Otta

I also think roasts are vastly overrated. And I've never jad a decent roast potato when having a roast out, and that includes places like the Palmerston. Best roasts I ever had out were from the now departed Woodman on Kirkwall, they were ?7.50 (this is about 5 years back) and I'm not being all working class champion, they were really good quality cooked by an old lady. Yesterday I had 2 pieces of chicken and chips from the Favourote in penge. It was proppa!

I'll start watching when I can drink again.

I think I have (extended) family who will possibly be looking down that road too. MAYBE even my old man (if the blokes in the pub convince him)... And I suspect I have "friends" (in a facebooky - used to know them, think they're pretty decent people, but unlikely to be seeing them anytime soon - way) who will also be tempted or even definites already. And I will tell them I think they're wrong, but I won't be dismissing them all as racist idiots.

I just tuned in to find the match had finished (thought it was evening). Looking at the scoreline though I'm not overly disappointed to have missed it.

Although clever I guess, as the anti Europe Tory back benchers will have liked the sound of it.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Cameron should send Borris after him. Two > big media personalities who happen to be > politicians. Let the very popular (with many) > Borris take a pop at Farage. Okay I should have known better than to say that. Just heard Bozza on the radio basically saying. I had a chat with Douglas (Carswel) and basically we pretty much agreed on everything, so his beloved "kippers" may as well just vote Tory". Oh dear.

Well I'm not sure it does, and don't think either of us can prove either way at this stage. So we'll see I guess...

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was on the phone and couldn't copy paste the > whole thing - I wans't trying to misrepresent you > at all > > Nor do I think your full paragraph changes > anything - it says to people who are tempted to > vote UKIP Oh FFS. it's MY FB page, so I'm voicing an opinion which was not pro UKIP but rather hopeful that the "main" parties might step up. If someone is stupid enough to base their vote on what I write on FB because they think they've got my blessing, then they are a f**king moron. But I very much douby that my status will lead anyone to vote UKIP.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Was there a party NOT supporting that war quids? > > Otta. You are in quite the charming mood lately. I'm fed up with being nice and charming, it gets you nowhere, and I'm finding you really bloody patronising. > > "Part of me feels pleased about UKIP winning a > seat in parliament" > > Sound familiar? Yes, it's a selected part of my facebook status from Friday. The WHOLE thing went "Part of me feels pleased about UKIP winning a seat in parliament. Feel like something is actually happening for a change and hopefully the arrogant leading parties might start to take notice and actually stand up and fight rather than just dismissing it." > No way to I think you are in anyway a ukip > supporter. But I think that sentence displayed > encouragement to UKIP voters. Do you think it > doesn't? Well if you just take the bit you chose to share on here in order to paint me in a certain light, then yeah I guess. If however you read the whole thing, I think (if you have half a brain) you'd realise that I am pleased because I think the whole political world needs a kick in the arse. Isn't that part of the reason you were wetting yourself over the Scottish referendum a couple of short weeks ago? I watched Question Time on Thursday, and still the likes of Harriett Harman were just dismissing UKIP voters, even though a good few of them were telling her why they'd felt this was all that was left for them. I don't agree with these people, but dismiss them and soon enough you'll see that UKIP are not just a little protest party. THAT is what I want to avoid, I just think that your attitude to it is playing in to their hands. But we'll agree to disagree. I'm not trying to fall out with anyone, but I won't be mis/selectively quoted and dismissed either.

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Need a beer much? Well yeah, but it wouldn't change what I'm saying here. I think that if we all took SJ's stance (and not just SJ obviously, I'm not picking on him, but he's voicing it rather strongly), then more and more people would end up going to UKIP, because what UKIP do is divide, and start and "us and them" thing. SJ seems to be playing in to that from where I'm sitting. Where SJ is spot on is that the media are giving UKIP the kind of press that, say, the greens could only dream of. But whilst that's going on, I don't think it helps for the self appointed "clever press" to say "look at them, isn't that silly". At least Nick legg had the bottle to go up against Farage, Cameron should send Borris after him. Two big media personalities who happen to be politicians. Let the very popular (with many) Borris take a pop at Farage.

