing like levels in the US - but very little banking investment in anything other than new financial instruments and the like. This certainly creates wealth for a few folk, but doesn't do much for the wider economy.
Exports from Far East to Africa but it is a complex structure which includes insurance.
"And what will David Laws, Michael Gove's Lib Dem mini-me say? Last week he was defending free schools and unqualified teachers but, speaking on Sky's Murnaghan programme this morning, Clegg made it pretty clear that the "party" line differed from Laws' "departmental" line."
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
I am sure that there is somewhere in Bongo-bongo where a chief is being invested: As the land of Bongo-bongo is a Commonwealth nation it may be suitable to send some consular representation. No sane person - morning Unckie Malc' - would suggest that the Queen also attends.
So let us draw a parallel with Scotland: No need for Cammers to turn up and soothe local pride. Just get some local dignatary to intimate that Greater-England actually gives-a-shyte....
I am sure that there is somewhere in Bongo-bongo where a chief is being invested: As the land of Bongo-bongo is a Commonwealth nation it may be suitable to send some consular representation. No sane person - morning Unckie Malc' - would suggest that the Queen also attends.
So let us draw a parallel with Scotland: No need for Cammers to turn up and soothe local pride. Just get some local dignatary to intimate that Greater-England actually gives-a-shyte....
Cameron's choice of Flipper is bizarre though Fluffy. I replied to your concern re my health and well being yesterday.
There speaks a true toff and shows the same arrogance as Cameron, "a leading politician in a small region", you could not make it up. What a stupid arse you are , he has been pushing as you put it that he as the Head of the Scottish Government should debate with the head of the UK government , not an opposition back bencher. You show exactly why Tories are hated the length and breadth of the country, an ignorant pompous arse who believe him and others like him are above the majority of the people in the country solely down to the fact that they were born with a full set of silver spoons in their mouths.
Absolutely he is head of the Scottish government. At the same level as the head of the Welsh government or the NI government. Or even an English government if we had him.
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
Neil questioning Sturgeon on whether Salmond will debate Darling/Carmichael if Cameron does not debate - can't get a 'yes or a no'......
It has been clearly stated , organ grinder first , extract maximum benefit as he hides behind the sofa and then well down the line he can be magnamanious and debate with the second raters whilst still scoffing at cowardy custard Cameron. All beneficial for YES and shows up unionists for what they are.
Alex Salmond to debate independence with Better Together leader Alistair Darling and new Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael 17 Oct 2013 18:05
NICOLA STURGEON has said debates between the three politicians would happen
Better Together claimed Ms Sturgeon's comments are a "U-turn".
A spokesman said: "It is good news that Nicola Sturgeon has finally confirmed that Alex Salmond has backed down and will now have a live TV debate with Alistair Darling. Now that both sides have agreed, it's time for the campaigns to get on and make this happen."
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
There speaks a true toff and shows the same arrogance as Cameron, "a leading politician in a small region", you could not make it up. What a stupid arse you are , he has been pushing as you put it that he as the Head of the Scottish Government should debate with the head of the UK government , not an opposition back bencher. You show exactly why Tories are hated the length and breadth of the country, an ignorant pompous arse who believe him and others like him are above the majority of the people in the country solely down to the fact that they were born with a full set of silver spoons in their mouths.
Absolutely he is head of the Scottish government. At the same level as the head of the Welsh government or the NI government. Or even an English government if we had him.
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
Charles , Salmond is the elected head of the Scottish government and the debate is whether the UK is broken up, any sane person would expect the head of the UK to represent the status Quo just as you would expect the head of Scottish Government represent the position of independence. Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
EG of Guardian wishful thinking for a piece but not exactly rushing to correct an inaccuracy either... so when the school opened she did have the qualification they say she hasn't got even now....
