Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
 Reminds me of when I'm getting ready to go out and my boyfriend is watching tv waiting for hours for me to finish. I, then, come running down and shout at him "what are you sitting there watching tv for?! We're late!"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Trump points at the journalists covering the rally and calls the the enemy. Hours later a gunman storms a newspaper office in Maryland and 5 or 6 journalists (depending on report) are dead. Wonder how Trumps liar in chief will spin his words and this mass killing today?" According to the news the gunman had a long standing dispute with the paper so doubtful it was anything to do with Trump. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"According to the news the gunman had a long standing dispute with the paper so doubtful it was anything to do with Trump." Just a coincidence then... Would you like to comment on Milo Yiannopolous (born Milo Hanrahan) too? He is the neonazi former news editor of Breitbart that a few days ago called for ‘vigilante death squads’ to gun down all hostile journalists on sight... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"According to the news the gunman had a long standing dispute with the paper so doubtful it was anything to do with Trump. Just a coincidence then... Would you like to comment on Milo Yiannopolous (born Milo Hanrahan) too? He is the neonazi former news editor of Breitbart that a few days ago called for ‘vigilante death squads’ to gun down all hostile journalists on sight..." Can't say I have heard of him but he sounds like a lovely chap! (only joking)  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anything that's on your mind but, possibly, not warranting starting a thread about it. " I'm thinking of pressing the "looking to meet" button this evening. I won't apply any political filter, however.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Danny dyers comments on piers Morgan show ??????" hahaha LOVED him! "The twat! Where is the geezer?!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Trump points at the journalists covering the rally and calls the the enemy. Hours later a gunman storms a newspaper office in Maryland and 5 or 6 journalists (depending on report) are dead. Wonder how Trumps liar in chief will spin his words and this mass killing today?" Well, they're busy working their way down the ten steps of genocide checklist, currently at 7 or 8 depending on your PoV, so Donny having to pretend to deal with the repercussions of his attempts to destroy the free press might be a welcome distraction. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Danny dyers comments on piers Morgan show ?????? hahaha LOVED him! "The twat! Where is the geezer?!" "I doubt many people would take notice of a third rate actor ( I use the term actor very losely) on a third rate tv soap! His comments had about as much class as his acting! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I doubt many people would take notice of a third rate actor ( I use the term actor very losely) on a third rate tv soap! His comments had about as much class as his acting! "You been taking tips from Trumpy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, there's something I thought I'd never see.... Someone taking exception to Piers Morgan being called a twat. " He didn't call Piers one, he was talking about a former prime minister! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I doubt many people would take notice of a third rate actor ( I use the term actor very losely) on a third rate tv soap! His comments had about as much class as his acting!
You been taking tips from Trumpy?"Tips on what!? Fortunately I'm my own man! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, there's something I thought I'd never see.... Someone taking exception to Piers Morgan being called a twat. He didn't call Piers one, he was talking about a former prime minister!" Didn't he though? That's the thing about timing, get it right and you can make things ambiguous enough to be interesting. Not that he's wrong about Call me Dave, mind you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right though - he called a referendum and made absolutely no contingency plan. Scarpered as soon as it went wrong. Hubris." He wasn't the only one that got the outcome wrong was he!? Let's be honest he would have been ridiculed if he had stayed although I think he would have done a better job than Mrs May. At least he had the integrity to go. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, there's something I thought I'd never see.... Someone taking exception to Piers Morgan being called a twat. He didn't call Piers one, he was talking about a former prime minister! Didn't he though? That's the thing about timing, get it right and you can make things ambiguous enough to be interesting. Not that he's wrong about Call me Dave, mind you." Not that I heard! Surely he would have done it in his finest Eastend gangster accent, I've seen tougher OAPs at the bingo! Lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right though - he called a referendum and made absolutely no contingency plan. Scarpered as soon as it went wrong. Hubris. He wasn't the only one that got the outcome wrong was he!? Let's be honest he would have been ridiculed if he had stayed although I think he would have done a better job than Mrs May. At least he had the integrity to go." If you call a referendum, there are two possible outcomes. My argument is it's hubris to think there is only one and make no provision for the other. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right though - he called a referendum and made absolutely no contingency plan. Scarpered as soon as it went wrong. Hubris. He wasn't the only one that got the outcome wrong was he!? Let's be honest he would have been ridiculed if he had stayed although I think he would have done a better job than Mrs May. At least he had the integrity to go. If you call a referendum, there are two possible outcomes. My argument is it's hubris to think there is only one and make no provision for the other. " Exactly it shows how out of touch the politicians were that no one thought it could happen! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right though - he called a referendum and made absolutely no contingency plan. Scarpered as soon as it went wrong. Hubris. He wasn't the only one that got the outcome wrong was he!? Let's be honest he would have been ridiculed if he had stayed although I think he would have done a better job than Mrs May. At least he had the integrity to go. If you call a referendum, there are two possible outcomes. My argument is it's hubris to think there is only one and make no provision for the other. " That being said, if there's two choices, one of which is clearly the wrong one, and that's the one people go for, I do understand why someone might go "fine, you fucking idiots, you deal with this mess". He's still a fucking twat though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right though - he called a referendum and made absolutely no contingency plan. Scarpered as soon as it went wrong. Hubris. He wasn't the only one that got the outcome wrong was he!? Let's be honest he would have been ridiculed if he had stayed although I think he would have done a better job than Mrs May. At least he had the integrity to go. If you call a referendum, there are two possible outcomes. My argument is it's hubris to think there is only one and make no provision for the other. That being said, if there's two choices, one of which is clearly the wrong one, and that's the one people go for, I do understand why someone might go "fine, you fucking idiots, you deal with this mess". He's still a fucking twat though." It remains to be seen that it's the wrong one, it's just a matter of opinion! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He did the same in Scotland in 2014. Refused to let any UK Government department plan for a leave vote. He went into a panic two weeks before the poll when leave was on 51 per cent. Trains to Glasgow and Edinburgh were full of unionist politicians. He survived (thanks only to Gordon Brown, whom he had told should play no part in the unionist campaign). Emboldened by the outcome, he did the same two years later. Rerun of Project Fear. Told UK Government departments to make no plans for a leave vote. If people found out, they might think it was actually a possibility. Crazy. Then the vote comes in, no-one has a clue what to do next and he decides he wants nothing to do with it. For that dereliction of duty, not for resigning but for refusing to make any sort of contingency plan, he will go down in history as one of the most reckless PMs. It was his referendum. And he bolted as soon as the game was up, leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces." I personally think he should have stayed but I suppose it would have been a bitter pill to swallow! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how in all that is holy, is brexit going to end ?" Well for the rich and badly for the rest of us... Fact is brexit is being managed to produce a disaster economy so that the rich will be able to buy up whats left of 70 years of public investment at fire sale prices. But with look the voluble part of the 52% that think brexit will be great will wake up to how they have been conned and the tories and their backers will be out of power for the next 70 years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how in all that is holy, is brexit going to end ?.... much snipped..... ...... the tories and their backers will be out of power for the next 70 years." I do actually see this as being such an almighty fuck up that you may actually be right. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how in all that is holy, is brexit going to end ? Well for the rich and badly for the rest of us... Fact is brexit is being managed to produce a disaster economy so that the rich will be able to buy up whats left of 70 years of public investment at fire sale prices. But with look the voluble part of the 52% that think brexit will be great will wake up to how they have been conned and the tories and their backers will be out of power for the next 70 years." Buy up what’s left? And do what with it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. " Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Weren’t the Tories against Brexit? Wasn’t it always the Labour Party who were pro Brexit because of the lack of democracy within the EU?" Confusion seems to be the common theme as noone has a clear idea of what's going on. It's even worse for us on this side of the Irish sea with all this talk of borders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are." Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How is it the USA is still fighting the same battle 70 years on? And all summed up in a country song. https://youtu.be/jKVnur5DkdI" tbf we’re doing the same ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How is it the USA is still fighting the same battle 70 years on? And all summed up in a country song. https://youtu.be/jKVnur5DkdItbf we’re doing the same !" Yep
