Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"but was of its time"


I dunno, It's probably even more relevant today, though as you say, if anything it makes the campaign trail back then look almost charming, parochial and makeshift compared to today's overblown, slick, attackvert filled nonsense.


Modern US political campaigning, now that really IS hateful!

Pickle Wrote:

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

> I think everywhere around here is good for kids

> (and Mums) - I guess part and parcel of bringing

> up kids in a big city is the fact they'll come

> into contact with a few nutters along the way.

>

> Welcome to the area and don't let one bad

> experience put you off.


You should try bringing up kids in the countryside! Full of crazies, armed with axes and (legal) shotguns to boot.

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Ah, it all sounds very sweet and full of love.



I know H


Love is free you know (not chargeable by the hour)


I couldn't stop laughing at the "She also gave me twenty pound, even though I only asked for ten"



Do you think his Mother has read his "creative" work ?


Netts:-S

Is this all just some huge reverse psychology bid to get more followers on twitter?


I'll ask to follow you if you'll buy me a burger.


Oh, and have you added your twitter feed to the "who to follow on twitter in ED" thread in the other section? You should.

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

    • Or increase tax.  The freezing of personal allowances is one way, not what I would choose.  On principle I don't care if the rich immigrate.  The main parties could have been more honest before the election.  Reform is deluded.
    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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