Toby Young@toadmeister12h .@tobyhelm There's a mistake in your story. You say Annaliese Briggs has "no teaching qualifications". In fact, she has a PGCE. Correction? Expand Reply Retweet
Toby Helm@tobyhelm2h @toadmeister of course I do. if she now has a PGCE (she did not when appointed) then please provide your proof. Details
Toby Young@toadmeister50m @schoolvp@tobyhelm You're wrong. She's had QTS since last July and had it when the school opened in September pic.twitter.com/v9HuW5HhV9 View photo
Toby Helm@tobyhelm34m @toadmeister@schoolvp fine...as i said quite happy to change it...will say she was not qualified when appointed. thanks pointing out. Expand
Toby Young@toadmeister10m @tobyhelm@schoolvp It is possible to get the same mistake in the Guardian story about this corrected as well? It was in the headline! Expand
"David Cameron will this week launch a YouTube attack on Ed Miliband and Ed Balls - branding them 'Mystic Ed And His Crystal Balls' for falsely predicting Britain's economic slump would get worse. Headlined 'Mystic Ed, The World's Worst Clairvoyant,' the internet cartoon film is designed to convince voters the Labour leader and Shadow Chancellor were wrong to denounce the Coalition's 'austerity Britain' policies.
Absolutely he is head of the Scottish government. At the same level as the head of the Welsh government or the NI government. Or even an English government if we had him.
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
Charles , Salmond is the elected head of the Scottish government and the debate is whether the UK is broken up, any sane person would expect the head of the UK to represent the status Quo just as you would expect the head of Scottish Government represent the position of independence. Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
It's not about Scotland vs UK It's not about Scotland vs England It's not about SNP vs Tory or Labour or whoever It's not about Salmond vs Cameron or Darling or whoever.
It's about Yes vs No.
If there's to be a debate about the independence referendum, then it's for the two sides - the Yes camp and the No camp - to pick their spokesman respectively. The SNP and their supporters do themselves no credit when they start the 'are you dissing me' stuff.
Alistair Darling on Sky just said that Eck had agreed to debate him earlier in the week, before changing his mind and running away again
Darling dreaming again , no matter how many times you or Darling lie Scott, it has been very cleared stated , Cameron first then the 2nd raters. Maximum benefit will be taken of Cameron's cowardice before he agrees to give Flipper a mauling.
"David Cameron will this week launch a YouTube attack on Ed Miliband and Ed Balls - branding them 'Mystic Ed And His Crystal Balls' for falsely predicting Britain's economic slump would get worse. Headlined 'Mystic Ed, The World's Worst Clairvoyant,' the internet cartoon film is designed to convince voters the Labour leader and Shadow Chancellor were wrong to denounce the Coalition's 'austerity Britain' policies.
Alex Salmond to debate independence with Better Together leader Alistair Darling and new Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael 17 Oct 2013 18:05
NICOLA STURGEON has said debates between the three politicians would happen
Better Together claimed Ms Sturgeon's comments are a "U-turn".
A spokesman said: "It is good news that Nicola Sturgeon has finally confirmed that Alex Salmond has backed down and will now have a live TV debate with Alistair Darling. Now that both sides have agreed, it's time for the campaigns to get on and make this happen."
Serial liar now Scott, it has been clearly enough stated even for a dullard like yourself , Cameron first and then he will debate darling , Carmichael and anybody else. Your spinning is pathetic to watch, and if you are down to quoting from the Daily Ranger then even for a Tory you have hit rock bottom.
"David Cameron will this week launch a YouTube attack on Ed Miliband and Ed Balls - branding them 'Mystic Ed And His Crystal Balls' for falsely predicting Britain's economic slump would get worse. Headlined 'Mystic Ed, The World's Worst Clairvoyant,' the internet cartoon film is designed to convince voters the Labour leader and Shadow Chancellor were wrong to denounce the Coalition's 'austerity Britain' policies.
(OT) Talking of the film "The Eagle", there are four basic possibilities about how to interpret the relationship between the Roman soldier (Marcus) and his British slave (Esca).
(a) Marcus was in love with Esca (b) Esca was in love with Marcus (c) They were both in love with each other (but both unrequitedly and unknowingly) (d) Neither.
I have always thought it was (a) but that might just be because I fancy Jamie Bell. If it's (b) or (c), it would explain why Esca stayed with Marcus and helped him even when he had the opportunity to escape. The traditionalist option of (d) would be explained by old-fashioned values of honour and loyalty without needing any thoughts of mutual squidgy-naughtyness.
What was the population of (a) Britain (b) Scotland in the 2nd century AD? I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
Clearly we have had far too many immigrants since then.
