maxxi

The SNP must be well pissed off - finally get to the party, all set to boogie up a storm only to find their date's done a runner. Now they'll have to sit on the edge of the dance floor for five years hoping some chinless tory twat* glances in their direction and throws them a crumb or two. "Independence referendum?" 'No chance.' "Voting reform??" 'No chance.' "Er... what about some nicer offices for the SNP members?" 'We'll think about it.' *I am of course using the accepted SNP definition of a right honourable member of HM Govt.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Calm down guys, I know it's not a new fandangled > whizzo gizmo Now, see, if you had one of these you'd be laughing. They do a 'watch' too.

I keep getting fake "you have a WhatsApp message waiting" emails which are phishing scams - no I haven't clicked on any, a quick Google told me all I needed to know.

FJDGoose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > B52s euuurggghhh !! NO ! I have now crossed you off my Xmas card list. To do this I first had to create a list (as it didn't exist) of forumites I might send cards to, find a site that would enable me to write personalised message-cards to every one on the list (including you), choose appropriately moving and/or witty and/or corny-schmaltzy images and have them compiled into a final list all ready to be sent around Yuletide. Then I crossed you off. Not just deleted - I printed the list out and scored through your name with a black biro. Several times.

He seems more annoyed that this 'private' conversation is in a book - than the fact that it never happened... 'I?m so annoyed about it. They?ve gone ahead ? as I understand it, what I?ve said to them privately has just got out. Or what I?m accused of saying to them privately, which I deny and can?t remember it, they?ve gone out publicly and said it and yet they?re saying themselves it was said to them privately. Oh it?s very private then to publish a book about it, isn?t it?' Never the best communicator wasn't Graham.

Voting for the party you believe in is a futile exercise in this area if you are not Labour or LD. - Cor, I dunno, (someone on social media might say) just as you start to think your vote may count and are willing to give democracy a go ... the first past the post system shits in your satchel and, unless you are a follower of the two mentioned, you may as well stay home.

Fleetwood Mac The Smiths (intros apart) Black Eyed Peas - and Springsteen of course (thought that was a given). eta- just realised x-post with edcam. Always quite liked The Smiths right up until the moment the singer opened his mouth.

My thanks to Andrew Rawnsley for my favourite word-of-the-election-week-moment (I'm convinced journos trawl for these when there's nothing but log jam predictions to report) - the word - Swithering. No it's not a school house for wizards that speak with forked tongue but the condition of being uncertain which course of action to choose. I am officially all of a swither.

Petrol my arse. Ooooh lah-di-dah, 4-star! Meths not good enough any more? Gentrification gone mad.

flocker spotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i am axually gonna vote this time > > sheesh > > getting old I am genuinely considering not voting, for the first time. Getting older.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a little reminder that Cherylyn is one of the > top social media personalities in Australia Alongside who? Rupert Murdoch and Skippy's atrophied kangaroo dick? This is balls, but typical Aussie humour - cracking on that this dull-as-shit clich? is loved down-under just to get the Poms to 'like' her stuff. It's similar to what they tried with Vegemite and Fosters - crafty bastards.

Delighted for Cook - shame he had to lose his wicket at the death but got that monkey off his back - sounded like a great 100 too (TMS), shaping up to be a good test.

I think the question meant anyone responding would reveal too much of themselves AqM - if they were indeed "poor, sick, young, unemployed or disabled" they might not wish to reveal the fact lest they be judged by the 'rich, healthy, middle-aged, working able-bodied' types that haunt this place. It isn't easy being young.

What rot AqM, be bold! Be the first Premiership new-fan for the Cherries (to whom massive congratulations by the way).

Couldn't disagree more Louisa. Labour's problem is the combination of careerist slogan-spouters who haven't done their homework and don't really care to and old Blairite well-poisoners. Milibabe's the only one who'd pass muster in a proper govt. On the BBC London special tonight (admittedly an unsatisfactorily bite-sized debate) Sadiq Khan provided an embarrassment of vacuous sloganing and fake sincerity that was truly sickening. The Tory's Piri Patel was deluded, talking as though she'd slept through the last five years, Hughes was Hughes and there was a Ukip knob but the only passion came from angry Green, Shahrar Ali; yes of course he can say all that as he won't have to do it but it made a nice change. No Plaid Cymru though so I was only half engaged and if they don't have a local candidate (rumour has it they may not) I still do not know who to vote for.

I think the whole Heygate thing has left people believing that some at Southwark see dealing with big developers like that as a job interview and retirement package rolled into one. Allegedly.

Given their recent fortunes maybe some of their deserted mega-lego-bungalows could be converted from stores to flats. I rather fancy a flat on the produce aisle.

*bites knuckles... hard*

numbers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Talking of which, you let that 200 > get away Maxxi!!! :) Under the present Government it is quite apparent that not only was this not a 200 but could and would never be a 200 and only fiddling the books makes it seem otherwise; under Labour of course it would be claimed as a 300 which would turn out to be 150 plus a lot of owed posts that might never materialise. I put my 'x' against the party I intend voting for and thus applied the Plaid Cymru Welsh vigesimal counting system which only made it 13 so I am exonerated.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- It talked about shy tories > too. Are you sure that wasn't a mispronunciation?

That's not a tv, that's a microwave. One thing to check (my Mother did this recently) is whether the remote has an analogue/digital button. My Mother's Sony (sounds like a line from a French language book) has one of these which she pressed in error. Until it is pressed again all is darkness.

I see him as an alcoholic, dysfunctional, abusive, six-foot, three-and-a-half-inch tall invisible rabbit.

Quids scores a late winner in the 100s game... http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/06/04/article-2154319-1370CCE3000005DC-440_468x259.jpg

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It appears to be some type of "build stuff out of > toast" activity, not a cafe. Sounds like a > corporate team building day from hell. Yer, but I bet there's plenty of crumpet. ETA: *for extra bad taste add jokes about 'great racks', 'tight buns', 'easily spread' etc...

He's right though (Quids I mean). The people in charge always knew (and admitted as much) that the stadium's only future was as a Premier League Football Team's home. That it would only be rented so it was available for other shit like concerts and Rugby World Cups and any amount of other events and the club would not be able to brand the stadium as their own home and that the naming rights (and money from that) would stay with the legacy committee. That being the case the only candidates were a nearby Premier League team with a history in the area - and one from north London. Even a 9 year old (or a Spurs fan) could work out who the tenant would be. And of course you can get the Socialist Worker round here - want to borrow my copy?