And we are quickly becoming just as open about it as the Yanks... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it?" People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them." How clever. What are the reasons? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons?" Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it?" Hahahahahahahah... Tories? Respect for the referendum?! Hahahahahahahah... you have seen the news in the past year right? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
What actually amazes me is that he thinks that they're gonna buy his "good" intentions. Oh wait! Some *are* buying it!  Wishful thinking or blinkered anti-EU vision? I say both. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ah...the tyranny of the majority. Otherwise known as "the will of the people" "I prefer "vox populi" as there is no tyranny! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff." But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? " Because its ideology is pro-capital, pro-market and its rules on state aid restrict the ability of government to interfere in the marketplace. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Because its ideology is pro-capital, pro-market and its rules on state aid restrict the ability of government to interfere in the marketplace. " So why are some Tories against it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When I say some, I probably mean a lot. Could it be that some from both sides of the political divide recognise the deficit of democracy in the EU and it has nothing to do with economics? " I find the democratic deficit arguement from Brexiters to be entirely hollow as they didn't want the democratically elected UK parliament to have a meaningful vote on the final deal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? " Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When I say some, I probably mean a lot. Could it be that some from both sides of the political divide recognise the deficit of democracy in the EU and it has nothing to do with economics? " or maybe it’s because the Eu has both left leaning and right leaning tendencies and so those on the extreme of either politics have something to rage against ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I So why are some Tories against it?" Control, I suspect. They don't feel in control of the EU and want to revert to something they can control. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions." It would be difficult to ask him myself but what is your opinion on why he and other socialists are against the EU if it is supposedly so ‘workers rights’? If you say that he’s against it because it is run by big business, is he wrong? How can it be both? You cannot have both sides of the argument without a common denominator. What is it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions. It would be difficult to ask him myself but what is your opinion on why he and other socialists are against the EU if it is supposedly so ‘workers rights’? If you say that he’s against it because it is run by big business, is he wrong? How can it be both? You cannot have both sides of the argument without a common denominator. What is it?" Would you say both the extremish left and extremish right are happy with the way the UK is being run ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Utter coward not to support armed forces day in any shape or form ..of all views please remember the fallen ..what ever your political views xxx" I support those who are fallen on November 11th I’ll support armed forces day the day there is a national teachers day... or a national nurses day... or a national carers day etc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions. It would be difficult to ask him myself but what is your opinion on why he and other socialists are against the EU if it is supposedly so ‘workers rights’? If you say that he’s against it because it is run by big business, is he wrong? How can it be both? You cannot have both sides of the argument without a common denominator. What is it? Would you say both the extremish left and extremish right are happy with the way the UK is being run ?" No, why? Have you ever seen them unite in a campaign against the UK government? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Utter coward not to support armed forces day in any shape or form ..of all views please remember the fallen ..what ever your political views xxx I support those who are fallen on November 11th I’ll support armed forces day the day there is a national teachers day... or a national nurses day... or a national carers day etc " There is definitely a National Nurses Day....think it's beginning of May. My housemate is a nurse and celebrates it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Utter coward not to support armed forces day in any shape or form ..of all views please remember the fallen ..what ever your political views xxx I support those who are fallen on November 11th I’ll support armed forces day the day there is a national teachers day... or a national nurses day... or a national carers day etc " It’s good to support the fallen but they will never know. It’s better to support the living to let them know we appreciate them defending us. Without them there would be no teachers or nurses etc....at least not in the way we know it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Utter coward not to support armed forces day in any shape or form ..of all views please remember the fallen ..what ever your political views xxx I support those who are fallen on November 11th I’ll support armed forces day