"Currants Bw..."

[GP]

Party at your gaff, then?

[Letters]

Yeah, it would be awesome for all the wild parties I have.

:tumbleweed:

There's another place which I think I like slightly less (no bar), but it's in a better area (near the station).

Ooh, and we might be getting another offer on our place. Screw you, Debbie!

[Marc Overmars]

I want a bar and nice BBQ area in my garden but it's not a priority according to my missus.

How can alcohol and meat not be a priority FFS?

[Letters]

I think the key question is: Is a bar in the back garden worth a half mile walk or a bus trip to the station added to my journey to work each day.

Hmm.

[Marc Overmars]

I walk that to the station every morning, it's really nothing once you get into a routine tbh.

[GP]

I think the key question is: Is a bar in the back garden worth a half mile walk or a bus trip to the station added to my journey to work each day.

Hmm.

Half a mile? What's that, like 5 minutes?

[Letters]

Hmm. Actually, as much as I did like the bar in the garden (I honestly think that's the coolest thing I've seen at any house we've viewed), the house itself was...well it was nice enough but didn't wow me as much as I thought it would. And I really don't like the area much, lots of piddling little roads which are a pain to drive through and no local shops and it is quite a way from the station.
The other one had a smaller garden (but I'm no gardener so that's probably no bad thing) but it did have a very nice loft conversion which has an en suite and it's 5 minutes from the station which has some shops and cafes around. It does back on to the train line but we waited for a train to go by and it wasn't that noisy, they're slowing down for the station when they pass so it's not too bad.

Hmm.
Thinking of making an offer.

[Letters]

Made an offer. Did the "no, that's not enough" "how about that?" dance and have now had an offer accepted.
Do like the place but after the last time not getting excited yet.
Marathon not a sprint, Brian.

[Letters]

Enjoy your new phones, sheeple

http://newsthump.com/2016/09/16/credulous-buffoons-buy-new-telephones/

:d

[Marc Overmars]

Walked past an Apple Store at lunch earlier. Can't believe how big the queue of fanboys was.

[GP]

I can't imagine how empty your life must be to want to camp out overnight to get a new phone.

[Niall_Quinn]

tbf, all the major retailers who are shoving this thing at the door at 600 quid a pop give it a 5 star rating. So it must be really good. Much better then that other 600 quid phone that everyone bought last year.

[Letters]

tbf, all the major retailers who are shoving this thing at the door at 600 quid a pop give it a 5 star rating. So it must be really good. Much better then that other 600 quid phone that everyone bought last year.

Really?

Arse. Feel silly for not buying one now :(

[Niall_Quinn]

Really?

Arse. Feel silly for not buying one now :(

Don't get too down about it. I've heard rumours that Apple might produce more of these phones in the coming weeks and months. In some ways it might be even better to wait rather than sleep on the streets like a tramp.

[adzzzbatch]

I'm looking forward to the Surface phone being released next year, it should be a good step up from my 950XL.

[Marc Overmars]

I went to eat at Red Dog Saloon last night, it's one of those Man vs Food kind of places. I did the naga viper hot wing challenge there, I love hot food and I love wings, so I thought how bad can it really be?

Fucked me right up. I was crying before I even started because the steam made my eyes water so much. Needed the biggest shit afterwards as well.

[Letters]

TMI :lol:

[LDG]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/triathlon/37402716

:bow:

That's awesome.

:crying:

[Letters]

(Proper) Sport :bow:

Football (as a sport) :rose:

[Xhaka Can’t]

You won't be saying that after we win the League this season.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I went to eat at Red Dog Saloon last night, it's one of those Man vs Food kind of places. I did the naga viper hot wing challenge there, I love hot food and I love wings, so I thought how bad can it really be?

Fucked me right up. I was crying before I even started because the steam made my eyes water so much. Needed the biggest shit afterwards as well.


I feel I could have got by without knowing that

[Letters]

You won't be saying that after we win the League this season.

Obviously I'd be delighted if that happened.

If only because of how cross Zim would be.

[Letters]

http://newsthump.com/2016/09/20/trump-campaign-energised-by-new-opportunity-to-be-unpleasant-to-muslims/

:lol:

[Goonermerree]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37428424

Sarkozy says migrants in Calais are the UK's responsibility. Am I missing something.

[Letters]

Yeah. He can sod right off.

[Kano]

Of course he would. He's desperate to get back into office and playing up to the rising anti-Muslim feeling in the country is the perfect ticket to get some voters from the increasingly dangerous Le Pen.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Of course he would. He's desperate to get back into office and playing up to the rising anti-Muslim feeling in the country is the perfect ticket to get some voters from the increasingly dangerous Le Pen.

Running before he can walk, he's probably not going to even be the nominee for Les Republicans

[Goonermerree]

The mayor of Calais blamed Britain too. How about, these migrants should have been processed by France long go?

[Goonermerree]

Agh, autumn equinox today. The sun is crossing into the southern hemisphere. I hate this time of year, I love the heat

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

CJ from Eggheads held on European Arrest warrant for Murder :haha:

[Letters]

I don't like it when it's dark ALL THE TIME. You get up, it's dark, you finish work, it's dark :(
And I could do with the dull grey days too, a bright autumn day is nice though.

[Letters]

CJ from Eggheads held on European Arrest warrant for Murder :haha:

...why is that funny? :unsure:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

...why is that funny? :unsure:

Well it's not funny for the victim, but it's just surreal if it's true. Cold case apparently so all the time he sat on a panel reeling off his trivial knowledge he'd taken another persons life.

Predatory gay man apparently, was accused earlier in the year of sexual assault

[GP]

I had never heard of him so had to Google. He looks like a murderer, tbh.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Ah apparently he published an autobiography where he suggested he might have killed someone, claimed that guy tried to mug him with a knife so he punched him in the face and threw him in the canal

Bizarre, seems like a total lie.....although maybe it happened and the book was something of a confessional

[Xhaka Can’t]

The mayor of Calais blamed Britain too. How about, these migrants should have been processed by France long go?

They aren't seeking asylum in France.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Agh, autumn equinox today. The sun is crossing into the southern hemisphere. I hate this time of year, I love the heat

I'm crossing over to the Southern Hemisphere at Christmas.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I had never heard of him so had to Google. He looks like a murderer, tbh.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/14/article-1311800-0B2C01F4000005DC-723_233x423.jpg

[Letters]

They aren't seeking asylum in France.

I didn't think you got to choose in that situation? Isn't it something about having to claim asylum in the first country you land in or is that something else?

[Letters]

Also. Credit reports. :blink:
Signed up to Noddle as I needed a report for the mortgage, they seem to know EVERYTHING about me, all I put in was my name and address. Probably DoB too.
Bit worrying really.

Drowning in forms right now but things seem to be progressing this time :pray:

I feel I owe trees an apology, the amount of stuff I've had to print off <_<

[Xhaka Can’t]

I didn't think you got to choose in that situation? Isn't it something about having to claim asylum in the first country you land in or is that something else?

That is true but the host country can't and sure as hell won't force you to claim asylum in their country.

[LDG]

That is true but the host country can't and sure as hell won't force you to claim asylum in their country.

Lets all go to Canada.

[Letters]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37451043

:(

He was struggling at little when I saw Monty Python...was that last year or the year before? They all blend in to one these days. Last year, I think. He was having to read some lines during one sketch.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37451043

:(

He was struggling at little when I saw Monty Python...was that last year or the year before? They all blend in to one these days. Last year, I think. He was having to read some lines during one sketch.

To become aphasic would be awful, it's not just a case of not being able to speak you wouldn't be able to read or write because the composition of letters and words in your mind would be jumbled

[Letters]

I'm reading "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat" at the moment which is a book full of stories about people will various neurological conditions which affect them in various interesting ways.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I'm reading "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat" at the moment which is a book full of stories about people will various neurological conditions which affect them in various interesting ways.

Kindle?...If so will have to give that a look

Currently reading "what's left" by Nick Cohen which would be deeply boring for most people i imagine.

[Letters]

I'm reading it on paper! I'm sure you can get it on Kindle though.
The first story - which is who the book's title is about - concerns a man who lost the ability to recognise things. He can describe them in great detail but not tell what they are.
Somehow he managed to lead a pretty active life, he was a music teachers and could recognise his pupils when they spoke.

Another story is about a woman who lost the sense of where her body parts were. It's something you don't think about but you instinctively know where your limbs are, without that sense you'd just fall over which is what happened to her. She had to learn to walk again by looking intently at her legs so she knew where they were. :blink:

Very odd collection of stories written by a neurologist about various patients he encountered.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I'm reading it on paper! I'm sure you can get it on Kindle though.
The first story - which is who the book's title is about - concerns a man who lost the ability to recognise things. He can describe them in great detail but not tell what they are.
Somehow he managed to lead a pretty active life, he was a music teachers and could recognise his pupils when they spoke.

Another story is about a woman who lost the sense of where her body parts were. It's something you don't think about but you instinctively know where your limbs are, without that sense you'd just fall over which is what happened to her. She had to learn to walk again by looking intently at her legs so she knew where they were. :blink:

Very odd collection of stories written by a neurologist about various patients he encountered.

I've heard about all kinds of neurological disorders like a guy who can't recognise facial features and they did this test where his son was out in the back garden with a few friends having a drink and he could not pick him out.

Or a guy who has antegradal amnaesia and cannot remember anything since he was taken ill with Encephalitis and can only retain memory for about thirty seconds or so.

[Letters]

Yeah, there was one guy described in the book who was in his 60s (the book was written in the 80s) but thought he was still a teenager back in 1945 just as the war was ending, he could remember everything clearly up to that point but nothing since and remembered everyone as they were at that time - wondering why his brother looked so old when he came to visit.
Weird.

[LDG]

Exchanged!

BOOM.

Now I we need to find somewhere to live :(

[Letters]

:blink:

You've sold your place without anywhere to go?

I've got a place you can have ##
(Well, not have...show me the money!)

[Letters]

Do you want to know what was on Channel Four's Teletext on Friday 23rd October 1998?

Course you do...

http://www.uniquecodeanddata.co.uk/teletext76/ch4-19981023/


You're welcome :tiphat:

[LDG]

:blink:

You've sold your place without anywhere to go?

I've got a place you can have ##
(Well, not have...show me the money!)

We're waiting for our new house to be built.

Trying to find a rental...but nobody would accept us until we exchanged. Got 5 weeks to fund somewhere....

:upset:

[Marc Overmars]

Do you want to know what was on Channel Four's Teletext on Friday 23rd October 1998?

Course you do...

http://www.uniquecodeanddata.co.uk/teletext76/ch4-19981023/


You're welcome :tiphat:

Teletext. :bow:

When I was a kid that was the only way I could check the latest scores and news! Page 302. :cloud9:

[GP]

Bamboozle :bow:

[Letters]

That bloke needs to get out more, but he's a genius. He's managed to decode Teletext from quite a few days from old VHS tapes

http://www.uniquecodeanddata.co.uk/teletext76/

Him :bow:

[Letters]

We're waiting for our new house to be built.

Trying to find a rental...but nobody would accept us until we exchanged. Got 5 weeks to fund somewhere....

:upset:

Are you having it custom built or is it just a new build which isn't ready yet?
I doubt finding somewhere to rent will be too difficult.