And for the record I think my views on UKIP are probably near enough identical to yours, but I think you're being an idiot if you think that every voter (WHICHEVER party they vote for) is looking beyond the promises of a leader in a TV interview.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Here is what I think would make a lot of people > NOT vote UKIP > > Non-UKIP voters making it obvious that UKIP don't > have a fair point. > > As it is, the media saturate us with UKIP presence > in all programmes (in a way other minority parties > don't get) and lots of people who have felt they > Have been unable to be publicly bigoted for years > suddenly feel liberated and encouraged. > > So you encourage them if you want. > > Free speech? I'm not stopping them speaking - I'm > just saying what they say is wrong. > > If I was a woman I would be petrified of UKIP > having any access to power for example. I'm not encouraging anyone, so fuck off on that one. I'm saying that not everyone of them is a thick cab driver or a closet bigot now happy to "cone out". 10 years ago I'd have said that, but things jave changed and if you can't see that then you're being more closed minded than sone of them.

Oh they should. But not everyone is tou SJ, you seem to really struggle to get yourbhead around that. Do you think your attitude here would convince anyone that crossed a UKIP box tp think again? Or is it more likely you'd get theor back up?

Yep, patronise them, that'll get the votes back.

The first flat me and the missus rented was all yellow inside, and it was lovely actually. I even used to lije the Mag when it was yellow.

Scuffle? Really? I do agree though that the independent business being somehow better for the community is something I've never really understood.

The Committed

Surely no one wants Peckham to be the new ED. It's "edgier" (for want of a better word) and that is a good thing.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That said, even my intolerant self is hoping this > is apocryphal > > "Quote of the day from Clacton on Resident "Yes I > voted UKIP the Tory MP has done nothing for years" Hahahaha brilliant! But kind of proves my point that a lot of people don't look beyond the leader and the headlines. And there may be other parties they could have voted for, but when do these parties get a mention in the press. Just heard on the news that the Lib Dems done so badly yesterday that they lost their deposit. Oh dear.

That's the point I was making earlier, a lot of people don't look too deeply at a party's manifesto, they vote based on the public face of the leader and the headlines. Not only UKIP voters, PLENTY of reds and blues too. That's basically what I was saying depressed me earlier.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not sure I agree. Have a look at results in May. I > suspect many struggling areas won't have a bar of > UKIP. Struggling doesn't make people thick. I didn't say struggling = thick. I also think you're making the same mistake the main parties are making, i.e. dismissing people that vote UKIP as thick.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are people on here starting to equate working > class with UKIP voters? Because that's not right > surely? Indeed, not right. But then again, they will do best in areas where people are struggling most.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh come on. i'm quite happy to bang on about class > etc but in reality much of white working class > London couldn't wait to get out of 'sh1thole' > London for years only then they mainly blamed a > different sort of incomer. Complete rubbish that > middle class newcomers have somehow pushed them > all away. in a global world, House prices aren't > driven by the fact a couple of cup cake shops open > on Hardship Lane.....even I'm bored of it all now You're right, these things seem to go in circles, and a lot of those that fled to Sidcup back in the day were probably doing it because they didn't like all the immigrants (just ask TonyLondonSuburbs). In the 80s there was lots of talk of yuppies, surely the first gentrifiers? But I disagree that a couple of cupcake shops doesn't make a big difference to an area. Just look at a property suppliment, or an episode of location x 3 to see the eyes of an aspirational couple light up when they see the cafes and cheese shops on a high street.

njc97 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta - isnt a "a nice place with things to do" > just "somewhere gentrified"? Not from my understanding of the word. I guess it depends how you define a nice place, and things to do. Surely you're then suggesting that a place that hasn't been gentrified is, by definition, not nice and has nothing to do? I don't necessarily conflate gentrification with house prices, more the sort of businesses that open.

niki_nje Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta, which route are you using exactly, by public > transport it will take 45 minutes or 30 min cycle > ride, so no it isn't 15 minutes away. Also why do > you feel the patronising need to tell me about > "reality" - I'm living it, dealing with it, that's > my point. Oh for God's sake, I wasn't being patronising. You said you were devastated to have to leave your home of 5 years, I said others (myself included) had to leave their home since birth, and that was the reality. That is not patronising, that's the reality I had to deal with, and now you're having to deal with, and the reason is largely gentrification. I don't know where exactly in Anerly you'll be, but if you're 7 minutes away from CP Triangle, then I'd get a 63 / 363 (whichever one goes to CP these days, I don't use that route). If you're nearer the Penge side, get a 176. 15 minutes might have been an exaggeration to be fair, but you'd do it well inside half hour, which isn't that bad surely? Edit to add, sorry I missed your smiley on first reading, so may have taken your post more seriously than it was intended.