williemillersmoustache

It's all about thermonuclear weapons, strategic energy and resource management. And yer bins. But mainly yer bins.

I got organising my brothers stag do all wrong clearly.

Thinking of all the trillions of unborn murdered from callous b*****ds knocking one out.

Ah, the DUP would still get to nominate the deputy and could still and are probably more likely to refuse power sharing.

Latest polling has Alliance neck and neck with the DUP What would happen if the DUP was pushed to third. Other than me chuckling for quite some time. And is this likely?

Clinging to the constituency popular vote in a multiparty election is just desperate. Particularly when the proportional vote gave the opposite result. Which is just so inconvenient for this above whinge.

30 or 40 years on, Python had these backward dinosaur fuckers nailed.

The ducks still crack me up. Every time.

It was very odd. Like the interviewer thought submarines were immovable objects.

I feel dirty, it feels wrong but Bennet and Cowan are spot on here.

BBC oatcake was full of it today too. "How could you leave Britain defenceless without its deterrent while Putin blah blah blah."

We're now onto indy is bad because something something Ukraine. Let's just check, yup that's the whole tory playbook

Again this is assertion before it has met a test. It's a position you favour clearly but it has not been tested. Therefore it is assertion. You're welcome to hold that view, but it doesn't gain merit the more times you smash it out.

This is just the "actually you need yet another election after the all the elections that have been held and lost by the no to a referendum side, in the hope that next time we'll win" argument. There is no intellectual basis for this, its just denial. Long winded and polite denial, but plain denial all the same. I almost take your point on meeting each of these spurious criteria and the diminishing returns for the Unionist side. But there's no basis to think that as each of these are put up another won't rise in its place. And that's what I meant by there being no reason to believe that if we met these goals there would be a sudden and damescene conversation from WM. Particularly when there has been no attempt to set these goals or criteria, it's just no. You haven't met them. Whatever they are. It's also weird you think I'm trying to discredit the FM or her approach.

Denied a single parry majority in a parliament specifically designed to prevent them. Now we need both ballots. You are as inconsistent and cynical as any tory or baroness on this. There's no reason at all to believe this is true. There is nothing that will be sufficient for some and suggesting there's some grounding or intellectual basis for this view is just insulting.

Now its a clear majority that's needed. Soon it will be a sustained majority. Then a decarbonised majority, a free range majority and 4 part dramatised majority on Netflix.

There was ultra aggressive tactical voting. Libdems and tories and Labour all happily rutting away together, to deny a pro indepence majority and they failed. Because there is a pro independence majority in Holyrood. I'm going to say this just one more time as it remains the case, there is only one way to accurately gauge support for a binary choice and that is by referendum. Neither multiparty votes nor adding one vote and ignoring another then licking your finger and sticking it in the air achieves this. The support is there, otherwise we'd have Douglas Ross or that Labour guy Ricard Langoustine as FM. And you have ignored the list vote because if the opposite was true I'm sure this argument of yours would be turned on its head and suddenly the constituencies wouldn't matter its the proportional list that counts. Perhaps your prediction will come to pass, I think not but that will be because the Scottish government have chosen to ignore the repeated and explicit instructions from the electorate, not because of what amounts to little more than frankly desperate numberwang.

Oh it's far more cynical than that. There's nothing wrong with owning a home, but there is something very wrong with owning a home that should be available for social rent and that hasn't and won't be replaced.

I look forward to Oliver Dowden writing a very strong letter about how bad and wrong this is with Questions That The Baroness Must Answer.

The houses owned by people who could afford to buy them had nicer cars in the driveway and had more money spent on them? These are fascinating insights.

2 goals, 3 statements, 8 arrests and a dossier. Starring Tom Selek, Ted Danson etc etc.

Simply the weight of the pronounced cro magnon brow obscuring his field of vision.

I further googled "Gentlemen farmers spread their muck" and things just spiralled

Yes. Here you can read about the nazi horsehit so favoured by the Kremlin that he bought and spread without ever stopping to check if it was bollocks. I couldn't give the slightest monkeys toss what he wrote about Cambodia.

No Kenneth, he too is an arsehole. In September 2014, Pilger wrote critically of The Guardian and other western media, regarding their reporting on Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, writing "Without a single piece of evidence, the US and its NATO allies and their media machines blamed ethnic Russian 'separatists' in Ukraine and implied that Moscow was ultimately responsible". He asserted that "the newspaper has made no serious attempt to examine who shot the aeroplane down and why"