[Letters]

http://www.uniquecodeanddata.co.uk/teletext76/bbc2-19950409/

Page 314. QPR 3 - Arsenal 1 :angry:

Wenger Out! <_<

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I think you mean Stewart Houston out

[Letters]

:lol:

(Page 354. the league table)
We were 12th in the table after 36 games, 5 points above the relegation zone. We'd won 11 league games, drawn 10, lost 15.
Wenger has done 'slightly' better ##

[Niall_Quinn]

Can't you post a single thing without having a dig at another poster here? Isn't this a prime example of the WUM material that other posters have been banned for? Worse in fact, because other posters targeted Wenger rather than individuals here. And this is an Arsenal forum, and Wenger's the manager, so at least the other "WUM" stuff was relevant to the forum. What's your stuff all about? A good 4 or 5 examples in the last eek alone and not a single example from anyone else that I have spotted.

Isn't it true that you are the biggest WUM on here? I mean based on the evidence?

However, I'll answer.

2 titles vs 3 titles. The latter is better, by 1 title. Hardly a dramatic shift in returns and over 20 years nowhere near as impressive as the genuinely top managers in the English game. What you are doing is equating Wenger's 4th Place Trophy triumphs with success. If we finish 4th rather than 12 then Wenger is somehow successful. If that's your standard, and obviously it is Wenger's standard, then fair enough. But better managers wouldn't settle for that, and they haven't settled for it. This ongoing worship of a manager that has had no significant success in 12 years is baffling.

[GP]

:lol:

(Page 354. the league table)
We were 12th in the table after 36 games, 5 points above the relegation zone. We'd won 11 league games, drawn 10, lost 15.
Wenger has done 'slightly' better ##

I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Letters]

http://newsthump.com/2016/09/26/bbc-to-launch-bake-off-rival-with-samuel-l-jackson-called-cakes-on-a-plain/

:lol:

[Niall_Quinn]

Do you think the retards mindlessly chanting USA can keep it up all through the Ryder Cup? Or will and act of God happen that causes a fucking comet to land on them?

[Letters]

They've kept it up for the last 100 years or so, so I imagine so.

[Niall_Quinn]

They've kept it up for the last 100 years or so, so I imagine so.

Comet it is then. Maximum casualties please. Smartarse cunts, can't say I care much about golf and I'm no fan of anything European but it's essential for all of humanity for the Europeans to beat these fucking yank trailer bums.

[Niall_Quinn]

Peter Willett :bow:

Probably the most accurate assessment I have seen of your average yank.
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/golf/ryder-cup-2016-danny-willetts-brother-blasts-us-golf-fans-as-mob-of-imbeciles-20160928-grqyvs.html

[Letters]

Comet it is then. Maximum casualties please.
Could you defer it a week, I'm off to Washington tomorrow :unsure:

[GP]

State or DC?

[Letters]

DC. Work thing, a technical conference which I kinda booked as a jolly although actually having looked at the agenda I think it will be pretty useful.
And MrsL is coming out on Wednesday so we can spend some time there afterwards so everyone wins.
Never been before, looking forward to it.
:dance:

[GP]

Cool. Take pics of Donald's house.

[Letters]

I was hoping to do a tour but you can't at the moment, maybe because of the election <_<
Booked a tour of Congress instead.
Want to do the zoo. They have pandas :d

[Niall_Quinn]

DC. Work thing, a technical conference which I kinda booked as a jolly although actually having looked at the agenda I think it will be pretty useful.
And MrsL is coming out on Wednesday so we can spend some time there afterwards so everyone wins.
Never been before, looking forward to it.
:dance:

This ought to be astonishing but in a nuthouse I guess it's par for the course.

[LDG]

This is a world where Ollie can afford 15 holidays a year at 20 yrs old.

Anything goes.

[Letters]

What the hell has happened to Ollie? He's turned into a toff. :blink:
Oh, and they don't pay me properly at work so I figured they owed me a jolly <_<

[LDG]

What the hell has happened to Ollie? He's turned into a toff. :blink:
Oh, and they don't pay me properly at work so I figured they owed me a jolly <_<

Haha!

He's always been a toff!

Methinks Daddy might be richer tham WMUG's Daddy.

[Letters]

Really?! He comes across as rough as (no offence, Ollie, if you still look here) but then he's off shooting and booking skiing trips etc.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Couldn't take any more of that shit in my feed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LDG]

Couldn't take any more of that shit in my feed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

:haha:

[Marc Overmars]

38 degrees in Dubai right now. :sick:

Probably lost a stone from sweating so much.

[Coney]

I was hoping to do a tour but you can't at the moment, maybe because of the election <_<
Booked a tour of Congress instead.
Want to do the zoo. They have pandas :d

They have the National Air and Space Museum, which I would love to visit (even though some of their exhibits and pictures are upside down). That should be a great place to visit.

[Letters]

:lol: yes that is definitely on my list.
The Kennedy Space Centre in Florida is worth a visit too. They have a Saturn V which isn't upside down but is on its side, suspended from the ceiling and is absolutely massive.

[GP]

I see these kids now with 'Jive' printed on their shirts, pff. Now I can teach you how to say 'Jive'

[Niall_Quinn]

Sounds like a shooting war with Russia has begun in Syria. Mad fucking bastards.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I see these kids now with 'Jive' printed on their shirts, pff. Now I can teach you how to say 'Jive'

Golly!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Niall_Quinn]

Golly!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

:gp:

Get 'em back on the jars where they belong!

[Niall_Quinn]

Here is Piers Morgan's contribution to journalism today:

All brawn and no brains: Kim should do her AWOL bodyguard a favour and fire him now – before Kanye does something worse

Guess I should start taking him more seriously.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Here is Piers Morgan's contribution to journalism today:


Guess I should start taking him more seriously.

Don't even joke about that

[GP]

:gp:

Get 'em back on the jars where they belong!

If it's good enough for the White House it's good enough for me.

[Letters]

http://newsthump.com/2016/10/04/kim-kardashian-fears-stolen-nude-photos-wont-be-released-on-to-internet/

:lol:

[Letters]

Moving house... :ilt:


That is all.

[LDG]

Moving house... :ilt:


That is all.


Piece of piss.

[Letters]

:lol:

The latest twist is that our buyer can't raise enough money and has had to lower her offer.
Again.

I can't tell if she's genuine or playing us but it means we have to find a bit more money.


Lucky for her she's hot <_<

[Coney]

:lol: yes that is definitely on my list.
The Kennedy Space Centre in Florida is worth a visit too. They have a Saturn V which isn't upside down but is on its side, suspended from the ceiling and is absolutely massive.

When I took the family to Orlando for 2 weeks for the theme parks, they had to wait because the first day after we landed, we went to KSC (including the Canavaral add-on tour). I'd wait 30 years to go there and I was not going to wait another day. 3 days later, we were back at the cape at 7:00am to watch a rocket launch. You have to get your priorities right.

[Letters]

:( One time I was in Florida it just happened to be when a shuttle launch was on so we paid through the nose for a trip which was supposed to give us a tour of the space centre and then go see the launch - it was a night launch too.
By the time they'd collected everyone and got there we had about 30 minutes for a 'tour' so only had time to get out quickly, see one thing and get back on the coach again.
It was a freezing night - Florida does get cold nights sometimes and this was one of them.
And then...the launch was cancelled because it was a bit cloudy, or something <_<

I did get to see a shuttle go up one other time though, that wasn't part of a tour we just drove out to a vantage point. I thought that one was cancelled too but right at the end of the window it went up.
It was pretty weird, we were so far away that it was completely silent for about a minute and then we heard it. It was like an Underground train going right underneath us. Amazing.


Space :bow:

At this technical conference for the next 2 days then I have a few days to play :dance:

[LDG]

:cold:

[Letters]

Is it? It's been quite nice over here, pretty much T-shirt weather even in the evenings although it is getting a bit cooler and there's forecast for rain on Saturday.
Last day of the conference today, then I can go out to play :dance:

[LDG]

It's 'taters. Cold wind.

Was 9 degrees when I walked out this morning.

[Marc Overmars]

I'm looking forward to getting back to the good old British climate.

30 degrees by 9am everyday is ridiculous.

[LDG]

Is no fucker from GW in the UK apart from me :unsure:

[fakeyank]

Is no fucker from GW in the UK apart from me :unsure:

There is a possibility I will be moving to London for a few months for work. See ya then! :tiphat:

Arsenal :rose:

[LDG]

There is a possibility I will be moving to London for a few months for work. See ya then! :tiphat:

Arsenal :rose:

Can't you do it in the close season?

Fucksake.

[fakeyank]

Can't you do it in the close season?

Fucksake.

I wish.. :(

Its not finalized yet, but if it does get the green light, it'll be end of this year or early next year.

Not like that time of the year is our Achilles heel pretty much every season or something... :whistle:

[Xhaka Can’t]

The Blue Jays are killing it!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Letters]

I'm looking forward to getting back to the good old British climate.

30 degrees by 9am everyday is ridiculous.
Aye, that's the thing I'll never get used to there, it just doesn't cool down.

Washington is awlsome, I've decided :dance:

[Letters]

There is a possibility I will be moving to London for a few months for work. See ya then! :tiphat:

Arsenal :rose:FY Out! :angry:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

There is a possibility I will be moving to London for a few months for work. See ya then! :tiphat:

Arsenal :rose:

A new place to check out your grindr app?

[GP]

Gotta Catch 'Em All!

[fakeyank]

A new place to check out your grindr app?

Sure :rolleyes:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Meh, doesn't seem as funny anymore (to me anyway), which is a shame because homophobic insults carry more gravitas in this day when rightfully it's kind of frowned upon.

Of course if you actually are gay (i have no idea) it would also make me quite a terrible person....

[fakeyank]

You probably are a terrible person regardless :lol:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Well I don't randomly grab women's pussies

[Letters]

You can do what you like if you're famous.

#banter

[Xhaka Can’t]

So the lack of fame is where I am going wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

So the lack of fame is where I am going wrong.


Sent from my iPad because my Laptop has been seized as part of an ongoing investigation into historical sex offences

Yeah pretty much

[Xhaka Can’t]

:lol:


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Letters]

It's pretty bloody scary. I don't think anything will stop people voting for him.
It doesn't matter what he does or says
:upset:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

It's pretty bloody scary. I don't think anything will stop people voting for him.
It doesn't matter what he does or says
:upset:

Of course his base are rock solid, but any chance of winning the undecided is practically dead

I use the qualifier practically, because some of the wikileaks stuff could provide more evidence of Clinton duplicity (and let's be fair if she was facing anyone but Trump she'd be a dead duck by now).

Whoever wins in November (and i'm about 85% sure it will be HRC) will be a one term president. There is another global downturn coming and the incumbent will face the backlash.

Unfortunately the same cannot be said here, with the current state of Labour...the Tories are recession proof.

[Letters]

I dunno.
I just got back from the US and the feeling I got was that they don't like either candidate.
People seem to be voting for The Donald because he's not Hillary and vice versa.

[Goonermerree]

Bloody, stupid Microsoft!!! They, it, whoever they are, updated my bloody laptop and put back everything I'd had taken off and took off Chess Titans and rearranged all my sticky notes. Bloody cheek. It's frightening that they have so much control over my bloody laptop that is bought and paid for by me!

[Letters]

Just come back from one of their technical conferences so I'm all cool-aided up at the moment.

Microsoft :bow:

[GP]

They didn't do that.

