Well put, Coyote!
RudeFredBraBoy, I can assure you that the tag was not me, though I would hope that you already know that I would not stoop to that sort of level!
Chat Forum
[closed]
Margaret Beckett (Warning, piss-boiling content.....)
-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Flashy; you may have certain political and/or social views that may differ from mine, but what I am sure of, is that you're not malicious or dishonourable. I had no doubt that you had nothing to do with such vile spite. You're far too much of a gentleman, to stoop that low.
You, I'd have a drink with. I suspect we'd actually have a lot more in common, than we both realise!
Posted 3 years ago # -
Indeed, I would imagine so as well. Although I would have trouble if your speech is as poor as your punctuation!
Now, back on topic -
How much does a TV cost?
Mine was about £800, I think. So how on earth did Kaufman think it was acceptable to buy one at nearly £9,000 and claim for it?
Am I out of touch with TV costs or something?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Actually I'm interested in the cost of an armchair Flash. Quote from the Telegraph :
And what of the “£800 massage chair?” How did that fit in, he was politely asked by an interviewer. He replied: “You see, I’d have more respect for you if you were honest about the figures. You know full well it is £730.”
LOL ! ...... do you think that he had to bite his bottom lip to stop grinning after saying that ?
BTW, have we agreed that this whole expenses mess is Thatcher's fault ? Although obviously New Labour are at fault for not scrapping it.
Oh .... and there was a very interesting letter in yesterday's Independent highlighting what a massive pay cut Vince Cable had to accept when he gave up his job as Chief Economist for Shell to become an MP.
Why are so few people concerned about the comparatively low wages MPs receive ? If they really want to get on and double their wages, MPs have to become ministers. Which must kind of make it very tempting to put grovelling to the party leader, before serving the interests of your constituents
Posted 3 years ago # -
ernie_lynch - Member
Actually I'm interested in the cost of an armchair Flash. Quote from the Telegraph :And what of the “£800 massage chair?” How did that fit in, he was politely asked by an interviewer. He replied: “You see, I’d have more respect for you if you were honest about the figures. You know full well it is £730.”
LOL ! ...... do you think that he had to bite his bottom lip to stop grinning after saying that ?
That was, I have to say, utterly hilarious television!
Posted 3 years ago # -
£8000 for a TV is in the realms of buying your own cinema i.e not possible
Funny how Labour MPs have come out as the most corrupt from all this
Posted 3 years ago # -
Lanesra, I'm not so sure they have, to be honest. The loser here is the entire house of Commons.
Meanwhile, in the other place, Labour peers certainly have come out as the most corrupt recently.
The Commons, however? I think it's all parties who are at fault.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Lanesra, I'm not so sure they have, to be honest. The loser here is the entire house of Commons.
Or more accurately, the taxpayer.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Labour peers certainly have come out as the most corrupt recently
But wasn't that because the NotW only attempted to entrap Labour peers, and made no attempt to do the same to Tory peers ?
If they did, then I reckon we should know the names of the Tory peers who refused to accept money from NotW undercover reporters - they should surely be applauded for their honesty and integrity.
Posted 3 years ago # -
It will be interesting to see how people vote in the upcoming local/euro elections.The tories were kicked out in '97 due to sleeze and now that all the three main parties have been seemingly caught up in more sleeze,will people look to minor parties ? Surely people can't conplain about all this mess and continue to vote mainstream.I think alot will depend on the media and how much coverage they are willing to give to minor parties.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ernie, IIRC there were Lib, Con and Ind peers who turned it down, as well as one Lab peer. Will have to go and have a look when the rugby's finished.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yeah please do Captain, I can only find that they approached 5 peers, all of them Labour.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The Lords, Labour MP's have two members excluded (the first time since 1642)
Expenses, Elliot Morley, Margret Moran, Hazel Blears, **** from today, Shahid Malik (lots more to come out about him), Tam Dyel £18,00 for a book case the day before he retired etc etc..
Posted 3 years ago # -
But wasn't that because the NotW only attempted to entrap Labour peers, and made no attempt to do the same to Tory peers ?
If they did, then I reckon we should know the names of the Tory peers who refused to accept money from NotW undercover reporters - they should surely be applauded for their honesty and integrity.
Nu Labour snouts in the trough. Thatcher was right, I hope to god you lefties/communists etc never get in again, as you've been responsible for the two worst recessions/unemployment figures that this country has ever seen
Posted 3 years ago # -
Nu Labour snouts in the trough. Thatcher was right
I didn't think Thatcher ever talked about "snouts in the trough", but tell me about it - you never know, it might improve my image of her.