Come over here, taking our huts, stealing our woad.
Exactly. What did the Romans/Angles/Jutes/Vikings/Normans/Hugenots etc etc ever do for us? And what do you mean they are us?
Before the Angles life was much smoother
Straighter you mean?
Absolutely - had to build a wall to keep out those Picts and Scots who were always invading to steal our women and cattle.
“Most of the regions of [northern] Britain are marshy, since they are flooded continually by the tides of the ocean; the barbarians are accustomed to swimming or wading through these waist-deep marsh pools; since they go about naked, they are unconcerned about muddying their bodies. Strangers to clothing, they wear ornaments of iron at their waists and throats; considering iron a symbol of wealth, they value this metal as other barbarians value gold. They tattoo their bodies with coloured designs and drawings of all kinds of animals; for this reason they do not wear clothes, which would conceal the decorations on their bodies. Extremely savage and warlike, they are armed only with a spear and a narrow shield, plus a sword that hangs suspended by a belt from their otherwise naked bodies. They do not use breastplates or helmets, considering them encumbrances in crossing the marshes.” Herodian ‘History of the Empire after Marcus’ Book III Chapter 14
Traitorous too - linking up with fellow invaders like the Vikings and the French.
Absolutely he is head of the Scottish government. At the same level as the head of the Welsh government or the NI government. Or even an English government if we had him.
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
Charles , Salmond is the elected head of the Scottish government and the debate is whether the UK is broken up, any sane person would expect the head of the UK to represent the status Quo just as you would expect the head of Scottish Government represent the position of independence. Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
It's not about Scotland vs UK It's not about Scotland vs England It's not about SNP vs Tory or Labour or whoever It's not about Salmond vs Cameron or Darling or whoever.
It's about Yes vs No.
If there's to be a debate about the independence referendum, then it's for the two sides - the Yes camp and the No camp - to pick their spokesman respectively. The SNP and their supporters do themselves no credit when they start the 'are you dissing me' stuff.
Typical cowardly Tory position , just so you can claim when beaten that it was not your fault , it was that stupid oaf in the No camp. Give us a break it is a concern for the UK and whilst many do not give a toss , given that Cameron as head of HMG said he would fight with every fibre of his being , to now hide behind the couch and say it is not my concern is risible. Once it is a YES we will see who is involved.
Let Cameron vote in the referendum and then he can debate with Salmond. Since it's an internal matter for Scots to decide it doesn't seem right for him to get involved. Of course, like most English Welsh and Ulstermen and women he has an opinion, but we have no vote. It's not our decision to make, it's yours, Discuss it and work it out amongst yourselves.
I don't understand why the Pb Scot Nats spend so much time on her arguing with people who have no say in the matter. Seems a waste of effort when there are real voters north of the border who need persuading.
Charles , Salmond is the elected head of the Scottish government and the debate is whether the UK is broken up, any sane person would expect the head of the UK to represent the status Quo just as you would expect the head of Scottish Government represent the position of independence. Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
It's not about Scotland vs UK It's not about Scotland vs England It's not about SNP vs Tory or Labour or whoever It's not about Salmond vs Cameron or Darling or whoever.
It's about Yes vs No.
If there's to be a debate about the independence referendum, then it's for the two sides - the Yes camp and the No camp - to pick their spokesman respectively. The SNP and their supporters do themselves no credit when they start the 'are you dissing me' stuff.
Typical cowardly Tory position , just so you can claim when beaten that it was not your fault , it was that stupid oaf in the No camp. Give us a break it is a concern for the UK and whilst many do not give a toss , given that Cameron as head of HMG said he would fight with every fibre of his being , to now hide behind the couch and say it is not my concern is risible. Once it is a YES we will see who is involved.
Serial liar now Scott, it has been clearly enough stated even for a dullard like yourself , Cameron first and then he will debate darling , Carmichael and anybody else. Your spinning is pathetic to watch, and if you are down to quoting from the Daily Ranger then even for a Tory you have hit rock bottom.
Be gentle with Scott, he's had to up his rate of creepy Nat stalking now he's been prohibited from whining about tim.