[Goonermerree]

Just come back from one of their technical conferences so I'm all cool-aided up at the moment.

Microsoft :bow:

Well get onto them and tell them to put Chess Titans back on my laptop!

[Letters]

:lol: Will do!

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I dunno.
I just got back from the US and the feeling I got was that they don't like either candidate.
People seem to be voting for The Donald because he's not Hillary and vice versa.

I could have told you that
No one actually likes Hilary Clinton, I can't abide the woman. Her husband is an unrepentant rapist and they are both of them greedy and self centered to the point of sociopathy.

But I don't think she'd be dangerous for the country and the world, at least not the way Trump would be.

Polls showing she has 11 point lead over him

82% of the French who voted in 2002 did so for Jacques Chirac, they didn't do that because they liked him....gluttonous, corrupt and constant philanderer. But they voted for him because he wasn't Jean Marie Le Pen.

Now yes this is not France, the Donald probably has like I say a base of about 35% at least of likely American voters, my point is people who don't like either candidate would in my estimation be more likely to play it safe and vote for Clinton.

Some might decide to vote for the libertarian candidate but these are more likely to be republicans and independents than undecided. The polling could be wrong like it was with Brexit and the last election, but both were largely within the margin of error in what was always seen as a tight contest.

Donald Trump has not ever enjoyed a poll lead over Hilary Clinton to my knowledge since he won the nomination (and I'm not sure he enjoyed one full stop without a prospective third party candidate like Bernie Sanders or Michael Bloomberg factored in)

I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, I had my fingers burnt too badly by Brexit to make that mistake but I think the path to victory in the electoral college is slipping through his fingers currently

Nevada, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa and in some polls even Pennsylvania were trending towards Trump a month ago, they are all pretty safely back in the Hilary Clinton column.

I would say he has to go for some audacious all or nothing strategy, which could see him across the line but more likely will backfire and see Clinton win by the biggest electoral college margin since 1988.

[GP]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLbxqEA8AWaGze/giphy.gif

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLbxqEA8AWaGze/giphy.gif

soon you will learn to appreciate him

[LDG]

http://tribzap2it.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/star-wars-salacious-crumb.gif

[Niall_Quinn]

Political correctness gone mad. Male politicians now being criticised for not being fags. He should have said, I want to bum that hunky stud - right up the shitter, he'd have lost 99% of the male vote but at least he'd be viewed as a progressive.

[Niall_Quinn]

Fox News footer read... US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - DONALD TRUMP VS CROOKED HILLARY

:haha:

Anyone who votes in this election has really let themselves go.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Political correctness gone mad. Male politicians now being criticised for not being fags. He should have said, I want to bum that hunky stud - right up the shitter, he'd have lost 99% of the male vote but at least he'd be viewed as a progressive.

Can't help but feel you've missed the point, well actually you haven't at all you are far too smart for that...you've deliberately made the point about something else

In this country we have a little thing called Op Yewtree, we have put people on trial who think that their celebrity allows them to get away with sexually assaulting people.

Grabbing women by their genitals is not an assertion of your heterosexuality, it means you lack self control...the way a young child can't control themselves and grabs at things.

I don't care about him philandering, i think for too long people believe that someone having affairs affects their political judgement...it doesn't

Thinking being famous gives you access to whatever you want and gives you automatic agency to violate someone is something else.

So whether he was talking about sexually assaulting men or women is totally inconsequential.

And if you don't agree, let me ask you this....what would be your immediate reaction be if Donald Trump grabbed your wife in such a way?

[Xhaka Can’t]

He only pretends to be smart.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Niall_Quinn]

He only pretends to be smart.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Unlikely. I'm not smart enough to do that.

[Niall_Quinn]

eBay being trolled.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=%C2%A35+note+AK47&_sop=16

All the sick in the head fuckers who have rushed out their BINs at 5 or 6 figures for something that is worth a fiver today and will be worth 4.99 tomorrow, and so on. There's definitely a serious mental condition sweeping society.

[Niall_Quinn]

Other side of the coin:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=%C2%A35+note+AK47&_sop=15

:haha:

Some cunt has bid £5 for a £5 note. So he'll send a fiver to the seller and the seller will wrap up a different fiver, pay postage and send it back to the buyer.

:haha:

Poor sick bastards.

[Marc Overmars]

I have 2 of the new fivers, both with AA02 serial numbers. Not as coveted as AA01 but still should be able to flog them well above face value.

People are weird.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Other side of the coin:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&amp;_sacat=0&amp;_nkw=%C2%A35+note+AK47&amp;_ sop=15

:haha:

Some cunt has bid &#163;5 for a &#163;5 note. So he'll send a fiver to the seller and the seller will wrap up a different fiver, pay postage and send it back to the buyer.

:haha:

Poor sick bastards.

I'm highest bidder on 12 &#163;5 notes. None of my bids including postage are above &#163;2


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Xhaka Can’t]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BRAND-NEW-Polymer-5-Pound-Note-SUPER-RARE-AK47-Batch-/262666882256?hash=item3d282a8cd0:g:dSoAAOSwzaJX-Afw

Free postage!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Xhaka Can’t]

Stick your 64p up your ass.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/new-AK47-5-Note-/322284576267?hash=item4b09a85e0b:g:H~EAAOSwCGVX9iR 9


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Xhaka Can’t]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161012/755113bba5125b14a8b583ca858b0bb3.png

Fingers crossed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Xhaka Can’t]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161012/a94e8f5ab47313693ff81715dec2cd75.png


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Letters]

Hmm. Just checked and the fiver I've got is "AM46". What do I get for that?

[GP]

About tree fiddy

[Letters]

Done!

[Goonermerree]

I have AK11 - I'll sell it for a tenner!!!

[LDG]

I have an old five pound note. Collectors item. RARE NUMBERED MINT

[GP]

I've got some mints.

[Goonermerree]

Jessica Ennis-Hill. :bow: Finishing at the top, the right thing to do She's 30, she ain't getting much better.

[GP]

Nice arse too.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Jessica Ennis-Hill. :bow: Finishing at the top, the right thing to do She's 30, she ain't getting much better.

I thought she finished 2nd


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LDG]

I thought she finished 2nd


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

All the ladies finish second when I'm around.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

All the ladies finish second when I'm around.

or fail to finish at all?

[Kano]

https://youtu.be/Tkdyok8eQWY

[GP]

That's clearly Diane Abbott.

[Marc Overmars]

Harambe. :bow:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Ched Evans found not guilty - I wonder how people will retract the statements they made about him two years ago

In my opinion the guy is a sleazy scumbag, but there is a difference between that and conmitting a crime

[Letters]

Just posted that in General Football Nonsense. Basically agree, he's a sleaze but probably not a criminal.

[LDG]

or fail to finish at all?

That's the plan :shrug:

[Coney]

Ched Evans found not guilty - I wonder how people will retract the statements they made about him two years ago

In my opinion the guy is a sleazy scumbag, but there is a difference between that and conmitting a crime

Interesting how the Daily Heil has questioned using evidence about her previous 'engagements'. They are missing the point. Normally, sexual history is not relevant. If a woman has had 1000 partners, she still has the right to say no. However, in this case, the fact that 2 other men independently said that she had done the same things in the same way is very relevant to the case, which is why the judge allowed the defence to present that evidence.

I terms of her being prosecuted herself, that is a different manner. The defence evidence shows reasonable doubt and for that alone, he has to be found innocent. But it cuts both ways. For her to be prosecuted for false accusation requires there to be no reasonable doubt too, so both parties have to be treated as innocent - of rape and of false accusation of rape.

The low conviction rate of rapes which some consider a scandal is because when you have the situation of one person's word against another, then it is highly likely that it cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Mind you, having served as foreman of a jury, I can tell you that the reason some people want to put forward a guilty verdict is often based on a feeling that they don't like the person. On one trial, outside the court and jury room (so I can legally tell you this) two jurers were chatting about a case and one said to the other 'Well, he has a social worker with him so he must be guilty of something'. And yes, they were both reading the Daily Heil! I can't relate what happened in the jury room though as that is not permitted. However, some of the other crass comments by jurers changed my view of the jury system - you cannot expect the general public with no understanding of procedures, logic, reason, independence, etc. to be able to make proper decisions. Think of the dummest people you know, think of them as a group of 12 making life-changing decisions about someone they know little about - imagine if it was you. Frightening.

[Letters]

you cannot expect the general public with no understanding of procedures, logic, reason, independence, etc. to be able to make proper decisions.
#brexit.

The trouble with democracy is that it's based on the idea that everyone has an equally valid opinion and that just isn't true.

I remember years ago rumblings of a referendum about us adopting the Euro and thinking "Don't ask me!". I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent and well educated but I got a D in Economics! :lol: Were there such a referendum I'd try to educate myself on the relevant issues to try and make an informed decision but I'm not a subject matter expert, why would I be? And millions of Sun and Daily Mail readers would vote no because of the "bloody Frogs" and "all them foreigners". Why do those people get a say?

I'm increasingly disillusioned with the whole system. I cannot get my head around the fact that Trump has just boasted about sexually assaulting women (and this after a torrent of lies, racism, misogyny over the last year) and rather than being deselected people are waving little American flags at him and voting for him.

Logic :rose:
Reason :rose:

[Niall_Quinn]

#brexit.

The trouble with democracy is that it's based on the idea that everyone has an equally valid opinion and that just isn't true.

I remember years ago rumblings of a referendum about us adopting the Euro and thinking "Don't ask me!". I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent and well educated but I got a D in Economics! :lol: Were there such a referendum I'd try to educate myself on the relevant issues to try and make an informed decision but I'm not a subject matter expert, why would I be? And millions of Sun and Daily Mail readers would vote no because of the "bloody Frogs" and "all them foreigners". Why do those people get a say?

I'm increasingly disillusioned with the whole system. I cannot get my head around the fact that Trump has just boasted about sexually assaulting women (and this after a torrent of lies, racism, misogyny over the last year) and rather than being deselected people are waving little American flags at him and voting for him.

Logic :rose:
Reason :rose:

:doh:

Jesus Christ!


(He's your boss isn't he? What does he think about your rather nasty and dismissive opinion of so many members of his flock? Both here and abroad?)

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Well that's fair enough, Jesus if he existed was yet another nutbag a who taught his followers to love thy enemy and to turn the other cheek and that to give no thought to the morrow in terms of thinking about anything other than the here and now (which was the forerunner for apolcayptic ideation, don't plan for a world that is not going to be here).

So to pretend Jesus was a good moral teacher is somewhat perverse to begin with

And yet we are told by Christians that we have to embrace the human sacrifice in order to divest us of original sin.

[Niall_Quinn]

Well that's fair enough, Jesus if he existed was yet another nutbag a who taught his followers to love thy enemy and to turn the other cheek and that to give no thought to the morrow in terms of thinking about anything other than the here and now (which was the forerunner for apolcayptic ideation, don't plan for a world that is not going to be here).

So to pretend Jesus was a good moral teacher is somewhat perverse to begin with

And yet we are told by Christians that we have to embrace the human sacrifice in order to divest us of original sin.

Hypocrisy is the foundation of all religion. Religion is not the same thing as spiritual belief. Religion is a tawdry, manmade control mechanism like any other. It's the control that's important, not the philosophical integrity or moral directive. This is why so many members of religious clubs will reluctantly agree to slaughter their fellow man, in the victim's best interests of course. History tells us this and history continues to happen right across the globe, centuries on. What's wrong with this picture?

