Glenrothes Labour win

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

How many 'followers' do I have?

I've been up early making them fetching robes, but need to know numbers and sizes.

If you could list them Royboy it would be a great help.

Thanks.

Could I make this official, I am not one of Rind's "followers" I just think he's a nice chap

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by garinda

How many 'followers' do I have?

I've been up early making them fetching robes, but need to know numbers and sizes.

If you could list them Royboy it would be a great help.

Thanks.

We have your photo up on the wall as a role model for the kids, I was always told if you don't aim high you can never be dissapointed, so I'm passing the same advice on

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Could I make this official, I am not one of Rind's "followers" I just think he's a nice chap

Damn, and I've made you a beautiful robe, the sort of thing John Galliano would dress the Dali Lama in.

Judas.

[Meccy]

Yes you are quite right and that should not have been allowed then either. He was a terrible Prime Minister
By the nature of your response it would appear that you presume that I am a Tory. One should never make an opinion based on a mere presumption. I am merely a believer in democracy. Your response is more like that of a politician at the despatch box who, when confronted with an uncomfortable fact, responds with the playground chant of "Well you did it too"

Do you believe in the peoples right to decide who should represent them? If your answer is yes (which it should be!) Will you not then agree that when a Prime Minister steps down that the country should vote to decide who will next represent them and that elections should not just be called only when it suits the government?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Meccy

Yes you are quite right and that should not have been allowed then either. He was a terrible Prime Minister
By the nature of your response it would appear that you presume that I am a Tory. One should never make an opinion based on a mere presumption. I am merely a believer in democracy. Your response is more like that of a politician at the despatch box who, when confronted with an uncomfortable fact, responds with the playground chant of "Well you did it too"

Do you believe in the peoples right to decide who should represent them? If your answer is yes (which it should be!) Will you not then agree that when a Prime Minister steps down that the country should vote to decide who will next represent them and that elections should not just be called only when it suits the government?

I never presume anything, ever.

It was no secret at the last General Election that Brown was going to take over mid term.

I've made numerous posts about my dislike for Brown, 'presumably' you haven't seen them.

Personally I vote for who I think will be the best M.P. for Hyndburn, and at the last election it was Greg Pope.

By the way, my responses are nothing like that of a politican.

I'm non-partisan, and follow no party line. Therefore I'm able to say whatever I think is right.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by garinda

It was no secret at the last General Election that Brown was going to take over mid term.

Perhaps we watched different speeches, but Blair said he had every intention of staying for a full term. I guess he didn't take the back, or front, stabbing into account.

[Meccy]

You still didn't answer my question. Do you not agree that there should be a general election when a P.M. stands down?

[Meccy]

Presumably you haven't noticed that I only joined today and have not had a chance to read all of your posts. I will try of course, all the better to understand where you are coming from.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Meccy

You still didn't answer my question. Do you not agree that there should be a general election when a P.M. stands down?

Er...yes. I've said so before.

Also when a M.P. decides to cross the floor, after being elected under a different party banner.

Costly, but that's democracy.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by andrewb

Perhaps we watched different speeches, but Blair said he had every intention of staying for a full term. I guess he didn't take the back, or front, stabbing into account.

We've had this discussion before.

I distictly remember posting a link from the press, published before the last election, where Blair said he'd stand aside for Brown mid-term.

I'm not going to search for it, as I've just spent ten minutes searching through incontinence.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Meccy

You still didn't answer my question. Do you not agree that there should be a general election when a P.M. stands down?

Well I'm no friend of Brown or any of his ilk, but there is nothing which states that a general election should be called if the PM stands down. it has happened a few times notably When Wilson stood down in the seventies, Thatcher in the nineties and now Blair, but if Brown had been forced out a few months ago, it would have been right in my eyes to hold an election, replacing two leaders in the same Parliament would have been one two far

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Well I'm no friend of Brown or any of his ilk, but there is nothing which states that a general election should be called if the PM stands down. it has happened a few times notably When Wilson stood down in the seventies, Thatcher in the nineties and now Blair, but if Brown had been forced out a few months ago, it would have been right in my eyes to hold an election, replacing two leaders in the same Parliament would have been one two far

We agree again.

It might not seem right, but there is nothing in the statute books that mean it's breaking any rules at all.

[Lilly]

Originally Posted by garinda

See, the idea's growing.

If and when the Tories bring back the Work Houses there are all sorts of people who could benefit.

Scrap Child Benefit. Many more savings can be achieved buying chicken nuggets etc. in vast quantities direct from the producer.

Poor pensioners will benefit from being huddled together, and will thus stay warmer, and save on heating bills.

Everytime a crime has been committed the police will not waste any precious time, but will be able to go directly to the Work House, as we all know it's only the disadvantaged in society who commit crime, and never those in power.

Plus, being privately owned we'll have a willing and cheap (free) workforce, for all that stone breaking etc., thus ensuring maximum profits.

I was referring to all criminals. I never said that it's only the disadvantaged who commit crime.

I want to be clear though that I was only joking. I would not like to see the return of the workhouse. I know what went on in there and it aint pretty.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Lilly

I was referring to all criminals. I never said that it's only the disadvantaged who commit crime.

I want to be clear though that I was only joking. I would not like to see the return of the workhouse. I know what went on in there and it aint pretty.

I know you didn't mean that at all.

It's very clear, and I was just being sarcastic.

I'm very happy the poor aren't shut away in Victorian gloom.

A gloom some older members will recall their grandparents talking about.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's very clear, and I was just being sarcastic.

Thats not like you