|
|
BBC Con bias
Con leader goes on fun run:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: http://www.backtheban.com/ League Against Cruel Sports: http://www.league.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? How would that work, since AFAIK he's still alive? -- We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile. |
BBC Con bias
Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? There's plenty of Gordon stories around today all about how he needs to watch his back. Seems his own party hates him more than we do. |
BBC Con bias
"allanbonnetracy" wrote in message ... Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? There's plenty of Gordon stories around today all about how he needs to watch his back. Seems his own party hates him more than we do. If you're bored and/or frustrated with mainstream politics and mainstream "news", and you have nothing better to do that watch rubbish even though it's a holiday season, then I suggest you visit a Punch and Judy show. Content-wise, they're on-a-par intellectually, have roughly the same educational value, and I'm sure there's one at "Butlins Minehead" - a place which seems to be popular with many of the cretins in this newsgroup. In spite of the fact that Butlins went *way* out of fashion over 50 years ago (because they were ****, and because commercial airliners became affordable to the masses at around the same time) and are now frequented only by a very, *very* poor social underclass of meatheads, you can still trust some of these morons to keep on returning year after year. |
BBC Con bias
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 07:55:42 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy
wrote: Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? There's plenty of Gordon stories around today all about how he needs to watch his back. Seems his own party hates him more than we do. The Con Party appear to be worried that hatred for Gordon Brown doesn't mean more votes will be heading their way, and have began making unwelcome overtures to the Lib Dems. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8432099.stm: ----- Begin Quote ----- The Liberal Democrats have rejected a claim by David Cameron that there are now fewer policy differences between the two parties than in the past. In his new year message, the Tory leader said there was "a lot less disagreement than there used to be" on how to create a fairer Britain. But Lib Dem chief of staff Danny Alexander called the comments "vacuous spin" that were "fooling nobody". He said Mr Cameron appeared "confused" about the meaning of fairness. The Conservatives have been making friendly overtures to the Liberal Democrats in recent months, with some opinion polls suggesting a hung Parliament the most likely outcome of next year's general election. ----- End Quote ----- -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: http://www.backtheban.com/ League Against Cruel Sports: http://www.league.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
The Con Party appear to be worried that hatred for Gordon Brown
doesn't mean more votes will be heading their way, and have began making unwelcome overtures to the Lib Dems. Brown was unelectable, even in his own party, fifteen years ago when Labour sensibly chose Blair as leader. That decision led to three election victories. Brown’s only option of a route to power was therefore to eventually seize power over the heads of the country and his own party. He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Brown was a turkey fifteen years ago so where does that leave him now. The electorate hates him finding anyone, apart from diehards, prepared to vote for another five years of Brown is like finding rocking horse ****. Labour sleepwalked into this situation, on the back of their disillusion with Blair, and, consequently, unless they deal with the Brown problem, with all and more of the ruthlessness he applied in gaining power, they will surely destroy themselves. The issue for Labour now is survival as a party, a contained defeat rather than the annihilation Brown will surely bring. Ask any Tory what worries them most and for sure it’s Labour getting rid of Brown. Everything Brown touches goes wrong, often by the poisonous baggage he leaves everywhere behind him, mostly by design (he's an idiot) and sometimes even because he’s just a jinx that gets the sort of luck he largely deserves for a treacherous political life lived entirely by the sword. |
BBC Con bias
HTML-STRIP v1.4b
"Martin Jay" wrote in message ... Con leader goes on fun run: Is it really a news item? Yes, it is no worse than others. Current headlines at Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Three of them stand out as "just another news item" Six arrests in fall death enquiry Parents' plea over abduction Briton told of execution timing Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: League Against Cruel Sports: |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
tally ho!!!! |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? They did those for about sixteen years from c. 1992 to 2008. |
BBC Con bias
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:38:32 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy
wrote: He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Much of what you wrote contains some truth, but the above is quite inaccurate. The recent Glasgow by-election gave his candidate a surprisingly large majority, because his supporters largely went out to vote and the opposition didn't bother. The same thing could possibly happen in the GE unless the opposition parties can get their voters to abandon their inertia and actually go out to vote. Brown *could* get in due an exceptionally low turnout, which would be the worst of all possible worlds. |
BBC Con bias
|
BBC Con bias
allanbonnetracy wrote:
finding anyone, apart from diehards, prepared to vote for another five years of Brown is like finding rocking horse ****. I think Gordon Brown is a great leader and I hope Labour keeps him until the election. In fact, even if they lose every single seat in the election, I hope they still keep him for the next few elections. -- We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile. |