The myth of Jesus, on the other hand, is a device used to underpin the control structure of the biggest religious club. It's very clever. If we all ever bothered to follow the eminently sensible and personally beneficial theoretical teachings of Jesus then (leaving aside the fact we are scientifically primitive at this time so don't grasp the nature of our environment or even our existence) we'd be a damn sight better off. That can't be denied. Don't kill people. Don't steal from them. Have a bit of respect. That's all he really taught. So build a criminal syndicate on top of those principles and you have a shield for life, plus it becomes a simple matter to control the foot soldiers. Basing the whole thing in faith is the icing on the cake. It becomes blasphemous to question the rulebook and, more importantly, the rulers who have, after all, been appointed by a faith based deity who must never be questioned. Pray to me. Kill for me. Pay me. Love your neighbour - and then rob and kill him. Simply God moving in mysterious ways. I bet company CEO's wish they had such advantages at their disposal (they are getting there).

The delicious hypocrisy of religious leaders "sadly" accepting the will of their god because, because, because. They even set themselves up as victims, heroically suffering for their faith. And mysteriously, all the while, accumulating personal power. What was it Carlin said? God is omnipotent, all powerful, the master of all he surveys. But the one thing he can't get a grip on is money. He needs your money!

[adzzzbatch]

What is this kabaddi thing I keep seeing on Sky Sports?

:unsure:

[Letters]

It's 'it', Indian style. In India it's quite a big thing, they have leagues and show it on TV and everything.

[adzzzbatch]

I thought I saw a lot of brown people taking part, I had no idea what was going on though!

[Goonermerree]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37667924

Trump going mad, trying everything he can now to derail the Clinton camp. Now he's saying she was on drugs and should be tested before the next debate. Oh and that the election is rigged.

Maybe they should bin them both, give Obama the Presidency for another year and start again!

[Letters]

Going? Implying a change.

Clinton, for all her problems, at least has a grip on reality.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gCXlTMPnF0

[Niall_Quinn]

And again, hot on the heels of your last triumph, the next plunge into waters so far out of your depth you can't find a bottom to start your usual digging.

[Letters]

I have nothing to add here so I'm going to say something vague which sounds like it might be clever and be making a point but really isn't saying anything.
Fair enough. :good:

[Niall_Quinn]

Fair enough. :good:

There's little doubt we both know what is being said.

[WMUG]

http://2static.fjcdn.com/pictures/His+lily+died+comic+by+floccinaucinihilipilificati ona_56c224_5681836.jpg

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I long for this US election to be over with, it's unremittingly grim

If at all possible it's actually worse than the referendum campaign and there was a an actual murder during that

[Niall_Quinn]

I long for this US election to be over with, it's unremittingly grim

If at all possible it's actually worse than the referendum campaign and there was a an actual murder during that

Why don't you just tune it out? There's very little impact or intrusion on people in the UK, unless they are inclined to seek it out. But if you do look then you are seeing politics for what it really is, and that's something worth seeing.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

It's like being sick, we are on the dry heaving now there is nothing more to come it's all essentially over with but still the horrible muscle tightening spasms are there.

Hard to tune out basically.

Ordinarily i might have wanted a Republican to win the White House just to finally wipe the essence of the Clintons from American politics.

But Jesus this Republican? Guy actually won't be happy until he's whipped his poor pathetic supporters up into such a frenzy that they end up hurting or killing someone.

[GP]

http://i.imgur.com/Jn2pAAy.jpg

[Letters]

http://2static.fjcdn.com/pictures/His+lily+died+comic+by+floccinaucinihilipilificati ona_56c224_5681836.jpg

That site is blocked at work so I had to turn Wifi off on my phone and type the URL in.

Wasn't worth it.

[Letters]

It's like being sick, we are on the dry heaving now there is nothing more to come it's all essentially over with but still the horrible muscle tightening spasms are there.

Hard to tune out basically.

Ordinarily i might have wanted a Republican to win the White House just to finally wipe the essence of the Clintons from American politics.

But Jesus this Republican? Guy actually won't be happy until he's whipped his poor pathetic supporters up into such a frenzy that they end up hurting or killing someone.

I think this is the worst election ever. I thought our options were depressing last time out but wow, this really does take the biscuit.
Clinton, for all the issues with her, does at least seem to have some grip on reality. Yes she's corrupt and self-serving but most politicians towards the top of the tree tend to be.
Trump though...I think he's downright dangerous. Or maybe he isn't? Who knows? Who knows what he'll do. He has no concrete, consistent policies (aside from building a wall, and that clearly is never going to happen) and constantly contradicts himself.
Oh, and on top of that he's a racist, a misogynist and a bigot with a serious narcissistic personality disorder.
Hold me! :upset:

[GP]

I find it odd that a man with no political background whatsoever can can even run for the top office.

[Letters]

What I really can't understand is how he can just keep saying stuff without any scrutiny.
Every time I see him talk (before I turn off for fear of putting my put through the screen) he just keeps spouting stuff which just isn't true and rather than thinking "hang on, is that true?" his supporters whoop and cheer and wave little American flags.

Twats.

[GP]

Freedom of speech, innit.

They've got so wound up in their 'freedoms' they've forgotten what they actually mean.


To Americans, freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want without it ever being challenged.

[LDG]

What I really can't understand is how he can just keep saying stuff without any scrutiny.
Every time I see him talk (before I turn off for fear of putting my put through the screen) he just keeps spouting stuff which just isn't true and rather than thinking "hang on, is that true?" his supporters whoop and cheer and wave little American flags.

Twats.

You do know that the President is just a front man for the machine that works behind him/her?

He's an actor saying or doing whatever will get his party in office.

What's more worrying are the people who are in agreement with what he's saying. That's the real problem. Just like the UK. A flock of sheep being herded here and there, deflecting from the real problems that nobody wants to address.

Having either if them in office amounts to the same thing. A different bunch of power hungry cunts, ensuring the rich people they are in bed with stay rich. There is no politics here, it's just which side gets to the trough this time round.

The very fact that people (even here) are obsessed with the personality of the two people going for office, shows how much we are obsessed with the shite the media spew out. It's like X-Factor for presidents. Soon people will phone vote it all.

Whoever ends up in office isn't going to be dangerous (depending on which way you view it), as the puppet will revert to type as soon as their feet are under the desk. The stats quo will remain....unless Trump can't keep his mouth shut, in which case I'm sure he term will be terminated quickly in some way shape or form.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I find it odd that a man with no political background whatsoever can can even run for the top office.

I don't think that's necessarily of itself a bad thing, i think the problem is that too many politicians are SPADS who know no world outside politics

I'd prefer a politician to have more experience from the outside world, it's not unique in American Presidential History either. Lincoln had held no public office before becoming president and Eisenhower was a General who was courted by both political parties.

But a businessman (well a realtor with a dodgy hair cut and reality tv star) who is running a campaign which is a total hypocrisy on everything he's ever done in business?.....No thanks.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

What I really can't understand is how he can just keep saying stuff without any scrutiny.
Every time I see him talk (before I turn off for fear of putting my put through the screen) he just keeps spouting stuff which just isn't true and rather than thinking "hang on, is that true?" his supporters whoop and cheer and wave little American flags.

Twats.


Two reasons for it, One because you scrutinise Trump every time he says something that's clearly stupid or a lie you would spend all the time doing so and Two the Media are terrified of the perception of being seen as biased (which in many cases they are) and therefore they feel the need to draw an equivalence between the candidates.

[Letters]

I don't think you can say Obama has just been a front man for a machine. He's pushed through progressive laws and been frustrated in his attempts to push through others.
Who the president is does make a difference.

[Niall_Quinn]

You do know that the President is just a front man for the machine that works behind him/her?

He's an actor saying or doing whatever will get his party in office.

What's more worrying are the people who are in agreement with what he's saying. That's the real problem. Just like the UK. A flock of sheep being herded here and there, deflecting from the real problems that nobody wants to address.

Having either if them in office amounts to the same thing. A different bunch of power hungry cunts, ensuring the rich people they are in bed with stay rich. There is no politics here, it's just which side gets to the trough this time round.

The very fact that people (even here) are obsessed with the personality of the two people going for office, shows how much we are obsessed with the shite the media spew out. It's like X-Factor for presidents. Soon people will phone vote it all.

Whoever ends up in office isn't going to be dangerous (depending on which way you view it), as the puppet will revert to type as soon as their feet are under the desk. The stats quo will remain....unless Trump can't keep his mouth shut, in which case I'm sure he term will be terminated quickly in some way shape or form.

Thanks.

There are times when I think it's me that's insane so it's a hell of a comfort to know that at least some other people can see this bloody obvious, smacking them in the face, shitting down their throat reality.

The mere fact the Bush gang has teamed up with the Clinton gang this time around ought to give the game away to even the most challenged of thinkers. Actors playing their role so the audience looks over here and not over there.

The one shining star of this whole process has been Julian Assange. That guy has guts.

[Niall_Quinn]

Two reasons for it, One because you scrutinise Trump every time he says something that's clearly stupid or a lie you would spend all the time doing so and Two the Media are terrified of the perception of being seen as biased (which in many cases they are) and therefore they feel the need to draw an equivalence between the candidates.

Do you really believe the media is terrified of that perception? If so, they have rushed headlong into their worst fear. As a result, their credibility rating stands at 6%. Mind you, that doesn't stop almost 100% of people reaching for the remote control so they can tune in to propaganda that would make the Cold War Kremlin blush. People literally know they are being lied to and yet they still view these outlets as authorities. It's a shocking indictment of the average citizen. However, fewer and fewer young people are engaging so the future is not necessarily written.

[Niall_Quinn]

I don't think you can say Obama has just been a front man for a machine. He's pushed through progressive laws and been frustrated in his attempts to push through others.
Who the president is does make a difference.

Not biting.

[Letters]

It wasn't addressed at you. :shrug:
But if you or LDG disagree then feel free to say why.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Do you really believe the media is terrified of that perception? If so, they have rushed headlong into their worst fear. As a result, their credibility rating stands at 6%. Mind you, that doesn't stop almost 100% of people reaching for the remote control so they can tune in to propaganda that would make the Cold War Kremlin blush. People literally know they are being lied to and yet they still view these outlets as authorities. It's a shocking indictment of the average citizen. However, fewer and fewer young people are engaging so the future is not necessarily written.


Yes I do think they are terrified, print news has become extinct and the media networks are worried about going the same way.

In some ways it's a good thing, people are thinking for themselves more. On the other hand are they? They seem more interested in reading things online that confirm their own opinions rather than anything that expands their understanding.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

When NQ says politicians don't control the economy, he broadly speaking is correct. Although indirectly they have created the circumstances in which giant financial institutions have conglomerated like blocks of Lego and created the "too big to fail" impregnibility.

Politicians are also very beholden to their donors, and that tends to create a fenced off set of ideas of what is good policy and what is not. So the accusations of elites and vested interests is often one that has a lot of substance to it.

The problem is on the other hand, some bad ideas are just manifestly bad ideas and some people manifestly should never be in any position of authority. But because the rather closed off circle politics operates in, it strengthens the hands of these individuals and makes them more sympathetic and appealing to the public.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Charlatans and snake oil salesman like Trump exist and are given life blood by the existence of corporate sponsored career politicians like Hilary Clinton.