Absolutely - had to build a wall to keep out those Picts and Scots who were always invading to steal our women and cattle.
Eeh?
The Scots are from Hibernia (Oirland). So unpopular (as a people) that even the Bogtrotters evicted them. And that was long after the Romans left (and the Saxons had arrived in Greater Northumberland).
Did you get taught history by using the :tumbleweed: method...?
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Absolutely - had to build a wall to keep out those Picts and Scots who were always invading to steal our women and cattle.
You mean you had to get a bunch of Italians to do it for you.
'What's a brick?'
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
It's laughable to say the least Richard. The nats having spent the best part of their campaign saying it's a scottish issue and that no-one else should interfere, now realise they've run out of bogeymen and have to talk to their own compatriots on issues of substance. So much for the canny FM.
I think Iain Martin on the Sunday Politics has it about right - he reckons there is an understanding between Cameron & Clegg that there are going to have to be occasional differentiation bust ups between now & the GE......meanwhile, Clegg has been on Sky saying 'No coalition crisis' over schools...
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
It's laughable to say the least Richard. The nats having spent the best part of their campaign saying it's a scottish issue and that no-one else should interfere, now realise they've run out of bogeymen and have to talk to their own compatriots on issues of substance. So much for the canny FM.
Alan, not like you to be so desperate as to ally yourself with such horse manure. Expect it from Nabavi as a cringing Tory having to witness the cowardice of his party leader but expect better from you. Cameron is running scared as he prefers to let darling be seen as the man who lost the union, does not have the guts to man up and debate it. Kind of says it all. For sure the floor will be wiped with Darling and his type but the headline will be the cowardice of the unionists.
As the Scots believe that they should be represented in Government (and they feel that they are not) how far do they wish to take this? A point as-of example:
The Ulster-Scots represent about three percent of the UK electorate. They have fasitdiously not voted for the current coalition nor any sitting governmnt in my lifetime. Do our SNats feel that their "unique" viewpoint should be represented in the UK government (assuming that the incestuous Fenians stop 'abusing' the 'powers')?
And what about London: London voted for Coalition politics. Should the power-house of England (and benefits-provider for the Celtic-fringe) not have an equal or prominent say in the formation of the Westminster government?
Scotland needs to grow-up and face reality. The grown-up solution is a Scottish debate on Scotland's deminishing place within the global framework: The realistic outcome is that most Scots 'lack-the-balls' to support the cause of independence....
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
Ah, you meant skirlie then. If you're going to use patois or dialect patronisingly, best to get it right I find.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Monica , Not much cringing going on from Salmond , he is up there wanting to take on the top man , who unfortunately is a quivering jelly who prefers to cringe behind the sofa. He is asking the leader of HMG to show what the union is and why it should stay and lo and behold rather than do that he prefers to hide behind some obscure idea that he is not in the No campaign. Just for your slow brain, Salmond is not asking as leader of YES , he is asking to debate as part of the UK government. Unfortunately HMG are terrified. Camerons lackeys in NO will get their opportunity for a drubbing in good time. Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
This is what the last Labour govt saved Britain from
@JonathanHaynes: Last year adult incontinence pants outsold baby nappies. Absolutely fascinating piece about Japan's odd demographics http://t.co/h00lJ1e74y
Written by a person who has not been to Japan. No one doubts there are more old people than babies in Japan, but to say that young people don't want to have sex is ridiculous. The results show as they do on surveys because Japan has a massive "shame" culture in public, but in private that all goes out of the window. Brazilian waxing in Japan has recently become very popular among the 18-24 demographic, for example, if that's not an indicator then I'm not sure what is...
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
For sure he will have invested in them and they will be worth Billions
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
Ah, you meant skirlie then. If you're going to use patois or dialect patronisingly, best to get it right I find.
As there are regional variations, then the plural is permissible.
Written by a person who has not been to Japan. No one doubts there are more old people than babies in Japan, but to say that young people don't want to have sex is ridiculous. The results show as they do on surveys because Japan has a massive "shame" culture in public, but in private that all goes out of the window. Brazilian waxing in Japan has recently become very popular among the 18-24 demographic, for example, if that's not an indicator then I'm not sure what is...
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland. Some thick twat pours over Wiki for an insult and thinks he is funny. Get a life saddo.