BBC Con bias
In message , Martin Jay
wrote And underlines the sad fact that few people in the UK understand how the electoral system works. Or care What's the point of voting if all the politicians are corrupt and only interested in lining their own pockets? It doesn't matter who gets in the next time as the current fiscal situation will dictate what has to be done. -- Alan news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
BBC Con bias
They forgot that the world did not end today, and then there is the, Cliff
did not top the charts this Christmas one... Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "Martin Jay" wrote in message ... Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: http://www.backtheban.com/ League Against Cruel Sports: http://www.league.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... allanbonnetracy wrote: finding anyone, apart from diehards, prepared to vote for another five years of Brown is like finding rocking horse ****. I think Gordon Brown is a great leader and I hope Labour keeps him until the election. In fact, even if they lose every single seat in the election, I hope they still keep him for the next few elections. lol -- https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:45:49 +0000, lid wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:38:32 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy wrote: He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Much of what you wrote contains some truth, but the above is quite inaccurate. And underlines the sad fact that few people in the UK understand how the electoral system works. Uk elections are like a restaurant menu with the 'choice' of chicken + chips, chicken + roasties, chicken + salad... What if you don't want chicken? Who do we beef, fish, venison loving 'extremists' vote for? I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) Guy |
BBC Con bias
"Bigguy" wrote in message ... Martin Jay wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:45:49 +0000, lid wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:38:32 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy wrote: He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Much of what you wrote contains some truth, but the above is quite inaccurate. And underlines the sad fact that few people in the UK understand how the electoral system works. Uk elections are like a restaurant menu with the 'choice' of chicken + chips, chicken + roasties, chicken + salad... What if you don't want chicken? Who do we beef, fish, venison loving 'extremists' vote for? I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) I reckon UKIP will get my vote. -- https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 03:32:02 -0000, Basil Jet
wrote: allanbonnetracy wrote: finding anyone, apart from diehards, prepared to vote for another five years of Brown is like finding rocking horse ****. I think Gordon Brown is a great leader and I hope Labour keeps him until the election. In fact, even if they lose every single seat in the election, I hope they still keep him for the next few elections. Only a mere flicker on the troll-o-meter! Fred X |
BBC Con bias
Ophelia wrote:
"Bigguy" wrote in message ... I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) I reckon UKIP will get my vote. Sadly that would be a wasted vote in my constituency, because getting the incumbent Labour guy out by voting for the second party has to be my priority. Also I'm concerned that UKIP don't stand for anything except exerting more power over Britain than the other parties want. It's as if they want power for themselves but won't tell us what they want to do with it. If they promised that they would immediately pull us out of the EU and then they would call a second general election immediately after, that would make them look more honest and admirable. -- We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile. |
BBC Con bias
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:00:30 +0000, Alan wrote:
It doesn't matter who gets in the next time as the current fiscal situation will dictate what has to be done. Not entirely true. A government legislates social as well as economic policy so although the government will be restrained in terms of economic spending due to the size of the deficit, it will have the power to legislate on criminalizing or legalizing aspects of personal behavior. |
BBC Con bias
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... Ophelia wrote: "Bigguy" wrote in message ... I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) I reckon UKIP will get my vote. Sadly that would be a wasted vote in my constituency, because getting the incumbent Labour guy out by voting for the second party has to be my priority. No matter what I vote, the incumbent will stay, so I will do what makes ME feel better Also I'm concerned that UKIP don't stand for anything except exerting more power over Britain than the other parties want. It's as if they want power for themselves but won't tell us what they want to do with it. If they promised that they would immediately pull us out of the EU and then they would call a second general election immediately after, that would make them look more honest and admirable. I don't agree. They can split the vote. Have you not seen that Pearson offered to stand UKIP down, if the Cons promise to hold an IN/OUT referendum on the EU? He was turned down. Had Cameron said yes I wouldn't have believed him anyway. His 'cast iron' promise didn't mean much, did it? https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... Ophelia wrote: "Bigguy" wrote in message ... I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) I reckon UKIP will get my vote. Sadly that would be a wasted vote in my constituency, because getting the incumbent Labour guy out by voting for the second party has to be my priority. No matter what I vote, the incumbent will stay, so I will do what makes ME feel better Also I'm concerned that UKIP don't stand for anything except exerting more power over Britain than the other parties want. It's as if they want power for themselves but won't tell us what they want to do with it. If they promised that they would immediately pull us out of the EU and then they would call a second general election immediately after, that would make them look more honest and admirable. I don't agree. They can split the vote. Have you not seen that Pearson offered to stand UKIP down, if the Cons will promise to hold an IN/OUT referendum on the EU? He was turned down. Had Cameron said yes I wouldn't have believed him anyway. His 'cast iron' promise didn't mean much, did it? https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/ |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? You're right, the Met office story is totally irrelevant and unimportant with their record |