Frankly every single American politician should be ashamed of themselves about Trump, because they as much as book selling talk radio nuts are responsible for him having gotten this far.

[Niall_Quinn]

Yes I do think they are terrified, print news has become extinct and the media networks are worried about going the same way.

In some ways it's a good thing, people are thinking for themselves more. On the other hand are they? They seem more interested in reading things online that confirm their own opinions rather than anything that expands their understanding.

You're talking about technological change, but there has been no accompanying change in the nature of the mainstream media. They are as bad as they ever were and in many ways worse. And this is the reason why more people are "thinking for themselves" (or more likely refusing to think approved thoughts), because the propaganda is now so extreme. Yes, it still captures the majority, but the extremism is shaking non-believers off the tree. Not that it matters because the establishment will do what it has always done when the masses stir - start a war. And watch the media hustle in the build up. Again, as if nothing happened the last time around. If they are afraid of being rumbled then they aren't being very covert. On the contrary, this election cycle has seen them metaphorically flounce out of the closet in wigs and lipstick. Some people are bound to notice.

[Letters]

When NQ says politicians don't control the economy, he broadly speaking is correct. Although indirectly they have created the circumstances in which giant financial institutions have conglomerated like blocks of Lego and created the "too big to fail" impregnibility.

Politicians are also very beholden to their donors, and that tends to create a fenced off set of ideas of what is good policy and what is not. So the accusations of elites and vested interests is often one that has a lot of substance to it.

The problem is on the other hand, some bad ideas are just manifestly bad ideas and some people manifestly should never be in any position of authority. But because the rather closed off circle politics operates in, it strengthens the hands of these individuals and makes them more sympathetic and appealing to the public.

I think Obama was doing things which he believed would make things better.
He's legalised gay marriage for example which is a step towards equality and Obamacare seems to be a progressive step. Both things Trump has said he will reverse.
Not saying there aren't bigger things going on which no president has control of but the personality and opinions of the next person in the white house will make a difference.

[Niall_Quinn]

When NQ says politicians don't control the economy, he broadly speaking is correct. Although indirectly they have created the circumstances in which giant financial institutions have conglomerated like blocks of Lego and created the "too big to fail" impregnibility.

Politicians are also very beholden to their donors, and that tends to create a fenced off set of ideas of what is good policy and what is not. So the accusations of elites and vested interests is often one that has a lot of substance to it.

The problem is on the other hand, some bad ideas are just manifestly bad ideas and some people manifestly should never be in any position of authority. But because the rather closed off circle politics operates in, it strengthens the hands of these individuals and makes them more sympathetic and appealing to the public.

There's more to it than that, as this latest election proves. When you put characters like Trump and Clinton in front of people and ask them to pick a leader from the two and people don't just collapse laughing and then get very angry you know there is something very, very wrong. In my opinion the vast majority of people today are mentally ill. And not always by choice. Many have been driven to the condition as a result of prolonged exposure to the extreme variance in what they conditioned to believe and what they can't help glimpsing out of the corner of their eye. I don't imagine the human mind is chuffed being fed on a diet of life, liberty and justice when the eyes keep sending a steady stream of death, disenfranchisement (in all its forms) and overt corruption. Again I go back to the young people to find some hope. The elder generations that have a living memory of a now airbrushed past will soon be gone. There was every danger the subsequent generations might be totally bereft thereafter, consumed in a permanent fantasy. All indicators point to that not being the case. Just as the environment adjusts, compensates, regenerates and revitalises so will human beings. I think. I hope. This dark age will pass as others have.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

You're talking about technological change, but there has been no accompanying change in the nature of the mainstream media. They are as bad as they ever were and in many ways worse. And this is the reason why more people are "thinking for themselves" (or more likely refusing to think approved thoughts), because the propaganda is now so extreme. Yes, it still captures the majority, but the extremism is shaking non-believers off the tree. Not that it matters because the establishment will do what it has always done when the masses stir - start a war. And watch the media hustle in the build up. Again, as if nothing happened the last time around. If they are afraid of being rumbled then they aren't being very covert. On the contrary, this election cycle has seen them metaphorically flounce out of the closet in wigs and lipstick. Some people are bound to notice.


You have just agreed with me, but what I've said is that alternative media is often just as bad if not worse in terms of propaganda and outright lies.

The media (and to think of it as a homogenous grouping is pretty laughable) tends to focus on minutiae and distraction rather than propoganda. But it's less about trying to peddle a narrative of the dark puppet masters and more about personal enrichment.

And alternative media is no different, they basically pay their journalists (laughable term) based on how likely click bait the piece is going to be rather than the strength of the piece.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I think Obama was doing things which he believed would make things better.
He's legalised gay marriage for example which is a step towards equality and Obamacare seems to be a progressive step. Both things Trump has said he will reverse.
Not saying there aren't bigger things going on which no president has control of but the personality and opinions of the next person in the white house will make a difference.

Things like legalising gay marriage is scenery though, Obamas campaign was sponsored by a lot of Wall Street institutions and his treasury secretaries Tim Geitner and Jacob Liew were both Wall Street insiders. And this has been the way of things for a while from Hank Paulsen who was a CEO at Goldman Sachs under Bush and Larry Summers (who served under Clinton).who was in the pocket of the financial sector who lectured at universities about the great self correcting power of the market place and was a proponent of the Glass-Stiegel bill which reversed every progressive regulation put in place by the US government after the 1929 crash and paved the way for giant corporate mergers.

I have no doubt Obama instinctively was far more for regulation and redistribution policies than he otherwise enacted, which was partly due to congressional blocking and partly because of who he was beholden to for winning office.

[Niall_Quinn]

You have just agreed with me, but what I've said is that alternative media is often just as bad if not worse in terms of propaganda and outright lies.

The media (and to think of it as a homogenous grouping is pretty laughable) tends to focus on minutiae and distraction rather than propoganda. But it's less about trying to peddle a narrative of the dark puppet masters and more about personal enrichment.

And alternative media is no different, they basically pay their journalists (laughable term) based on how likely click bait the piece is going to be rather than the strength of the piece.

Well then we should laugh because that's just what we are dealing with, a collection of seemingly diverse sources that, nevertheless, play within the tight bounds of an establishment narrative. Whether it's the New York Times or Joe the blogger, 99% of this "diverse" commentary is handicapped and therefore homogenised by the careful framing within which all opinion and debate is formed. For example, ask a "left wing" or "right wing" commentator about taxes and they'll give you the same answer but with a percentage sign modified up or down. The question is, should a collection of citizens assume additional rights for themselves and then abuse these rights to rob their fellow citizens? This question is then framed as, should we lower or raise taxes? The very essence of the issue has been lost in the reframing. A left winger will explain the virtues of expanded robbery without ever understanding the true implications of his opinion. A right winger will disagree vehemently, calling for smaller government as if such a desire carries automatic virtue. Again, the essence has evaporated. And when you point this out they will go out of their way to argue against their own laws in an attempt to justify their position. Yet when you ask them what should be done about crime they both assume a grave tone as they discuss suitable punishments. They literally hold two opinions simultaneously and then develop a passion for both. Little wonder they are insane.

[Niall_Quinn]

Things like legalising gay marriage is scenery though, Obamas campaign was sponsored by a lot of Wall Street institutions and his treasury secretaries Tim Geitner and Jacob Liew were both Wall Street insiders. And this has been the way of things for a while from Hank Paulsen who was a CEO at Goldman Sachs under Bush and Larry Summers (who served under Clinton).who was in the pocket of the financial sector who lectured at universities about the great self correcting power of the market place and was a proponent of the Glass-Stiegel bill which reversed every progressive regulation put in place by the US government after the 1929 crash and paved the way for giant corporate mergers.

I have no doubt Obama instinctively was far more for regulation and redistribution policies than he otherwise enacted, which was partly due to congressional blocking and partly because of who he was beholden to for winning office.

There's another example. Should the state criminalise or legalise gay marriage. The right says criminalise. The left says legalise. I say, what the fuck business does the state have trying to tell people how they may or may not live their own personal lives? I mean, what the fuck? The correct answer to that question is, yes, we should get rid of the state immediately.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

There's another example. Should the state criminalise or legalise gay marriage. The right says criminalise. The left says legalise. I say, what the fuck business does the state have trying to tell people how they may or may not live their own personal lives? I mean, what the fuck? The correct answer to that question is, yes, we should get rid of the state immediately.

Although it is only mentioned fleetingly by myself I tend to agree with that. If two people want to get married it's no ones business to approve or disapprove. If certain shop owners want to refuse to serve gay people, fair enough....you obviously care more about sexual behaviour than your livelihood and the customer you've turned away will be taken by someone else.

[Letters]

Things like legalising gay marriage is scenery though, Obamas campaign was sponsored by a lot of Wall Street institutions and his treasury secretaries Tim Geitner and Jacob Liew were both Wall Street insiders. And this has been the way of things for a while from Hank Paulsen who was a CEO at Goldman Sachs under Bush and Larry Summers (who served under Clinton).who was in the pocket of the financial sector who lectured at universities about the great self correcting power of the market place and was a proponent of the Glass-Stiegel bill which reversed every progressive regulation put in place by the US government after the 1929 crash and paved the way for giant corporate mergers.

I have no doubt Obama instinctively was far more for regulation and redistribution policies than he otherwise enacted, which was partly due to congressional blocking and partly because of who he was beholden to for winning office.

You say it's scenery, these things do make a difference to people's lives. I think overall Obama has done things which he thinks will make things better. Had he not been frustrated by Congress he'd probably have achieved more.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

You say it's scenery, these things do make a difference to people's lives. I think overall Obama has done things which he thinks will make things better. Had he not been frustrated by Congress he'd probably have achieved more.

I don't know if you have Netflix, but if you do watch a documentary series called the Roosevelts and see what Teddy and FDR achieved in office and then come back and tell me Gay Marriage is substantial legislation compared to that.

Don't get me wrong in many ways I like Obama, the only area in which I don't agree with him and even Trump had a point about was not being strong enough on foreign policy....I think broadly speaking Assad and Putin have given him the runaround.

I think he's a great orator and writer. On the surface Obamas biggest achievement is healthcare, for all its shortcomings the ACA has stopped insurance companies denying people treatment based on pre existing conditions. Yes they are trying to strike back by putting up premiums and yes more needs to be done to drive down pharmaceutical costs but it's a definite step in the right direction.
But the lack of boldness in his presidency (the ACA was actually a modified Republican plan, and implemented in the state of Massachusetts by Mitt Romney when he was governor) was I repeat as much due to corporate donors as it was a republican congress (republicans only controlled both houses from 2014).

[Letters]

I don't know if you have Netflix, but if you do watch a documentary series called the Roosevelts and see what Teddy and FDR achieved in office and then come back and tell me Gay Marriage is substantial legislation compared to that.
I do kinda have Netflix via our lodger so I might check that out. Thanks.
And it was just an example, as was Obamacare.
There may well be bigger things in terms of world economy than no US president can control but I think in general he's done some things which will improve people's day to day lives.
This all started when someone said it doesn't matter who gets in. I don't accept that at all.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Oh i don't subscribe to that view, i think this election especially more than any other proves that it does matter.

There is a legitimate point to be made that the power of the presidency is limited (as it should be) but think of America from it's foundation as a secular democracy where the divine right to rule didn't exist and the very concept of the country for what it represents is to this day very important.