Written by a person who has not been to Japan. No one doubts there are more old people than babies in Japan, but to say that young people don't want to have sex is ridiculous. The results show as they do on surveys because Japan has a massive "shame" culture in public, but in private that all goes out of the window. Brazilian waxing in Japan has recently become very popular among the 18-24 demographic, for example, if that's not an indicator then I'm not sure what is...
Link?
Err, no link here. Info comes from talking to (male) Japanese colleagues...
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
Ah, you meant skirlie then. If you're going to use patois or dialect patronisingly, best to get it right I find.
As there are regional variations, then the plural is permissible.
As the Scots believe that they should be represented in Government (and they feel that they are not) how far do they wish to take this? A point as-of example:
The Ulster-Scots represent about three percent of the UK electorate. They have fasitdiously not voted for the current coalition nor any sitting governmnt in my lifetime. Do our SNats feel that their "unique" viewpoint should be represented in the UK government (assuming that the incestuous Fenians stop 'abusing' the 'powers')?
And what about London: London voted for Coalition politics. Should the power-house of England (and benefits-provider for the Celtic-fringe) not have an equal or prominent say in the formation of the Westminster government?
Scotland needs to grow-up and face reality. The grown-up solution is a Scottish debate on Scotland's deminishing place within the global framework: The realistic outcome is that most Scots 'lack-the-balls' to support the cause of independence....
:such-a-shame:
We shall see Fluffy , the result is not in yet despite your protests
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
Ah, you meant skirlie then. If you're going to use patois or dialect patronisingly, best to get it right I find.
As there are regional variations, then the plural is permissible.
Bollocks (pl)
The twat probably thinks you are introducing him to another Scottish delicacy , his turnip head will be stuck in Wiki trying to work out what the ingredients are so he can regale us of how he had it in Scotland and it tasted foul.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
As sensible as the lies and drivel you post on Scotland. No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
It's laughable to say the least Richard. The nats having spent the best part of their campaign saying it's a scottish issue and that no-one else should interfere, now realise they've run out of bogeymen and have to talk to their own compatriots on issues of substance. So much for the canny FM.
Alan, not like you to be so desperate as to ally yourself with such horse manure. Expect it from Nabavi as a cringing Tory having to witness the cowardice of his party leader but expect better from you. Cameron is running scared as he prefers to let darling be seen as the man who lost the union, does not have the guts to man up and debate it. Kind of says it all. For sure the floor will be wiped with Darling and his type but the headline will be the cowardice of the unionists.
Why in a month of Sundays would Cameron debate salmond malc ? It's what salmond wants him to do so that he can play the hate the english card by debating a plummy southern toff. Fact is Salmond spent so much time saying it was a scottish affair he's now painted himself in to a corner that he just looks a prat by demanding outside "interference". Salmond has spent two years railing against outsiders instead of addressing the people who can vote, poor politics.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
Would you rather discuss recipes? That's hardly your strong suit either.....
Patrick Wintour @patrickwintour Senior Tories believe David Laws did not know anything about new schools policy until he saw the papers late last night. V hard to credit.
What do the Lib Dems do inside these government departments?
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
It is as Richard Head put it. It is in fact just toasted oatmeal. In some northern parts they may add onions etc and make a stuffing out of it , but it is far from common and not common in central or southern Scotland.
On topic, it's worth remembering that aside from the obscure Indian outfit, ICM and Ipsos MORI were joint winners of the 2010 polling accuracy competition.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right?
Why in a month of Sundays would Cameron debate salmond malc ? It's what salmond wants him to do so that he can play the hate the english card by debating a plummy southern toff. Fact is Salmond spent so much time saying it was a scottish affair he's now painted himself in to a corner that he just looks a prat by demanding outside "interference". Salmond has spent two years railing against outsiders instead of addressing the people who can vote, poor politics.
Alan, If only to show he is a real leader and not a powder puff. far better to go down with balls than to be remembered as a big jessie avoiding debate. Failing to debate shows the weakness of the unionist position and suits Salmond better than actually having to debate Cameron. Salmond can drag it out and then say , OK as Cameron is scared send on HMG 2nd team. A stuttering lying Darling will not paint a good picture of the union but reinforce the fact that labour are the Tories poodles in the debate. Cameron should have kept his mouth shut earlier re his going to fight with every fibre of his being for the union. Now saying it is nothing to do with him , makes him look even more stupid than ever.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
Would you rather discuss recipes? That's hardly your strong suit either.....