the day there is a national teachers day... or a national nurses day... or a national carers day etc " All important, but not the same as the military. People don't join those professions knowing they might be asked to make the ultimate sacrifice. They don't have a seperate system of justice to the rest of the population, the military do. They aren't liable to be sent anywhere in the world for tours of duty, the military and sometimes their family are. If they are sick, they tell their boss and don't show up, they self certify, the military can't do that. If they aren't happy with their pay and conditions, they can strike, unlike the military. If they are unhappy, they can quit and leave immediately, the military can't. Their housing is not tied to their employment, unlike most of the military. There are many differences between military and civilian life, and they deserve to be recognised and their contribution celebrated. Remembrance day is to remember those who have died for the country, and those who have returned from war, many of which with a mixture of visible and invisible injuries. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions. It would be difficult to ask him myself but what is your opinion on why he and other socialists are against the EU if it is supposedly so ‘workers rights’? If you say that he’s against it because it is run by big business, is he wrong? How can it be both? You cannot have both sides of the argument without a common denominator. What is it? Would you say both the extremish left and extremish right are happy with the way the UK is being run ? No, why? Have you ever seen them unite in a campaign against the UK government?" because there hasn’t been a suitably worded reforendum. My point is how two sides can see the negatives in remaining in the status quo. And how it doesn’t prove where we are is from the result of no democracy. Indeed it’s possibly an argument for it being a democracy as the existing position is a compromise of various political view points. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m getting confused here. Which is a rare occurrence, I'm sure. The Tories and Labour always had swivel eyed contingent that were varying degrees of Eurosceptic. In a bid to stop UKIP drinking their milkshake, the Tories let their ones loose and then promptly lost control of the party to them. Downside of blaming the EU and immigrant for everything for years, I guess. In response, the much younger labour membership decided to let old man Jezza have a go, neatly forgetting that while they as a whole don't care for brexit and will be the worst impacted by it, Corbyn has always hated it, so he's more than happy not to try and do anything either about it, or to curb the Tories worst impulses. And thus, here we are. Swivel eyed. Oh dear At least the Tories have shown a little respect for the people and the result of the referendum. But you are not really answering the question. If Brexit was ‘for the rich’ blah blah blah, why does Corbyn want it? People can want the same thing for different reasons. That's not a difficult concept for most people to grasp once it's been spelled out for them. How clever. What are the reasons? Corbyn is a socialist in the 70s mould, he has always opposed the EU because he sees it as an anathema to his very socialist ideals. Once again, basic stuff. But you’ve still not answered the question. Why is it an anathema to his socialist ideals? Well, as for why Corbyn feels that way, you'd best ask the man himself. But if you check his voting record you can see he has consistently voted against all EU treaties, and voted for the UK to leave the EEC in 1975. Seems fairly obvious on the face off it, so I can't imagine why you're asking these fruitless questions. It would be difficult to ask him myself but what is your opinion on why he and other socialists are against the EU if it is supposedly so ‘workers rights’? If you say that he’s against it because it is run by big business, is he wrong? How can it be both? You cannot have both sides of the argument without a common denominator. What is it? Would you say both the extremish left and extremish right are happy with the way the UK is being run ? No, why? Have you ever seen them unite in a campaign against the UK government?because there hasn’t been a suitably worded reforendum. My point is how two sides can see the negatives in remaining in the status quo. And how it doesn’t prove where we are is from the result of no democracy. Indeed it’s possibly an argument for it being a democracy as the existing position is a compromise of various political view points. " Or none. Which is why the EU was created to be a plutocracy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not " lets stick to debating individual points. But if you insist. At what point does my vote mean something. Is there a maximum number of voters before I cease to matter ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not lets stick to debating individual points. But if you insist. At what point does my vote mean something. Is there a maximum number of voters before I cease to matter ?" India has a democracy in a country of 1.3bn people, the EU is only 500m. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not lets stick to debating individual points. But if you insist. At what point does my vote mean something. Is there a maximum number of voters before I cease to matter ?" Probably yes. What number, I don’t know. Your concerns may be similar to a Manchester shop worker but have no relevance to a Hungarian goat herder | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not lets stick to debating individual points. But if you insist. At what point does my vote mean something. Is there a maximum number of voters before I cease to matter ? Probably yes. What number, I don’t know. Your concerns may be similar to a Manchester shop worker but have no relevance to a Hungarian goat herder " Excellent. Casual racism. What about a welsh shepherd ? What if the uk was had the population of China but no difference in splits between jobs ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not lets stick to debating individual points. But if you insist. At what point does my vote mean something. Is there a maximum number of voters before I cease to matter ? Probably yes. What number, I don’t know. Your concerns may be similar to a Manchester shop worker but have no relevance to a Hungarian goat herder " But your argument is that 500m is too many, yet its fine in India with 1.3bn. Your argument is rubbish. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it " but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... " It sounds like his argument is heading towards eugenics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... " Yes it’s both | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... Yes it’s both " so is the uk with its shepherds and billionaires within range ? But the Eu with its goat herders to billionaires outside ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... Yes it’s both so is the uk with its shepherds and billionaires within range ? But the Eu with its goat herders to billionaires outside ? " Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart " You obviously have a selective memory when it comes to our post war history -especially when culminating in it's 3 day work week of the 70's? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Basically peoples needs and wants across the continent are so diverse that they cancel eachother out so the rich and powerful decide what is ‘best’ for us.That was always the plan and the sheep have fallen for it but we’re all the same culture ? And the Uk is diverse in itself as we have shepherds to billionaires. So if it’s range not numbers, there must be a point where the range is too big too.... Yes it’s both so is the uk with its shepherds and billionaires within range ? But the Eu with its goat herders to billionaires outside ? Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart " who knew the difference between sheep and goats could make or break an economy so. Germany must be a sheep country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not " Our entire system is hierarchal and the EU is no different. We cast a vote for a candidate. The successful candidate might win with 30 per cent of the vote. That candidate then has one vote out of 650 to decide who forms the government. By this stage, the other 70 cent of his or her constituency count for nothing. So 650 votes decide the Government. The Government is appointed and takes up a seat in the EU Council of Ministers etc. The UK seat is one of 28 with voting rights, albeit some weighted heavier than others based on GDP share. So the entire structure is hierarchal. You and I do not get a say in anything beyond the boundary of the constituency. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, you’re not getting it. You think the EU is democratic but your vote will never change anything. So basically all decisions are made by the rich and powerful and they don’t care if it’s good for you or not Our entire system is hierarchal and the EU is no different. We cast a vote for a candidate. The successful candidate might win with 30 per cent of the vote. That candidate then has one vote out of 650 to decide who forms the government. By this stage, the other 70 cent of his or her constituency count for nothing. So 650 votes decide the Government. The Government is appointed and takes up a seat in the EU Council of Ministers etc. The UK seat is one of 28 with voting rights, albeit some weighted heavier than others based on GDP share. So the entire structure is hierarchal. You and I do not get a say in anything beyond the boundary of the constituency. " So we live in a dictatorship? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart You obviously have a selective memory when it comes to our post war history -especially when culminating in it's 3 day work week of the 70's?" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart You obviously have a selective memory when it comes to our post war history -especially when culminating in it's 3 day work week of the 70's? When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks " lets hope there’s no EU countries above us... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart You obviously have a selective memory when it comes to our post war history -especially when culminating in it's 3 day work week of the 70's? When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks lets hope there’s no EU countries above us... " I would love it to be Spain but that’s by the by, they are fucked cuz of the Euro | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks " Ahem... a quote from Wikipedia: "in 1950, British output per head was still 30 per cent ahead of the six founder members of the EEC, but within 50 years it had been overtaken by many European and several Asian countries" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes. That’s why the UK has always been successful and the EU is falling apart You obviously have a selective memory when it comes to our post war history -especially when culminating in it's 3 day work week of the 