America hasn't always been a force for Good in the world, it has like we have often made things worse from it's attentions.....but it should at least seek to be so. As you will see from the Roosevelts documentary both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt believed America had to stand up against the oppressor and now one of the candidates for the presidency seems to swoon like a school girl at compliments from figures like Vladimir Putin and seems to want to renege on it's commitment to international cooperation based on half truths that countries aren't paying their way.

TR and FDR were truly great men, both stood up to the vested business interests in their own country to make America a better place, and if Trump wanted to Make America Great again he'd look to follow their examples, not just exploit the hopes and dreams of the credulous in order just to feed off the attention.

[Letters]

Phil Collins tickets go on sale tomorrow (Friday) at 9am.

No need to thank me.

:tiphat:

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Phil Collins tickets go on sale tomorrow (Friday) at 9am.

No need to thank me.

:tiphat:

You're right there isn't

[Letters]

I think we can all agree that Phil Collins fans deserve to be ripped off so I might get some tickets to put on SeatWave ##

[Kano]

I do kinda have Netflix via our lodger so I might check that out. Thanks.
And it was just an example, as was Obamacare.
There may well be bigger things in terms of world economy than no US president can control but I think in general he's done some things which will improve people's day to day lives.
This all started when someone said it doesn't matter who gets in. I don't accept that at all.

Whoever gets in will affect people's life, that's a given because legislation will be passed even if they hid in the Oval Office for four years. Will all those affected by those changes be those who need it? Definitely not. So the really important issues that could change so much forever remain resolved and they pass the buck, each government blaming the last for their inability to change anything. Obamacare is a failure because the idea was supposed to be free healthcare for the needy but instead it has become 'affordable', which leaves large swathes of people unable to access the help they need. As usual, when a new government comes to power, they realise how strongly their hands are tied and how much power has to be conceded in order to placate all the other parties involved. That's why manifestos end up looking like a book of hollow lies every time. Adam Curtis' new documentary succinctly summarises the limitations of those in government across the world now, unable to effect change and restricted to merely maintaining stability in the system. The only leader in the Western World I can think of that is remembered well by the people is Kennedy - and that's because he was killed before he had a chance to fuck things up like everyone else. There have been advancements of law in terms of equality across gender, race and sexuality that are welcomed but the fact is those had to changed in the modern age. Everything else is out of their range and round in circles it will continue.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Actually far more people are covered by health insurance now and people won't be denied coverage due to pre existing conditions, no it's not perfect but no one has offered anything better other than the single payer option and that just won't happen in America.

Progression works on a steady trajectory, technology and science improves lives as much as government legislation. If people don't think on a global scale things are better than they were say fifty years ago in terms of life chances, equality and quality of life than they would be wrong.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Lisa needs braces.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Letters]

Gary, how come your cousin's such a f***wit?

[GP]

What? :lol:

Who's Gary's cousin?

[Marc Overmars]

Lisa needs braces.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Dental plan!

[Niall_Quinn]

What? :lol:

Who's Gary's cousin?

Me you knob! Hadn't you twigged that :haha:

[Letters]

What? :lol:

Who's Gary's cousin?

Someone on FB, not here.
Big Trump supporter.
Impervious to logic or reason, seemingly.

[GP]

Someone on FB, not here.
Big Trump supporter.
Impervious to logic or reason, seemingly.

Mr Trump :bow:

[LDG]

This all started when someone said it doesn't matter who gets in. I don't accept that at all.

To all intents and purposes, it doesn't matter, as I said earlier. I was reacting to your chicken licken theory that the sky would fall in if Trump got in.

Do you honestly think he'd be able to build a wall, reverse leaglisation of gay marriage, deport muslims etc. Absolutely none of it would ever happen. It's all just deflection. It's an outrageous puppet show designed to get a hell of a lot of stupid people to cast their vote for one side of two packs of wolves and vultures.

I accept that being the figurehead / puppet grants you fame, and therefore, influence. But don't tell me that what Obama has managed to do is his own agenda.

What makes me laugh, is that Trump is able to go so far with his sales patter. It should be obvious to all that it's all a load of shit, but one hell of a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

To all intents and purposes, it doesn't matter, as I said earlier. I was reacting to your chicken licken theory that the sky would fall in if Trump got in.

Do you honestly think he'd be able to build a wall, reverse leaglisation of gay marriage, deport muslims etc. Absolutely none of it would ever happen. It's all just deflection. It's an outrageous puppet show designed to get a hell of a lot of stupid people to cast their vote for one side of two packs of wolves and vultures.

I accept that being the figurehead / puppet grants you fame, and therefore, influence. But don't tell me that what Obama has managed to do is his own agenda.

What makes me laugh, is that Trump is able to go so far with his sales patter. It should be obvious to all that it's all a load of shit, but one hell of a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value.

No but he can probably enact his economic policies which would contract the US economy and have a knock on effect globally.

He can repeal ACA and leave people like my cousins uninsured

Plus potential of trade war with China, not sticking to commitments of NATO or the non proliferation treaty

[Niall_Quinn]

No but he can probably enact his economic policies which would contract the US economy and have a knock on effect globally.

He can repeal ACA and leave people like my cousins uninsured

Plus potential of trade war with China, not sticking to commitments of NATO or the non proliferation treaty

Those aren't HIS economic policies. In fact they aren't economic policies at all.

Economy: the state of a country or region in terms of the production and consumption of goods and services and the supply of money.

No candidate since Andrew Jackson has ever discussed the latter point. Ron Paul understood it and expressed it in watered down terms, "We're going to audit the Fed." I assume "audit" was code for "expose" and Paul is and was an honest man. Jackson actually got the fuckers shut down. They struck back by engineering his impeachment. Nevertheless, Jackson remains the last US president that had an economic policy.

Trump's instructions are to distract the population by blaming brown people for the general economic hardship that 99% of Americans have to endure, while ensuring the 1% can officially avoid their social obligations. He's a corporate welfare candidate, exactly the same as Clinton except his controllers prefer to take their winnings up front and short term whereas Clinton's paymasters prefer the long game of soaking the country in unsustainable debt and expanding the interest mountain.

The Affordable Care Act is not affordable and does not provide care. And it most certainly is an "act". That's enough said, or ought to be. I worked inside that on the tech side. What an absolute farce. It was always a way to reduce choice and reorganise health care provision ("health care" being a euphemism as always) in order to introduce efficiencies for the industry at the expense of the citizenry. That has been done now, the puppet Obama having directly lied to the American people about almost every aspect of the project. Now the other shoe is due to drop with almost every influential observer and policymaker in agreement that urgent reform is required. Translated that means mission accomplished, time to bank the profits. Your cousins aren't considered as individuals, never were and never will be for as long as the corruption exists at the heart of the political and economic system.

There's already a trade war with China, and potentially a much hotter war than that. As eventually must happen with every pyramid scheme, the American banking system has run out of downline members. China is still on the up and will ease past America and out of sight within the next 20 years as it continues on its own doomed trajectory. American presidents have no say in any of this. Such decisions are way, way above their pay grade. Again, Andrew Jackson was the only guy to ever throw a spanner in the works. I think you mentioned both Roosevelts previously. Classic puppets who never stepped outside the clearly defined boundaries, although admittedly they managed to make a better show of it than the degenerate Obama and his gay marriages. Andrew Jackson is the guy worth studying of you want to see a president who "stood up" against corporate power. And he won. Unfortunately all his work was undone in 1913 when the bankers reasserted their control and nothing has changed since. Forget about Trump or Clinton fighting the good fight. It's not something that will ever cross their temporary desks. Power is permanent, the presidency is a fashion.

Trump or Clinton will hold the title Commander in Chief but this is strictly for show. If either tried to interfere in the running of the military machine or the operations of the huge industrial base that supports it then they'd be physically picked up and dumped on the street. If it was decided that the US was to pull out of NATO (which will never happen if American continues to desire a shield for their belligerence and expansionism) then it wouldn't be the lowly Trump calling the shots.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

You realise of course that Andrew Jackson's veto of the Bank Bill had literally nothing to do with stemming the power of big financial interests and all part of his ongoing feud with Henry Clay and Clay's surrogate Nicholas Biddle.

Whilst i'm in no way supporting the financial institutions that certainly did as Jackson stated codify the rich getting richer, but Jackson was borderline insane and almost caused civil war thirty years previously over Tariffs with the South (he didn't support high Tariffs but hated his Vice President John C Calhoun so much that he escalated it so he could bring Calhoun up on treason charges).

Jackson in many ways is the nearest president you can compare to Trump in temperament, except Jackson actually had achievements in his career.

As for the ACA, again it can only be compared with what immediately preceded it, and My Cousin's son was able to be covered on his healthcare plan for an accident he'd had which previously he wouldn't have. I think not being bankrupted by medical costs superseded this idea of being treated as an "individual".

The idea that it's there to benefit big business is counter intuitive when you consider the Medical lobbyists have tried at every step to undermine and kill it.

[Niall_Quinn]

You realise of course that Andrew Jackson's veto of the Bank Bill had literally nothing to do with stemming the power of big financial interests and all part of his ongoing feud with Henry Clay and Clay's surrogate Nicholas Biddle.

Whilst i'm in no way supporting the financial institutions that certainly did as Jackson stated codify the rich getting richer, but Jackson was borderline insane and almost caused civil war thirty years previously over Tariffs with the South (he didn't support high Tariffs but hated his Vice President John C Calhoun so much that he escalated it so he could bring Calhoun up on treason charges).

Jackson in many ways is the nearest president you can compare to Trump in temperament, except Jackson actually had achievements in his career.

As for the ACA, again it can only be compared with what immediately preceded it, and My Cousin's son was able to be covered on his healthcare plan for an accident he'd had which previously he wouldn't have. I think not being bankrupted by medical costs superseded this idea of being treated as an "individual".

The idea that it's there to benefit big business is counter intuitive when you consider the Medical lobbyists have tried at every step to undermine and kill it.

The discussion isn't about what this or that president did or what sort of temperament he had. It's about whether a president yields power and as stated, the last president to wield power in any meaningful way and enforce a policy that directly challenged the power structure was Andrew Jackson. Yes, the genocidal Andrew Jackson but then again America was founded on slavery by founding fathers who understood very well the nature of things (them being masons and all). America has been a lie from concept. However, it was founded as the least offensive lie in the annals of modern history. Not a ringing endorsement but relative, albeit pitiful progress. This is why many people to this day believe America is still run by England. They take this too literally but there's truth in it. The American project could never work (and was never designed to work as stated) because of the European baggage it carried with it and allowed to proliferate in the form of parasitical banking systems. And without a policy to curtail, control and disband these banking systems all so-called economic policies are rendered meaningless. This is also why the modern Jews are psychologically hated. Rather unfortunate for them but they willingly accepted the role of front man for the holier than thou Christians who didn't want to sully their souls in the process of accumulating their worldly wealth. All politics is theatre designed to distract from reality. The thought that Trump or Clinton could or would exert influence beyond the stage is far fetched to say the least. The Clinton gang (the "progressives") are bag carriers for the regressive controllers that have afflicted humanity for so long. The inversion again. In politics if they say one thing then look to its opposite to understand the intent. It's difficult to pinpoint who Trump represents because he has enough money to shield his real base. The nouveau riche and up-and-comers I suppose. Dissatisfied elements of the military?

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

My point is no matter what the pull of the financial industries, that presidents do make an impact either for good or for ill.