Anecdotiers food stories are always a highlight, hopefully he'll on day merge a pie or skirlie story with pondering the lack of hen nights in Sitges
I'm afraid to mention that there's a chipper in Stonehaven (possibly the one that invented the deep-fried mars bar) that does a mince & skirlie pie; Financier may have an orgasm-induced seizure.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
Yeah, but it's not and never has been described as 'skirlies'.
TUD , it suits their purpose though , patronising git thought it was witty to use as an insult and the dullard made a hash of it, and pseudo Scot tries to be smart arse as usual and shows themselves up as only being a disney Scot.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
As sensible as the lies and drivel you post on Scotland. No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
Well done for never having done it, then.
A Cameron/Salmond debate would be asymmetrical: Salmond saying independence good for Scotland, Cameron saying bad for the UK. Cameron can't say independence would be bad for Scotland without sounding spiteful and vindictive, whereas a Scot can.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
Well done for never having done it, then. A Cameron/Salmond debate would be asymmetrical: Salmond saying independence good for Scotland, Cameron saying bad for the UK. Cameron can't say independence would be bad for Scotland without sounding spiteful and vindictive, whereas a Scot can.
Cameron could make his pitch on why the Union is good for Scotland.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
As sensible as the lies and drivel you post on Scotland. No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
Well done for never having done it, then.
A Cameron/Salmond debate would be asymmetrical: Salmond saying independence good for Scotland, Cameron saying bad for the UK. Cameron can't say independence would be bad for Scotland without sounding spiteful and vindictive, whereas a Scot can.
A towering genius joins the debate and gives us the amazing insight that Cameron could not show that Scotland being independent would be bad. Does this colossus perhaps work for Downing Street and it is him who has advised Dave not to do it.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
How flattering; how far down your search did you go to find that? Something to add to your notes on me though.
Not very far; the writer, Catherine Brown, is a noted Scottish food historian. She calls them skirlies; you said "it's not and never has been described as 'skirlies'". Who to trust?
I'm capable of making a mental note that you think I'm thick, and remembering it. This isn't even worthy of a mental note.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
Comments
arse who believe him and others like him are above the majority of the people in the country solely down to the fact that they were born with a full set of silver spoons in their mouths.
Londoners are younger than average Brits and more likely to be University graduates. Both these groups pay more income tax than average. The same people are likely to retire to the coast and pay less income tax, so the raw figures are quite misleading.
Similarly a lot of the money being earned in London is by commuters. Does this get attributed in GDP terms to London or to the Stockbroker belt? Likewise a company with HQ in London but branches all over the UK, does the companies earnings get attributed to the branches or to head office.
London's GDP cannot be meaningfully from the rest of the UK and the SE in particular.
But the next election will be won or lost in Loughborough and Broxtowe, not London.
Lamont is ok but the idea that Cameron who copes pretty well with PMQs every week, has much to fear from Salmond as a debater is fairly ridiculous.
What this is about is playing the tory card in Scotland and making it seem that voting for the Union is a vote for the tories. The quality of debate has got nothing to do with it.
I was wondering because I've just watched the film "The Eagle" starring Jamie Bell (gorgeous British slave) and Channing Tatum (dull Roman soldier).
"The sudden emergence of Tristram Hunt as the next leader of the Labour Party has been one of the most amazing transformations of modern politics.
....One Labour frontbencher told me that Ed Miliband had promoted the "telegenic" Hunt as a way of building up a rival to Chuka Umunna. If so, it worked about as well as making Stalin general secretary of the Communist Party as a counterbalance to Trotsky."
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/tristram-hunt-is-handy-if-ed-miliband-loses-labours-love-8891653.html
Just what the country needs, two forty-ish privately educated public school Oxbridge graduates slogging it out for PM.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/interactive/animations/population/index_embed.shtml
The BNP vote (%) has gone down in 8 of them, and up in 0.