BBC Con bias
In article ,
Noggin wrote: Martin Jay wrote: Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing Six arrests in fall death inquiry Met Office warning of heavy snow Cameron runs in charity mud race Parents' plea over abduction Which one stands out as being totally irrelevant and unimportant? :) Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? You're right, the Met office story is totally irrelevant and unimportant with their record The Times sums that one up in their cartoon today. Here is a Met Office warning: "Don't try to lift heavy snow" -- From KT24 Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11 |
BBC Con bias
"allanbonnetracy" wrote in message ... Where's the fluffy Gordon Brown story? There's plenty of Gordon stories around today all about how he needs to watch his back. Seems his own party hates him more than we do. critcher said................ you do not we do |
BBC Con bias
"allanbonnetracy" wrote in message ... The Con Party appear to be worried that hatred for Gordon Brown doesn't mean more votes will be heading their way, and have began making unwelcome overtures to the Lib Dems. Brown was unelectable, even in his own party, fifteen years ago when Labour sensibly chose Blair as leader. That decision led to three election victories. Brown’s only option of a route to power was therefore to eventually seize power over the heads of the country and his own party. He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Brown was a turkey fifteen years ago so where does that leave him now. The electorate hates him finding anyone, apart from diehards, prepared to vote for another five years of Brown is like finding rocking horse ****. Labour sleepwalked into this situation, on the back of their disillusion with Blair, and, consequently, unless they deal with the Brown problem, with all and more of the ruthlessness he applied in gaining power, they will surely destroy themselves. The issue for Labour now is survival as a party, a contained defeat rather than the annihilation Brown will surely bring. Ask any Tory what worries them most and for sure it’s Labour getting rid of Brown. Everything Brown touches goes wrong, often by the poisonous baggage he leaves everywhere behind him, mostly by design (he's an idiot) and sometimes even because he’s just a jinx that gets the sort of luck he largely deserves for a treacherous political life lived entirely by the sword. critcher said...................... do you by any chance have associations with a rather bluish sort of party ? |
BBC Con bias
wrote in message ... On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:38:32 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy wrote: He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Much of what you wrote contains some truth, but the above is quite inaccurate. The recent Glasgow by-election gave his candidate a surprisingly large majority, because his supporters largely went out to vote and the opposition didn't bother. The same thing could possibly happen in the GE unless the opposition parties can get their voters to abandon their inertia and actually go out to vote. Brown *could* get in due an exceptionally low turnout, which would be the worst of all possible worlds. critcher said.............. no it wouldn't |
BBC Con bias
"Bigguy" wrote in message ... Martin Jay wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:45:49 +0000, lid wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:38:32 -0800 (PST), allanbonnetracy wrote: He remains virtually untested in any election except in by-elections where the results have been disastrous. Much of what you wrote contains some truth, but the above is quite inaccurate. And underlines the sad fact that few people in the UK understand how the electoral system works. Uk elections are like a restaurant menu with the 'choice' of chicken + chips, chicken + roasties, chicken + salad... What if you don't want chicken? Who do we beef, fish, venison loving 'extremists' vote for? I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) Guy critcher said..................... try voting for abc(name to long to type) |
BBC Con bias
"Ophelia" wrote in message ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... Ophelia wrote: "Bigguy" wrote in message ... I would vote for a donkey to get rid of Labour ;-) I reckon UKIP will get my vote. Sadly that would be a wasted vote in my constituency, because getting the incumbent Labour guy out by voting for the second party has to be my priority. No matter what I vote, the incumbent will stay, so I will do what makes ME feel better Also I'm concerned that UKIP don't stand for anything except exerting more power over Britain than the other parties want. It's as if they want power for themselves but won't tell us what they want to do with it. If they promised that they would immediately pull us out of the EU and then they would call a second general election immediately after, that would make them look more honest and admirable. I don't agree. They can split the vote. Have you not seen that Pearson offered to stand UKIP down, if the Cons promise to hold an IN/OUT referendum on the EU? He was turned down. Had Cameron said yes I wouldn't have believed him anyway. His 'cast iron' promise didn't mean much, did it? https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/ critcher said....................... for gods sake (not gord) there is to much money in the eu for any of our parties to pull out. that is the future like it or not. If you believe UKIP will pull you out then you are fooling yourselves |