70's? When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks lets hope there’s no EU countries above us... I would love it to be Spain but that’s by the by, they are fucked cuz of the Euro " Uk gdp per capita: $45,565 Spain gdp per capita: $40,289 Others, for context. Italy.... $39,499 Germany .... $52,802 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks Ahem... a quote from Wikipedia: "in 1950, British output per head was still 30 per cent ahead of the six founder members of the EEC, but within 50 years it had been overtaken by many European and several Asian countries" "Ahem. Another good reason for not joining the EEC/EU then, thanks for your support | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks Ahem... a quote from Wikipedia: "in 1950, British output per head was still 30 per cent ahead of the six founder members of the EEC, but within 50 years it had been overtaken by many European and several Asian countries"
Ahem. Another good reason for not joining the EEC/EU then, thanks for your support "schrodingers brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks Ahem... a quote from Wikipedia: "in 1950, British output per head was still 30 per cent ahead of the six founder members of the EEC, but within 50 years it had been overtaken by many European and several Asian countries"
Ahem. Another good reason for not joining the EEC/EU then, thanks for your support "I see you've been using the Boris/ Gove bus calculator to do your economic sums again... Good luck is all I say if you seriously beliweve the UK would have performed better had it not joined in the first place. What with it losing virtually all it's colonies (a cheap source of raw materials) and systematically dismantling virtually it's entire industrial base while our European neighbours did the opposite (w.r.t industry that is).  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I see you've been using the Boris/ Gove bus calculator to do your economic sums again... Good luck is all I say if you seriously beliweve the UK would have performed better had it not joined in the first place. What with it losing virtually all it's colonies (a cheap source of raw materials) and systematically dismantling virtually it's entire industrial base while our European neighbours did the opposite (w.r.t industry that is). "
We ceased being an economy built on production and became one that consumed instead.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" When we were still the 5th largest economy in the world. Frankly that argument is bollocks Ahem... a quote from Wikipedia: "in 1950, British output per head was still 30 per cent ahead of the six founder members of the EEC, but within 50 years it had been overtaken by many European and several Asian countries"
Ahem. Another good reason for not joining the EEC/EU then, thanks for your support "What is it with some leave voters that really have a hard time working out the difference between "We should not have joined" and "We should leave"? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Ahem. Another good reason for not joining the EEC/EU then, thanks for your support
"Yes that and the fact that some have a hard time correllating data -choosing instead to conflate unrelated events. The obvious flawed logic in the quoted response is that the nadir of our economy to date was 1973 (the year the 3 day work week was adopted) but the year we voted to stay in the common market was 1975. Yes we also joined the EEC earlier in 73, but as any rational economist will tell you, the effects of economic policy are rarely felt immediately or attributable to a single event (hint: the oil crisis of 73-74 which had nothing to do with Europe). Ever wonder why the economy only really started to grow legs a number of years after joining the common market (circa the mid eighties after the resulting recession had finally come to and end)? But yes lets persist with conflating data to suit our own agenda shall we (but then again leavers prefer emotion over logic so appealing to any whim of rationality is pure fantasy on my part)  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really is time to hugely increase defence spending ! Mainly on planes and ships !" I disagree -we have been neglecting our spend on cavalry and swords for centuries and have now lost the empire as a result. "Also raise the recruitment age to 21 !" No lets match it to the retirement age -let them go out with a bang! "Why teach kids who Arne old enough to leave school now , vote , or drink to Kill !!!" Yes the workhouses need fresh blood -they've been declining of late! All of the above were stated with the ironic setting on 11 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really is time to hugely increase defence spending ! Mainly on planes and ships ! I disagree -we have been neglecting our spend on cavalry and swords for centuries and have now lost the empire as a result. Also raise the recruitment age to 21 ! No lets match it to the retirement age -let them go out with a bang! Why teach kids who Arne old enough to leave school now , vote , or drink to Kill !!! Yes the workhouses need fresh blood -they've been declining of late! All of the above were stated with the ironic setting on 11 "I would definitely put pensioners on the front line.They are the most expendable generation .Anyone over 60 should be conscripts in times of war.Think of the inheritance tax revenue to the state if the boomers were feed into the war machine grinder! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
)
Theresa May: "...the fires at the Staffordshire Moorlands, up in the north of..err..Britain..."