The Green vote has gone down in 1, and up in 4.
The UKIP vote has gone down in 1 and up in 11.
[not counting constituencies where they didn't have candidates in 2010].
tfs
Cameron is fighting for the Union.
He has stepped up on many occasions, to say why he wants the Union maintened to continue with good relations.
He knows that it is up to the Scottish voters who live in scotland to decide their future.
He also knows the reaction if he became too involved.
He remembers the over reaction to Blair and parish councils.
I say this as someone that if I lived in Scotland would vote for Independence, but would then question the SNP choice of keeping the same head of state system, and tied to the Bank of England with the pound, which is an odd type of true Independence.
"And what will David Laws, Michael Gove's Lib Dem mini-me say? Last week he was defending free schools and unqualified teachers but, speaking on Sky's Murnaghan programme this morning, Clegg made it pretty clear that the "party" line differed from Laws' "departmental" line."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/20/mehdis-morning-memo_73_n_4131098.html?1382261932
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/british_prehistory/overview_british_prehistory_ironage_01.shtml
http://www.iadb.co.uk/romans/main.php?P=4
I am sure that there is somewhere in Bongo-bongo where a chief is being invested: As the land of Bongo-bongo is a Commonwealth nation it may be suitable to send some consular representation. No sane person - morning Unckie Malc' - would suggest that the Queen also attends.
So let us draw a parallel with Scotland: No need for Cammers to turn up and soothe local pride. Just get some local dignatary to intimate that Greater-England actually gives-a-shyte....
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-debate-independence-better-2463765
Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
Toby Young@toadmeister12h
.@tobyhelm There's a mistake in your story. You say Annaliese Briggs has "no teaching qualifications". In fact, she has a PGCE. Correction?
Expand Reply
Retweet
Toby Helm@tobyhelm2h
@toadmeister of course I do. if she now has a PGCE (she did not when appointed) then please provide your proof.
Details
Toby Young@toadmeister50m
@schoolvp @tobyhelm You're wrong. She's had QTS since last July and had it when the school opened in September pic.twitter.com/v9HuW5HhV9
View photo
Toby Helm@tobyhelm34m
@toadmeister @schoolvp fine...as i said quite happy to change it...will say she was not qualified when appointed. thanks pointing out.
Expand
Toby Young@toadmeister10m
@tobyhelm @schoolvp It is possible to get the same mistake in the Guardian story about this corrected as well? It was in the headline!
Expand
Toby Helm@tobyhelm7m
@toadmeister I will do my best
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100242177/is-ed-miliband-silly-or-dangerous-the-conservatives-are-finally-making-their-mind-up/
"David Cameron will this week launch a YouTube attack on Ed Miliband and Ed Balls - branding them 'Mystic Ed And His Crystal Balls' for falsely predicting Britain's economic slump would get worse.
Headlined 'Mystic Ed, The World's Worst Clairvoyant,' the internet cartoon film is designed to convince voters the Labour leader and Shadow Chancellor were wrong to denounce the Coalition's 'austerity Britain' policies.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2468091/Now-personal-Cameron-ridicules-Mystic-Ed-YouTube-attack-Labours-predictions-economy.html#ixzz2iFzA4FlN
I expect the fans of Cameron Chameleon will love this too.....
It's not about Scotland vs England
It's not about SNP vs Tory or Labour or whoever
It's not about Salmond vs Cameron or Darling or whoever.
It's about Yes vs No.
If there's to be a debate about the independence referendum, then it's for the two sides - the Yes camp and the No camp - to pick their spokesman respectively. The SNP and their supporters do themselves no credit when they start the 'are you dissing me' stuff.
"no more boom and bust"
You also missed one word or so "and forecast they'd clear Labour's deficit by 2015"
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-debate-independence-better-2463765
Serial liar now Scott, it has been clearly enough stated even for a dullard like yourself , Cameron first and then he will debate darling , Carmichael and anybody else. Your spinning is pathetic to watch, and if you are down to quoting from the Daily Ranger then even for a Tory you have hit rock bottom.
(a) Marcus was in love with Esca
(b) Esca was in love with Marcus
(c) They were both in love with each other (but both unrequitedly and unknowingly)
(d) Neither.