BBC Con bias
"jamie powell" wrote in message ... If you're bored and/or frustrated with mainstream politics and mainstream "news", and you have nothing better to do that watch rubbish even though it's a holiday season, then I suggest you visit a Punch and Judy show. Prime ministers questions can be found on BBC Parliament |
BBC Con bias
J G Miller wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:00:30 +0000, Alan wrote: It doesn't matter who gets in the next time as the current fiscal situation will dictate what has to be done. Not entirely true. A government legislates social as well as economic policy so although the government will be restrained in terms of economic spending due to the size of the deficit, it will have the power to legislate on criminalizing or legalizing aspects of personal behavior ....if they can get a majority for it in the Commons. |
BBC Con bias
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:40:43 +0000, JNugent wrote:
...if they can get a majority for it in the Commons. Nonetheless, a government does not require a majority to make ministerial orders. |
BBC Con bias
Martin Jay wrote:
Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing He wasn't a Briton. He was a British national of Pakistani origin. -- Enzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. |
BBC Con bias
J G Miller wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:40:43 +0000, JNugent wrote: [on the proposition that a government can change legislation:] ...if they can get a majority for it in the Commons. Nonetheless, a government does not require a majority to make ministerial orders. A minister can order only what he is already empowered by statute to order. He certainly can't make regulations/statutory instruments (they have to be approved by Parliament). In order to preclude the possibility of a minister exercising the discretionary power conferred by the post, Parliament would have to have the minister ejected from office, which might be achieved by a no-confidence motion in the government. |
BBC Con bias
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:14:23 +0000, JNugent wrote:
A minister can order only what he is already empowered by statute to order. He certainly can't make regulations/statutory instruments (they have to be approved by Parliament). So long as the minister can engineer and declare the necessary state of emergency, from the powers invested by the Civil Contingencies Act 2004: QUOTE Emergency regulations may make provision of any kind that could be made by Act of Parliament or by the exercise of the Royal Prerogative; in particular, regulations may— (a)confer a function on a Minister of the Crown, on the Scottish Ministers, on the National Assembly for Wales, on a Northern Ireland department, on a coordinator appointed under section 24 or on any other specified person (and a function conferred may, in particular, be— (i)a power, or duty, to exercise a discretion; (ii)a power to give directions or orders, whether written or oral); (b)provide for or enable the requisition or confiscation of property (with or without compensation); (c)provide for or enable the destruction of property, animal life or plant life (with or without compensation); (d)prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, movement to or from a specified place; (e)require, or enable the requirement of, movement to or from a specified place; (f)prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, assemblies of specified kinds, at specified places or at specified times; (g)prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, travel at specified times; (h)prohibit, or enable the prohibition of, other specified activities; (i)create an offence of— (i)failing to comply with a provision of the regulations; (ii)failing to comply with a direction or order given or made under the regulations; (j)disapply or modify an enactment or a provision made under or by virtue of an enactment; (k)require a person or body to act in performance of a function (whether the function is conferred by the regulations or otherwise and whether or not the regulations also make provision for remuneration or compensation); (l)enable the Defence Council to authorise the deployment of Her Majesty’s armed forces; (m)make provision (which may include conferring powers in relation to property) for facilitating any deployment of Her Majesty’s armed forces; (n)confer jurisdiction on a court or tribunal (which may include a tribunal established by the regulations); (o)make provision which has effect in relation to, or to anything done in— (i)an area of the territorial sea, (ii)an area within British fishery limits, or (iii)an area of the continental shelf; (iii)obstructing a person in the performance of a function under or by virtue of the regulations; (p)make provision which applies generally or only in specified circumstances or for a specified purpose; (q)make different provision for different circumstances or purposes. (4)In subsection (3) “specified” means specified by, or to be specified in accordance with, the regulations. (5)A person making emergency regulations must have regard to the importance of ensuring that Parliament, the High Court and the Court of Session are able to conduct proceedings in connection with— (a)the regulations, or (b)action taken under the regulations. UNQUOTE |
BBC Con bias
"Enzo Matrix" wrote in message ... Martin Jay wrote: Con leader goes on fun run: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/8432439.stm. Is it really a news item? Current headlines at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/default.stm: Briton told of execution timing He wasn't a Briton. He was a British national of Pakistani origin. -- Enzo I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. critcher said.......................... wot a bunch of divs |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com