[Closed] Should I be offended?

Should I be offended?

aren't you always?

You two should start dating

Could be worse, could have been called a **** **** ****

[s]Should[/s]When am I [s]be[/s]not offended?

There fixed it for you...

This message board is so much more a part of your life than is healthy, isn't it?

You should buy him flowers for being nice to you.

a soft moderate Guardian-reading type liberal.

I cant see anything i'd be ashamed of there

You could just attention seek about it...

Well if helps you solve this little conundrum, it [i]wasn't[/i] meant as a compliment.

monksie - Member

This message board is so much more a part of your life than is healthy, isn't it?

+1

are you related to marcus brigstockt

Ernie who?

The fastest milkman in the west?

Some people like being offended. You just need to decide if you're one of them.

I thought it was part of your role in policing the internet with Elfinsafety to be offended on everyones behalf.

I think you should demand facts and figures and ask where he got his information from.

🙂

Never mind TJ - [url=

loves you....

yesterday i mentioned to a friend of mine that i'm going to try not eating red meat, as i'm not sure it agrees with me.

"have you been reading the f***ing guardian again?"

was his response.

[i]it wasn't meant as a compliment.[/i]

It's not a very good insult though. It's like telling some-one they're not very good at arranging flowers, or that their home made marmalade is a bit runny, and not very tangy...

I shall call Ernie a wishy washy liberal from now on. That'll learn him

or that their home made marmalade is a bit runny, and not very tangy...

I wonder what daily newspaper a left winger is expected to read? At least the Guardian has the sense to employ people like Gary Young and George Monbiot and the late Paul Foot. Even Simon Jenkins was last week arguing to end the military budget. I should like to be told of a more progressive daily alternative.

Have a fight, with knives and broken bottles and chisels!!

Elfinsafety vs TandemJeremy

😆 they are lovers 😆

Should I be offended?

Definitely. In Ernie's world being a "soft moderate Guardian-reading type liberal" is equivalent to being a Tory.

If I called you a deluded self righteous eco-marxist would that help balance things up a bit?

WTF TJ has a facebook fan page.... and there're female 'fans'... and some are (well certainly one) incredibly hot!!

Go forth singletrackers and FB stalk she who is known as Corinne...

I wonder what daily newspaper a left winger is expected to read? At least the Guardian has the sense to employ people like Gary Young and George Monbiot and the late Paul Foot. Even Simon Jenkins was last week arguing to end the military budget. I should like to be told of a more progressive daily alternative.

There's so much wrong with that comment that I don't know where to being. Why can't a "left-winger" read the Times, or the Sun, or any other paper ? Have confidence in your views/opinions for goodness sake. Do you think your political commitment is so weak and shakey that you need a newspaper to reinforce it for you on a daily basis? I've been reading the Guardian since I was 10 years old (although obviously not in depth at that age) and the reason I still read it today is simply because of the sheer quantity and range of news it carries. Although I think it's fair to say that I am very far from being a typical Guardian reader - even Stoner who reads the Guardian everyday (probably for the same reasons as me), and can hardly be described as "left-wing", is a more typical Guardian reader than me. I certainly don't buy it to read their leader comments, or the thoughts of Gary Young and George Monbiot and the late Paul Foot. I never read any of the comment pages apart from the letters. And Seumas Milne on a Thursday. But only because Seumas Milne amuses me by echoing everything I think - pretty unusual for a member of the waffling intelligentsia. I certainly don't, as a general rule, need the Guardian to tell me how I should think. This is the paper I'll remind you, which urged everyone to vote LibDem last May. Now of course I don't know whether their call to arms on behalf of the LibDems had an effect on the election result, but if it did have any effect at all, then it will have been to help the Tory Party rule unhindered, despite their lack of necessary electoral support. How [i]terribly[/i] "left-wing" of them. I find the gushing enthusiasm and belief which many Guardian readers have for their paper, truly depressing. At least most Sun readers that I know have a healthy, cynical, and realistic view, of their newspaper - they are under no illusion about its limitations, unlike Guardian readers - the irony of which has always amused me btw. Nothing wrong with reading the Guardian of course, just don't treat it like an indispensable left-wing holy book, it isn't. Finally, you [i]"should like to be told of a "more progressive daily alternative"[/i] you apparently claim. Well the Morning Star which I also read most days, ticks both boxes. Although I am absolutely certain that you are about as interested in reading the Morning Star, as you are in reading 'a more progressive daily alternative' - ie, not at all.