Although I don't get the impression that you're that sh1t hot on facts. Because I could be wrong, but I can't see any evidence any peers have been excluded from the Lords yet, if that's what you mean by "The Lords, Labour MP's have two members excluded (the first time since 1642)"
Of course it's always possible that they might be, although it's not conclusive. After all, the completely corrupt Tory peer Lord Archer wasn't excluded from the House of Lords, not withstanding the fact that his ability to attend was somewhat restricted by the fact that he sitting in a prison cell as a result of his corrupt crimes
Posted 3 years ago # -
I was sort of right...
However, four of the five Labour peers were willing to help to amend the bill in return for retainers. Some were more forthright than others.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Fair enough Captain, but it appears to have been loaded against Labour peers - I can't help feeling that it would have been somewhat fairer if they had also approached 5 Tory peers.
Although for me it's the peers who listened to what the undercover reporters actually wanted, and then declined to help, are the ones which come out of this smelling of roses. I'm not sure how impressed I am with the 3 Tory peers who didn't even bother to return calls
Posted 3 years ago # -
Although I don't get the impression that you're that sh1t hot on facts. Because I could be wrong, but I can't see any evidence any peers have been excluded from the Lords yet, if that's what you mean by "The Lords, Labour MP's have two members excluded (the first time since 1642)"
Ernie, read the papers
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ernest it would seem there is no pleasing you. Why would they bother to return calls from somebody offering them bribes?!
Well I suppose you'd expect better manners from the Tories "Hello, Lord Fotherington-Smythe here, yes, calling in reference to the cake tin full of cash... Well, I'm frightfully sorry old boy, but I'm going to have to decline, just not my cup of tea you see. Thanks for the offer, pip pip!"
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ernie can't grasp it that Nu Labour/Labour are the most corrupt politicians out there.
Thatcher was right to smash the unions/miners/labour(communist party) as she saw that they were all corrupt and were draining the public purse
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ernie, read the papers
Well actually I was thinking that perhaps you should do ?
But hey I said, I could be wrong - got a link that any peers have actually been excluded ?
Oh btw, your comment :
"you've been responsible for the two worst recessions/unemployment figures that this country has ever seen"
I was going to let it drop, but since you've told me to 'read the papers' I'd just like to point out that the 'worst unemployment figures that this country has ever seen' were in the 1930s and 1980s.
So hardly this government's, which you appear to think I'm part of, fault
But as I said - I don't think that you're too sh1t hot on facts ....
Posted 3 years ago # -
Why would they bother to return calls from somebody offering them bribes?!
Is that how you think the message on the answer phone was left : "We'd like to speak to you about giving you some cash to do some dodgy stuff" ?
LOL !
Posted 3 years ago # -
Well it seems that it did the trick with four out of five grasping hypocritical Labour peers Ernest.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yeah, you're right - that's how they must have done it !
Posted 3 years ago # -
Ernie, do me favour and **** off
Posted 3 years ago # -
Well I will **** off just as soon as you explain to me how "they face", is the same as "they have".
Or do think that there isn't any difference ?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Che - it's late at night. Don't you and your other logins ever sleep?
"Aye Fred, a woman breaks down all the political barriers, defeats the glass ceiling, brings an end to the cold war and the constant threat of Nuclear annihilation,"
That's an impressive feat - I had no idea that sexism in the workplace ended in 1979 when Thatcher won the election. The Equal Opportunities Commission presumably hasn't had much to do on women for nigh on 30 years now. I guess that works in the same way that there's no more racism in the US now that Obama is President, right?
Also, like a fool I had imagined that the end of the Cold War was something to do with the collapse of the Soviet economy, nationalism in the Baltic and Caucasian republics and Central Europe, the failed Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, perestroika and the rise of environmental activist groups. I now realise that it was all down to Maggie - an especially impressive success when you consider that none of the UK/US intelligence agencies predicted the USSR's collapse or the reunification of Germany...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Che ?
Posted 3 years ago # -
Che ?
Yes andywhit, konabunny knows of course, that the blood of an Irish rebel ran through his veins.
konabunny - "it's late at night. Don't you and your other logins ever sleep?"
No konabunny, in the small hours of the morning whilst you are safely tucked up in your bed, I keep a watchful and loving eye for any signs of stirrings on the forum.
btw, it's just the one login on IE and just one on FF. There is of course a reason, but it's surprisingly uninteresting. Obviously if you uniquely are interested, then I'll happily tell you. Although I can't believe that you are.Posted 3 years ago # -
Is it something to do with foxes?
Posted 3 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