The current power of speculative investment banks is attributable to Reagan and his Treasury Secretary Don Regan who wanted to "set the bull loose". Regan was a CEO for Merril Lynch and up until the time Reagan became president, investment banking was seen as a modest white collar industry with the expectation of an equally modest salary. And now they are the croupiers of the world's biggest casinos

And as I stated earlier both Roosevelts are the best examples of Presidents wielding actual power and making lasting changes to their country.

[Letters]

To all intents and purposes, it doesn't matter, as I said earlier. I was reacting to your chicken licken theory that the sky would fall in if Trump got in.

Do you honestly think he'd be able to build a wall, reverse leaglisation of gay marriage, deport muslims etc. Absolutely none of it would ever happen. It's all just deflection. It's an outrageous puppet show designed to get a hell of a lot of stupid people to cast their vote for one side of two packs of wolves and vultures.

I accept that being the figurehead / puppet grants you fame, and therefore, influence. But don't tell me that what Obama has managed to do is his own agenda.

What makes me laugh, is that Trump is able to go so far with his sales patter. It should be obvious to all that it's all a load of shit, but one hell of a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value.
Why did you vote in the last election if you think it doesn't matter? I remember you saying how you voted, and why. Why bother? Or does this only apply in America?

I don't think he's going to build a wall, no. That is obvious bullshit. I was watching a bit of Jim Jeffries' "Freedumb" show and in that he says that Trump is like a kid running for school president saying things like "and we're going to have two lunchtimes, and we'll have a soda machine in every classroom, and..."

But the other things yes, I think he could do some of those. Why couldn't he? And yes, I think that some of the things Obama has done are things he wanted to do. It's called Obamacare and is a progressive step, as are some of the legislation that he's brought in for equal rights for some minorities - things which Trump has said he'll roll back. I think Obama would have done more on certain issues had he not been frustrated by Congress.

There may be bigger, global things going on which the president has little or no control over but the personality and opinions of the president absolutely make a difference, and those differences affect people's lives.

What I find scary about Trump is who knows what he'll actually do? He constantly contradicts himself and he's so thin skinned that he's likely to overreact to things. Not someone I want making important decisions which affect people.

[Niall_Quinn]

It seems the fundamental difference in our thinking hinges on the belief, or dismissal, of the political function as a power to influence outcomes. You attribute a decision making role to the political classes, e.g. the claim that Reagan enabled the banking sector. I dismiss the idea a public official of low standing (speaking in establishment terms and certainly not my terms) and thereby comparatively low rank could ever influence the decision making process further up the tree.

My position is supported by the reality of term limits and the very character of the individuals who compromise their way to the "top". Geopolitics and cultural progression play out over generations and mysteriously almost always travel in a direction that favours the fortunes of the ruling classes, except of course in the most notable cases where systems and control break down. Russia during the revolutionary period, for example. France before it.

I don't disagree that the establishment has seen its control eroded since the absolutism of the monarchs, and that's what marked out the American experiment as significant. And their power is always balanced on a knife edge due to the practicalities of numbers. Few of them, many of us. I'm sure it's a difficult balancing act for the poor loves and as technology and education have advanced so concessions have had to be granted, usually following pitched battles on the streets. Civil rights, the abolition of slavery.

Running through it all though is the one non-negotiable, money (or today's equivalent, currency). This is the red line. Jackson crossed it. So did Lincoln in his own way. And Kennedy was about to cross it before he was gunned down. Ron Paul talked about it. Not a peep from Clinton or Trump so we therefore know they have no meaningful policies. They can claim whatever they want to claim. Building walls, sisters doing it for themselves, whatever. But money/ currency will decide how it plays out and he who controls the money controls not just the nation but the minds and exertion of the citizenry.

I suppose secrecy is the next significant issues, albeit a thousand yards down the road from the elephant of money. Neither Trump nor Clinton have mentioned this either. Kennedy mentioned it, before he was shot in the head. Ron Paul mentioned it too. After that, what remains is a bag of methods by which crumbs will be kicked around the floor in the direction of this unwashed mob or that unwashed mob.

Will Trump or Clinton be allowed to kick a few crumbs around? Sure. It's important to provide a few props to keep the play interesting and the audience engaged. I think this is the influence you are talking about. Even then, do you see how it works? They steal our money so they can bestow it upon us in their magnificent benevolence. You have to laugh.

[Niall_Quinn]

Why did you vote in the last election if you think it doesn't matter? I remember you saying how you voted, and why. Why bother? Or does this only apply in America?

I don't think he's going to build a wall, no. That is obvious bullshit. I was watching a bit of Jim Jeffries' "Freedumb" show and in that he says that Trump is like a kid running for school president saying things like "and we're going to have two lunchtimes, and we'll have a soda machine in every classroom, and..."

But the other things yes, I think he could do some of those. Why couldn't he? And yes, I think that some of the things Obama has done are things he wanted to do. It's called Obamacare and is a progressive step, as are some of the legislation that he's brought in for equal rights for some minorities - things which Trump has said he'll roll back. I think Obama would have done more on certain issues had he not been frustrated by Congress.

There may be bigger, global things going on which the president has little or no control over but the personality and opinions of the president absolutely make a difference, and those differences affect people's lives.

What I find scary about Trump is who knows what he'll actually do? He constantly contradicts himself and he's so thin skinned that he's likely to overreact to things. Not someone I want making important decisions which affect people.

How much do you know about Hilary Clinton?

[Letters]

How much do you know about Hilary Clinton?

Only what I read about her and hear her say.
My impression of her is she's as corrupt and as big a liar as most politicians who get to that level, but I'd much rather she was in the White House than someone who spouts the level of bigotry, misogny and racism that Trump spouts.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

That and it's not 1829 anymore, someone whose knowledge of cyber hacking extends to "my ten year old is really good at computers", someone who is such a brazen hypocrite on all his policy platforms, someone whose narcissism makes Mourinho seems considered and mild mannered...someone whose solution to inequality is massive tax cuts which will only benefit those at the top.

People like Trump are useful idiots for people who don't feel inequality extends far enough, in the same way scum like Aaron Banks does with UKIP in this country

[Letters]

Yeah, that too.

It always amazes me how he says he's going to make massive tax cuts and reduce the deficit and everyone whoops and cheers and no-one thinks "wait...hang on, how are you going to do those two things at the same time?!"

No-one at his rallies anyway, although I guess they're not that representative.

[Niall_Quinn]

Only what I read about her and hear her say.
My impression of her is she's as corrupt and as big a liar as most politicians who get to that level, but I'd much rather she was in the White House than someone who spouts the level of bigotry, misogny and racism that Trump spouts.

She's the epitome of contradiction (which is no longer just an opinion now Wikileaks has laid it all out a thousand times over), and she's as thin skinned as they come. Notorious for flying into vicious rages and tantrums when questioned or exposed as the dangerous incompetent she has repeatedly shown herself to be. Her ex-staffers and witnesses to these incidents leave no doubt she's unhinged.

Not that this is dreadfully important or hugely significant. I point it out to demonstrate how easy it is for people who "read about her" to be misled. When you hear Hilary accusing somebody you can be sure she's criticising them for one of her own traits or behaviours. This inversion and deflection is one of her key techniques.

As for the bigotry, misogyny and racism of Trump, again it all depends on what you read. Anyway, it's a bit rich a bigot, misogynist and racist such as yourself feels fit to comment. I read the stuff you posted about women and blacks on this forum. Now you might just say you were having a GW in-joke moment with the guys here and I'd believe that, because I've done it too and so have most members. But if I took your quotes and spun them up a bit and put them out to a receptive audience then dear oh dear, you'd be in a whole world of shit.

It would probably serve you better to read the opinions of Haitian community leaders rather than gold-digging tramps and left wing propagandists posing as journalists if you want to make a real comparison between the candidates. Because let's face it, let's have a moment of truth. We know almost fuck all about Trump because he's not been on the public stage until now and most of the he-said, she-said election knockabout is just that, unsubstantiated shite. There's definitely stuff there that has spilled out, like his wife claiming he raped her before she retracted. But in truth there's very little which is quite odd for a presidential candidate. Maybe he's good at keeping secrets, we can only speculate.

Now Hilary, on the other hand. I think you need to broaden your reading material. Plenty out there for people inclined to look.

[GP]

Yeah, that too.

It always amazes me how he says he's going to make massive tax cuts and reduce the deficit and everyone whoops and cheers and no-one thinks "wait...hang on, how are you going to do those two things at the same time?!"

No-one at his rallies anyway, although I guess they're not that representative.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=debRBD8V2Qo

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I think it's hard to make a judgement of someone's private temprament, but i suppose no you can't accuse Trump of being a walking contradiction he is as odious in public as people claim he is (unsubstantiated or not) in private.

This is a man who refuses to acknowledge the innocence of Five men whose convictions for Rape were overturned after DNA evidence exonerated them, partly because he'd taken out a poster campaign in New York advocating for the state to bring the Death Penalty and extend it for sex offenders and partly because let's be fair they were black.

And Letters may be a racist, misogynist and bigot but he's not running for high public office, and what Letters might say as off hand humour Trump has codified as part of his campaign. I believe in freedom of speech but freedom of speech doesn't immunise you from scrutiny and criticism of what you say, and what Trump says publically not even as a gaffe (or they might be gaffes but he's too stupid to do anything but double down on whatever nonsense he comes up with) summarises his character.

Whether the women who have come out against Trump are legitimate or not, he's invited it onto himself which what he was caught on tape saying, forget all the locker room talk about objectifying women (there isn't a man alive who hasn't objectified women in private conversations with another man) but he basically boasted that he commits sexual assault and can get away with it because he's famous, now if we are taking him at his word why on the other hand would these women be necessarily lying.

There was a whole ream of discussion on the Tory thread about the high level sexual abuse that goes on and how people in top positions are immunised from prosecution for it, I ask how is this any different?.

I have no idea whether Hilary Clinton flies into petulant rage in private about things (wouldn't surprise me that much), but she seems to be considerably less likely to get into public, child like squabbles with people...as Anderson Cooper said to Trump "he started it" is the argument used by a five year old.

[Niall_Quinn]

The purpose of my post was to expose (again) Letters' lack of knowledge and consideration upon which his conclusions are based. This coming from a person who only recently criticised swathes of the American population because they were ignorant, one-tracked and lacked consideration. Not only that, the propaganda he chooses to use to disparage one candidate is far more applicable to his candidate of choice. Certainly he's not the only person who behaves in this way, millions do. He's trying to ride a horse with both feet stuck in his mouth and it makes me spit coffee in wonder and bewilderment. Which I shouldn't do. I know I should ignore him.

[Letters]

What do you know about her apart from what you read about her? You may read different things to me but you don't know her any more than me. You have in the past sneered at me, saying I recycle other people's opinions but we all do. Unless we know someone personally our opinions of them have to be based purely on the way they present themselves and things we see and read about them. That's all we've got. Maybe you read different things to me but don't pretend your thoughts about her are original. And what makes the things you've read more valid?


As for the bigotry, misogyny and racism of Trump, again it all depends on what you read.