I have always thought it was (a) but that might just be because I fancy Jamie Bell. If it's (b) or (c), it would explain why Esca stayed with Marcus and helped him even when he had the opportunity to escape. The traditionalist option of (d) would be explained by old-fashioned values of honour and loyalty without needing any thoughts of mutual squidgy-naughtyness.
“Most of the regions of [northern] Britain are marshy, since they are flooded continually by the tides of the ocean; the barbarians are accustomed to swimming or wading through these waist-deep marsh pools; since they go about naked, they are unconcerned about muddying their bodies. Strangers to clothing, they wear ornaments of iron at their waists and throats; considering iron a symbol of wealth, they value this metal as other barbarians value gold. They tattoo their bodies with coloured designs and drawings of all kinds of animals; for this reason they do not wear clothes, which would conceal the decorations on their bodies. Extremely savage and warlike, they are armed only with a spear and a narrow shield, plus a sword that hangs suspended by a belt from their otherwise naked bodies. They do not use breastplates or helmets, considering them encumbrances in crossing the marshes.”
Herodian ‘History of the Empire after Marcus’ Book III Chapter 14
Traitorous too - linking up with fellow invaders like the Vikings and the French.
Best get rid!
Once it is a YES we will see who is involved.
I don't understand why the Pb Scot Nats spend so much time on her arguing with people who have no say in the matter. Seems a waste of effort when there are real voters north of the border who need persuading.
Good to see we have grown-ups in charge and not undergraduates playing silly JCR games!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRKhTQHrtdk
'What's a brick?'
Be gentle with Scott, he's had to up his rate of creepy Nat stalking now he's been prohibited from whining about tim.
The Scots are from Hibernia (Oirland). So unpopular (as a people) that even the Bogtrotters evicted them. And that was long after the Romans left (and the Saxons had arrived in Greater Northumberland).
Did you get taught history by using the :tumbleweed: method...?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
http://www.libdemvoice.org/clegg-schools-policy-36837.html
Just following his party
http://news.sky.com/story/1157096/nick-clegg-no-coalition-crisis-over-schools
Better than that it has probably been agreed - Clegg gets to do party management today, and next week back to focussing on the economy
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
Cameron is running scared as he prefers to let darling be seen as the man who lost the union, does not have the guts to man up and debate it. Kind of says it all.
For sure the floor will be wiped with Darling and his type but the headline will be the cowardice of the unionists.
As the Scots believe that they should be represented in Government (and they feel that they are not) how far do they wish to take this? A point as-of example:
The Ulster-Scots represent about three percent of the UK electorate. They have fasitdiously not voted for the current coalition nor any sitting governmnt in my lifetime. Do our SNats feel that their "unique" viewpoint should be represented in the UK government (assuming that the incestuous Fenians stop 'abusing' the 'powers')?
And what about London: London voted for Coalition politics. Should the power-house of England (and benefits-provider for the Celtic-fringe) not have an equal or prominent say in the formation of the Westminster government?
Scotland needs to grow-up and face reality. The grown-up solution is a Scottish debate on Scotland's deminishing place within the global framework: The realistic outcome is that most Scots 'lack-the-balls' to support the cause of independence....
:such-a-shame:
Just for your slow brain, Salmond is not asking as leader of YES , he is asking to debate as part of the UK government. Unfortunately HMG are terrified. Camerons lackeys in NO will get their opportunity for a drubbing in good time. Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
http://www.hamlynsoats.co.uk/recipes/savoury-suppers/skirlie/
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/05/09/indian-pollster-wins-the-2010-polling-race/
So if the polls do not narrow in the months ahead (say May or June) he will be compelled to take what he's offered which will be Darling or no deal.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100242136/unremarked-primaries-are-spreading-across-local-conservative-associations/
A Cameron/Salmond debate would be asymmetrical: Salmond saying independence good for Scotland, Cameron saying bad for the UK. Cameron can't say independence would be bad for Scotland without sounding spiteful and vindictive, whereas a Scot can.
Something to add to your notes on me though.
Ah, I see your point.
I'm capable of making a mental note that you think I'm thick, and remembering it. This isn't even worthy of a mental note.
Going that badly, is it?