Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I nearly choked on my fantasy crab sandwich. This 'writer' is pretending he's OK and that it's OK to muck-rake on another human.

The fact that Lady Mills-Mac is a fantasist does not in any way justify haranguing her, and the Mirror journo is simply trying to do that. It's all very grubby. Nero

I hear you Nero but as he's a social commentator he's only doing what he's paid for and that is to write his point of view despite what the paper's agenda may or may not be. Also how can we leave her alone when it is she who seeks to be in the media to raise her profile for her various charities and whatnot. She's a deluded self-publicist. Be that as it may I still think she is a sociopath.

It seems she doesn't seem to understand that people dislike her intensely.


Her public persona comes from being married to a legend. That's all. Take him out off the equation, we no longer care.


She obviously wants to continue to have a public role, but she doesn't have a right to it, we don't owe her anything.

She wasn't really a publicity seeker before the divorce tho was she? I can't remember her popping up all ove the place, except for animal rights stuff occasionally, so it doesn't really make sense to say at a traumatic time in her life she would be seeking publicity.


I also can't stand Mr Mc, arrogant twat that he is, and do wonder how much his people are fuelling the hate campaign against her, in order to get a better deal in the divorce courts.


I'm slightly on her side, but none of us really know enough to to make an informed judgement on this.

I really struggle to understand why anyone would seriously 'hate' Paul Mc.


So what if he wrote 'The Frog Chorus', and he wears silly polo-necks, and he let Linda play tambourine in 'Wings' and there was that business will the bagpipes on Mull of Kintyre? So what? John got killed, Paul got old. Take the last few years of John's life (with Yoko Sodding Ono) and imagine another thirty years of that. Go on.. try it.. I feel queasy already. Bleugh!

Totally agree with you on the Lennon front, but as for why I don't like Macca..


It's not his music (tho I loathe much of it) - there is something about the way he carries his place in musicall history that irks me unduly. He's not so stupid as to be openly arrogant, but he's much worse than that


Plus, behind all the thumbs-aloft mateyness there is something of the night about him (apologies to Widdicombe for the steal)


Another one: His gigs are worse than Robbie Williams for their karaokeness

:-$


Sorry Annasfield - I know people likes him but.. well, let's just say I'm balanced and don't dislike 'Eaver just because I like Paul (tu)


As for the thought of being chastised by both you AND Dulwichmum... well....


........


.................


;-)

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

there is something about the way he carries his

> place in musicall history that irks me unduly.


In what way? From memory, the last thirty years from Paul have been commendably restrained and dignified, considering where he's come from.

At the core of the anti-Paul brigade's mind-set seems to be some bizarre notion that somehow he doesn't deserve it (his place in musical history, I mean). Personally I can't think of many people who are more deserving.


Paul aint cool. He never was. But I am a fan of the Beatles and for that, I give him his due.

No one can take away from The Beatles, but basically I go along with what Sean said. Lennon was the more annoying though, I'll give you that.


Paul's attempt to get all classical was hilarious. Standing Stone if I remember rightly. A music lecturer I had at uni when I was doing my hobby (Alan) made us listen to it... What a total load of absolute sh!t.

Heather Mills' situation reminds me of Sarah Ferguson's in the 80s and early 90s. So I was interested in Sarah Ferguson's recent comments; I think this is a direct quote but who knows:


"It's quite difficult when you're in it - when it's right in your face," the Duchess of York told The Associated Press on Thursday night. "But there's always a reason for it, so maybe you have to change something in yourself."


"It's give and take," she said. "... If you are on the public stage, it's your public stage. Otherwise, don't be on the public stage. That's what I really think. If you're on it, accept it, if you don't want to accept it, get off it."


It looks to me as if Fergie's advice is to shut up and keep a low profile. Seems like good advice to me and it worked for Fergie; she's never going to be on my Christmas card list but she's come a long way from the car crash she used to be. Also, her kids are showing all the signs of growing into two well behaved young women - that says a lot.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Morally they should, but we don't actually vote for parties in our electoral system. We vote for a parliamentary (or council) representative. That candidates group together under party unbrellas is irrelevant. We have a 'representative' democracy, not a party political one (if that makes sense). That's where I am on things at the moment. Reform are knocking on the door of the BNP, and using wedge issues to bait emotional rage. The Greens are knocking on the door of the hard left, sweeping up the Corbynista idealists. But it's worth saying that both are only ascending because of the failures of the two main parties and the successive governments they have led. Large parts of the country have been left in economic decline for decades, while city fat cats became uber wealthy. Young people have been screwed over by student loans. Housing is 40 years of commoditisation, removing affordabilty beyond the reach of too many. Decently paid, secure jobs, seem to be a thing of the past. Which of the main parties can people turn to, to fix any of these things, when the main parties are the reason for the mess that has been allowed to evolve? Reform certainly aren't the answer to those things. The Greens may aspire to do something meaningful about some of them, but where will they find the money to pay for it? None of it's easy.
    • Yes, but the context is important and the reason.
    • That messes up Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - democracy being based on citizenship not literacy. There's intentionally no one language that campaign materials have to be in. 
    • TBH if people don't see what is sectarian in the materials linked to above when they read about them, then I don't think me going on about it will help. They speak for themselves.  I don't know how the Greens can justify promising to be a strong voice for one particular religion. Will that pledge hold when it comes to campaigning in East Dulwich (which is majority atheist)? https://censusdata.uk/e02000836-east-dulwich/ts030-religion
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...