Does it? I mean, I've seen the videos of Trump talking. I watched quite a bit of his rally last Friday. This isn't stuff the media are making up or twisting. He's saying this stuff and you can go look at the tapes :shrug:


Anyway, it's a bit rich a bigot, misogynist and racist such as yourself feels fit to comment. I read the stuff you posted about women and blacks on this forum. Now you might just say you were having a GW in-joke moment with the guys here and I'd believe that, because I've done it too and so have most members. But if I took your quotes and spun them up a bit and put them out to a receptive audience then dear oh dear, you'd be in a whole world of shit.

It's a bit different though, isn't it? This is a pretty small messageboard, even in its pomp it wasn't that big. It was, because of the subject matter, male-dominated and the sense of humour was neccessarily blokey. The board has a certain sense of humour which I enjoy and have joined in with but there is a certain level of anonymity and it's not a public, high profile board. And I'm not in a position of power (apart from Imaginary Internet Power) and not likely to run for one. What I think doesn't matter in terms of setting policy.

On Facebook I am very aware that the things I say could be seen by anyone - I don't bother having security settings set, I make all my posts public and thus I wouldn't write in the same way on there. Some of the jokes I think appropriate on here I would never post on there. And this is the thing with Trump. Maybe the "grab them by the pussy" comment was "locker room talk" (Although really? What locker rooms does he hang out in? When is that sort of thing ever acceptable?), some of the things he's said in public at his own rallies or on Twitter aren't much better. He said in his 'apology' it didn't reflect who he was as a person and I could maybe buy that were it not for the things he's said far more publicly which show that actually yes, that is exactly who he is.

You call the women who have come forward 'gold digging tramps'. At the last count 11 have come forwards, you have evidence that they have all been paid for their comments? And tramps? Really?


Now Hilary, on the other hand. I think you need to broaden your reading material. Plenty out there for people inclined to look.
Why do you always do that? You always hint at knowing better than me but never point me in (what you think is) the right direction.
Trump is relatively new to the political stage but he's not new to the public eye, there's plenty of material to rake through and plenty of dirt to dig up and a lot has been.

I found this re:Haiti:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/qa-clintons-haiti-42762130

Some potentially murky goings on but worse than many long term, high profile politicians? And as I've said Trump's business dealings have plenty of dirt to be mined too. I don't think anyone is claiming that voting in this election is anything but the choosing the lesser evil.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Well it's different in the sense that as far as I'm aware you haven't boasted about committing sexual assault.

[Letters]

I'm a terrific message board moderator, I moderate the best board.

[GP]

I'm a terrific message board moderator, I moderate the best board.

I know it.

You know it.

Everyone knows it.

[McNamara That Ghost...]

Turncoats.

[Goonermerree]

The Aberfan disaster, horrific. RIP

[Niall_Quinn]

I'm a terrific message board moderator, I moderate the best board.

I wouldn't disagree with that. You put up with a lot of shit that many admins wouldn't bother with. To counterbalance that, you talk a lot of shit too. But then again, don't we all.

[Niall_Quinn]

What do you know about her apart from what you read about her? You may read different things to me but you don't know her any more than me. You have in the past sneered at me, saying I recycle other people's opinions but we all do. Unless we know someone personally our opinions of them have to be based purely on the way they present themselves and things we see and read about them. That's all we've got. Maybe you read different things to me but don't pretend your thoughts about her are original. And what makes the things you've read more valid?



Does it? I mean, I've seen the videos of Trump talking. I watched quite a bit of his rally last Friday. This isn't stuff the media are making up or twisting. He's saying this stuff and you can go look at the tapes :shrug:



It's a bit different though, isn't it? This is a pretty small messageboard, even in its pomp it wasn't that big. It was, because of the subject matter, male-dominated and the sense of humour was neccessarily blokey. The board has a certain sense of humour which I enjoy and have joined in with but there is a certain level of anonymity and it's not a public, high profile board. And I'm not in a position of power (apart from Imaginary Internet Power) and not likely to run for one. What I think doesn't matter in terms of setting policy.

On Facebook I am very aware that the things I say could be seen by anyone - I don't bother having security settings set, I make all my posts public and thus I wouldn't write in the same way on there. Some of the jokes I think appropriate on here I would never post on there. And this is the thing with Trump. Maybe the "grab them by the pussy" comment was "locker room talk" (Although really? What locker rooms does he hang out in? When is that sort of thing ever acceptable?), some of the things he's said in public at his own rallies or on Twitter aren't much better. He said in his 'apology' it didn't reflect who he was as a person and I could maybe buy that were it not for the things he's said far more publicly which show that actually yes, that is exactly who he is.

You call the women who have come forward 'gold digging tramps'. At the last count 11 have come forwards, you have evidence that they have all been paid for their comments? And tramps? Really?


Why do you always do that? You always hint at knowing better than me but never point me in (what you think is) the right direction.
Trump is relatively new to the political stage but he's not new to the public eye, there's plenty of material to rake through and plenty of dirt to dig up and a lot has been.

I found this re:Haiti:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/qa-clintons-haiti-42762130

Some potentially murky goings on but worse than many long term, high profile politicians? And as I've said Trump's business dealings have plenty of dirt to be mined too. I don't think anyone is claiming that voting in this election is anything but the choosing the lesser evil.

Okay, I'll pick out one aspect of that because life is short.

I'm glad you went away and looked up some information on Haiti, despite the fact you claim I never point you anywhere. If I gave you direct links then you'd be going where I lead. That's why links are shite. They are usually confirmation bias at best. I'll state what I believe and if you want to dig a bit deeper to discover if I'm talking shite or maybe there's something in what I am saying, then fine. But if you don't know what I'm talking about and you reach a judgement anyway then not so good. So I'm glad you went away and found some information. Not so glad you chose ABC "news" as a source, for reasons that would take a long time to explain but really are quite obvious anyway. No problem though if that's your first source on a longer trail. No harm seeing what the deeply biased opinion is on both sides. It helps define the boundaries of investigation. But I hope you aren't going to stop there. You're right, we don't know any of these people personally and all we have to go on is the experiences of others. So gathering as much of that experience as possible to find commonalities, patterns and other clues is probably the best bet we have when trying to figure out what professional liars really mean when they speak.

I have followed the Clintons since Mena. You won't find Mena in the news because it is carefully censored. But you can find much information if you dig deeper. At first you'll be totally lost because the Internet is a sea of everything from batshit lunacy to incredible propaganda. But eventually you'll learn how to separate the wheat. Of course you may not have the time or inclination to find the evidence that could support your conclusions. Many people don't. Fair enough. But in that's the case we must place your opinion in a context that is suitably reflective. And I do.

[Niall_Quinn]

Pretty amazing where we have got to now:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/24/born-again-christian-ashers-bakery-lose-court-appeal-in-gay-cake-row

I wonder if I can order a cake that says Ban Gay Marriage? I bet not. Why is the state so keen to have the place overrun by fags? Why is it so important?

[GP]

Yes I agree all queers should be burned to death.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Pretty amazing where we have got to now:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/24/born-again-christian-ashers-bakery-lose-court-appeal-in-gay-cake-row

I wonder if I can order a cake that says Ban Gay Marriage? I bet not. Why is the state so keen to have the place overrun by fags? Why is it so important?


I am always mixed on these stories, on one hand i do think anyone who gets married whether it a man and a woman or two men or two women should be equally thought of as stupid.

On the other hand you would have to ask if for instance you had a gay baker who refused to make a cake for a heterosexual couple getting married, would this technically be discrimination?

I do tend to think that if someone wants to be a prat and do themselves out of business because of their loyalty to an apocryphal book than who are we to say they shouldn't. It's beyond me that any small business would not want to cash in on the Pink Pound.

We don't have specific laws against other forms of self harm do we?

When you talk about "fags" i actually don't know whether you are just being provocative for the sake of it, or whether you have some identifiable issue with people who are gay. It's up to you, i don't see why anyone would care personally.

[Letters]

I do wonder what would have happened had some people asked for a cake which was, say, pro-ISIS.
Would that have got to court had the bakery refused?
The key issue, for me, is that the bakery didn't refuse to make the cake because of the sexuality of the clients, it was because of the message they were being asked to promote which they didn't feel they could.
Are they not allowed to have that view these days?

[Niall_Quinn]

I am always mixed on these stories, on one hand i do think anyone who gets married whether it a man and a woman or two men or two women should be equally thought of as stupid.

On the other hand you would have to ask if for instance you had a gay baker who refused to make a cake for a heterosexual couple getting married, would this technically be discrimination?

I do tend to think that if someone wants to be a prat and do themselves out of business because of their loyalty to an apocryphal book than who are we to say they shouldn't. It's beyond me that any small business would not want to cash in on the Pink Pound.

We don't have specific laws against other forms of self harm do we?

When you talk about "fags" i actually don't know whether you are just being provocative for the sake of it, or whether you have some identifiable issue with people who are gay. It's up to you, i don't see why anyone would care personally.

I've always called them fags. Gay is a word that had a very specific meaning before it was hijacked and who wants to type out homosexual all the time? This fucked up LBGT or LGHTV or HDTV or whatever fucking mess of letters it is supposed to be is the new politically correct way I guess? Won't be using that, ever.

My complaint here is the seller's rights have been deemed inferior to a buyer's rights. The, "we are all equal but some of us are a bit more equal", condition.

[Niall_Quinn]

I do wonder what would have happened had some people asked for a cake which was, say, pro-ISIS.
Would that have got to court had the bakery refused?
The key issue, for me, is that the bakery didn't refuse to make the cake because of the sexuality of the clients, it was because of the message they were being asked to promote which they didn't feel they could.
Are they not allowed to have that view these days?

Yes, you are allowed to have that view. But only selectively and based on what some other person or group permits. The laws are carefully structured to discriminate against some in favour of others, particularly the anti-discriminatory laws.

[Letters]

whatever fucking mess of letters it is
Don't bring me into it :(

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I've always called them fags. Gay is a word that had a very specific meaning before it was hijacked and who wants to type out homosexual all the time? This fucked up LBGT or LGHTV or HDTV or whatever fucking mess of letters it is supposed to be is the new politically correct way I guess? Won't be using that, ever.

My complaint here is the seller's rights have been deemed inferior to a buyer's rights. The, "we are all equal but some of us are a bit more equal", condition.

Well arguably Fag and Faggot have been appropriated as well, anyone who can tell me what the etymology of calling homosexual people fags is (faggots are meatballs and fags are cigarettes) i will be mildly grateful for not having to be bothered to look it up myself.


Again a seller in my view within reason should be able to do what they like with their product, if a baker puts a sign on the front of the door saying "No Blacks, Jews or Queers" my view is that should be allowed because again to be too discerning on your customer base is self harm and in a competitive world those discriminated against will be welcomed elsewhere.

Also when these people sue, what is the price you can put on hurt feelings?

[Letters]

I bet this verdict makes him feel ratty

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-37755178

:rimshot:

[Letters]

Again a seller in my view within reason should be able to do what they like with their product, if a baker puts a sign on the front of the door saying "No Blacks, Jews or Queers" my view is that should be allowed because again to be too discerning on your customer base is self harm and in a competitive world those discriminated against will be welcomed elsewhere.
See, I don't think a seller should be able to discriminate based on who the person is.
If the gays want an anniversary cake then fine, the bakers may have a view on that but they do anniversary cakes so sure, why not?
Where I think it's wrong is they were being asked to print a cake which promoted a cause they didn't believe in. The couple could have just gone somewhere else, this only got legal to make a point. And the point is that apparently you're not allowed to have that view or at least you're not allowed to stand by it.