Although I think it's fair to say that I am very far from being a typical Guardian reader - even Stoner who reads the Guardian everyday (probably for the same reasons as me), and can hardly be described as "left-wing"

aye. Its the best "news"paper out there. I only read Polly occasionally for some rank hypocrisy to giggle about. And the letters page to top up on leftie-hand-wringing-sub-TJ-yoghurt-knitting-rantettes.

Well, you read the Guardian so presumably, you're offended by absolutely everything anyway.

😉

...this is my favorite thread for ages. Thanks guys!

Oh...and can I join that FB group? Can I? Can I? Can I PLEEEEASE?!?!?!?!

[url=

witty retort to the offended[/url]

At least most Sun readers that I know have a healthy, cynical, and realistic view, of their newspaper

I just like the ***s 8)

a soft moderate Guardian-reading type liberal.

It is a bit, well, wet. Crap, even. I mean, "soft moderate" Not exactly going to get the brothers on the picket line fired up, is it?

'The Morning Star' goes a little way to explain the Stalinist bile, it's about as edifying as Pif.

she who is known as Corinne...

does she mean The "X"

Yup, it's The X.

Remember that TJ was once described by 'The Grauniad' as a 'cult'. 😉

[i]'cult'[/i]

I thought that sort of typographical error was a thing of the past?

No, you should be flattered than anyone deigns to give the slightest sh!t.

Who is 'the X'? Do I need to do some more stalkery?

BillMC - Member

'The Morning Star' goes a little way to explain the Stalinist bile, it's about as edifying as Pif.

LOL ! I give you a big long spiel about how you don't have agree with the editorial position of a newspaper to read it, and you automatically assume that I support the Morning Star because I read it ! Do you also assume that me and Stoner must therefore by default, support the Guardian's editorial position because we read it every day ? As it happens, I do support the overwhelming majority of Morning Star's editorials, as indeed would a substantial proportion of the population if they bothered reading it. And btw, I see absolutely to difference whatsoever between the Morning Star's political position and that of Seumas Milne. Seumas Milne I'll remind you BillMC, was your beloved Guardian's Comment Editor from 2001 until 2007. My big sticking point with the Morning Star, and it's a very big sticking point, is its unwavering support for the Labour Party. I will not, despite the Morning Star best effort to convince me otherwise, vote Labour. Apart from obviously, notable exceptions such as Ken Livingstone in the mayoral elections. The Morning Star's position is based imo, on the outdated principle that the Labour Party is a social-democratic mass working class party. IMO it ceased to be that when the hard right seized control of the party. From 1995 until Nick Clegg took control of the LibDems, I supported the LibDems as the most viable social-democratic party which represented the best interests of ordinary working people. When the LibDems under Clegg abandoned social-democracy and embraced neo-liberalism, I ceased to support them. I voted Green last election, on the basis that their candidate was the only one on my ballot paper which stood for a social-democratic Keynesian alternative. So quite a big gulf between me and the Morning Star then. But nevertheless, I have massive respect for the Morning Star, and find most of their editorials absolute spot on. It is a completely non-sectarian newspaper ("Stalinist" LOL!) which regularly features articles from a whole range of political positions. This includes a great deal of articles from very prominent Labour Party politicians. And today's Morning Star contained an article by the national policy coordinator of the Scottish Socialist Party - something which you are unlikely to read in the Guardian. It is in fact a [i]"more progressive daily alternative"[/i] to the Guardian. But then I very much doubt that you read the Guardian because there is no "more progressive daily alternative" as you appear to suggest BillMC, you read it because it fits in nicely with your own personal views. As I said : [i]I am absolutely certain that you are about as interested in reading the Morning Star, as you are in reading 'a more progressive daily alternative' - ie, not at all[/i].

Well I read the Guardian so there.

TJ and I are as one.

EDIT: I do so with my eyes open tho.. there is a lot of tripe in it. Like people who seem to believe we could and should have some kind of soft socialist revolution in this country.

You people are deforesting the world with your paper addictions!!!

Online, natch.

ernie - we know you are some kind of wishy washy liberal.