(That's Scotland out then! NI and Wales to follow? )
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Really is time to hugely increase defence spending ! Mainly on planes and ships ! I disagree -we have been neglecting our spend on cavalry and swords for centuries and have now lost the empire as a result. Also raise the recruitment age to 21 ! No lets match it to the retirement age -let them go out with a bang! Why teach kids who Arne old enough to leave school now , vote , or drink to Kill !!! Yes the workhouses need fresh blood -they've been declining of late! All of the above were stated with the ironic setting on 11
I would definitely put pensioners on the front line.They are the most expendable generation .Anyone over 60 should be conscripts in times of war.Think of the inheritance tax revenue to the state if the boomers were feed into the war machine grinder! "Perhaps you would like your idea to become Green Party policy they wouldn't have any less chance of getting into power! To quote Ghandi "The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vunerable members". Just glad I don't live in the miserable world of Bob! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). While my excitement about England winning the world cup, is increasing with every game, my disappointment, if we don't, will be all that much bigger, the closer to the final we get. Hopefully, we'll all (continue to) be pleasantly surprised! " I have to say, I don't follow football so maybe this is a daft question.... but last night everyone was singing about it coming home. There were tweets of BA flight tickets with 'Football' 'Moscow' and 'England' on it, illustrating that they are coming home.... surely if they just got through to the next round then they are *not* coming home? Aren't we meant to be celebrating that they are *not* coming home? Or have I missed something? -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). " It's the hope that kills you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). It's the hope that kills you." Which would explain why you’re a no hoper | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). It's the hope that kills you. Which would explain why you’re a no hoper "Try harder next time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). It's the hope that kills you. Which would explain why you’re a no hoper
Try harder next time."Ok. Hope is a positive emotion. The opposite is hopelessness dejection and despair | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). While my excitement about England winning the world cup, is increasing with every game, my disappointment, if we don't, will be all that much bigger, the closer to the final we get. Hopefully, we'll all (continue to) be pleasantly surprised! I have to say, I don't follow football so maybe this is a daft question.... but last night everyone was singing about it coming home. There were tweets of BA flight tickets with 'Football' 'Moscow' and 'England' on it, illustrating that they are coming home.... surely if they just got through to the next round then they are *not* coming home? Aren't we meant to be celebrating that they are *not* coming home? Or have I missed something? -Matt" I don't follow football either (only watch specific games) but there is some talent (and I don't mean in footballing skills) that I like to look at and drool! haha I think the "coming home" thing is referring to the trophy/title. I think! ------- I think Theresa's in for a sleepless night tonight (and for the forseeable future nights). Maybe I'm a softie, but I feel sorry for her. Everything is going wrong... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's worse? Getting eliminated early on or within arm's reach of the trophy? Personally, I'd take it a lot harder if I got my hopes up and then failed to achieve my goal (pun intended, yes!). It's the hope that kills you. Which would explain why you’re a no hoper
Try harder next time.
Ok. Hope is a positive emotion. The opposite is hopelessness dejection and despair "You know that rote sitcom trope where one character will take a phrase or cliché at face value? Yeah... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
