Change

Posted by: uncle arthur

Change - 20/01/09 05:19 PM

Change is coming to America and as ever it'll all end in tears.
Posted by: landryrk

Re: Change - 20/01/09 05:31 PM

Let's hope not.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 20/01/09 06:13 PM

Originally Posted By: uncle arthur
Change is coming to America and as ever it'll all end in tears.


Do you live in the USA?
Nimrod
Posted by: Harland

Re: Change - 20/01/09 08:11 PM

I hope that for the sake of the USA and the wider communities around the world, as well as race relations, that he is successful.
Posted by: uncle arthur

Re: Change - 21/01/09 12:32 AM

Gentlemen, do you honestly think, some inexperienced, yes man, puppet is actually going to make a difference.

Dont be suckered in like you were with Blair, 10 years ago.

The only way we will change things is to round up all the incompetant scum( bankers)strip them of all their assets and lock them up for 6 years, just like we do for drug dealers and their ilk.

America needs to manufacture things for Americans and the English needs to manufacture things for the English.And stop buying shite from China, that end up being sold in Pound shops.

How did we ever get to this place we're in now , were a company like Wedgewood goes under.

This country is going to hell in a handcart, because you lot have allowed the pen pushers to take over your lives.

There are even idiotic wimps on this site, who have nothing better to do than complain to the regulators, about the odd controversial comment, little Hitlers we used to call them.

Iam glad Iam in the Winter of my years.
Posted by: Harland

Re: Change - 21/01/09 09:48 AM

All we were doing was hoping that he gets it right rather than hoping he gets it wrong. I didn't say that I liked him, I have no strong feelings either way. I guess that you don't agree, such is life.
Posted by: uncle arthur

Re: Change - 21/01/09 09:56 AM

Nothing will change until will get the BNP in power.
Posted by: Harland

Re: Change - 21/01/09 10:41 AM

Originally Posted By: uncle arthur
Nothing will change until will get the BNP in power.


I guess that says it all about your views on life. I'll try not to respond to your bitter views in future.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 21/01/09 11:18 AM

I wish him well. Although the expectations of him are high,he seems versed into inspiring a nation and beyond. He has a gorgeous wife,two charming daughters,the Obama family are a breath of fresh air for these troubled time. I too feared he might be another Tony Bliar,but in comparison that waste of space was a foot soldier. My main concern - which I am sure his shared by everyone this forum - is the comparison with President Lincoln,JFK and Martin Luther King,and that he doesn't share the same fate.
The new Commander In Chief gets a thumbs up from Nimrod.
Nimrod
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 21/01/09 11:51 AM

Originally Posted By: uncle arthur

There are even idiotic wimps on this site, who have nothing better to do than complain to the regulators




Sir/Madam

I am indeed an idiotic wimp,having previously written a letter to the moderators questioning the aggressive and,at times, threatening behaviour of "Norman Walker". Judging by the absence that followed shortly after, I presume they agreed.
I am now proceeding to waste a few minutes of my precious time in correspondence regarding the equally objectionable tone of "uncle arthur".

And if anybody questions the degree of "over-reaction" or "Little Hitlerism"
of such action perhaps they should proceed ,with caution, to the following link
where ,in my opening post, I quote a delightful selection of "odd controversial comments".

http://www.coast2coast.co.uk/forum/ubbth...=true#Post39313

Regards
Dr.BB
Posted by: Oldun

Re: Change - 21/01/09 12:03 PM

Age gives us the unique chance to see many US Presidents and many UK Governments and the ability to notice tell tale signs during the months following an election of what is going to happen to each new administration.

Since 1945 every freely elected Labour government has proven its ability to mishandle the British economy and has been ejected from office by a frustrated population. Each Conservative government that has been elected into office and has had to take on the disaster inherited from the out going Labour theorists and extremists. Each Conservative governments arrival has been greeted with initial applause, which quickly turned into hate as they have had to make drastic decisions to get the country back onto its feet again.

We must watch closely to see how quickly the adulation that has greeted President Obama turns into back biting if he is unable to deliver on his promises in the time required by the American population.

The one thing going for him is that he is a fluent orator who has the ability to inspire the masses of not only Americans, but masses of free and not so free peoples around the world. If he can maintain the belief in the massive American work force that after the initial hard times to come their lives will be better, then he will succeed.

The sad truth for Britain is that, unlike the USA we do not currently have in any party an awe inspiring orator in our political system who can light the masses into hysteria of selfless patriotism that will drive our country out of its politically correct, jack’s alright, lethargy and fear of success.
Posted by: Bliss 60

Re: Change - 21/01/09 04:26 PM

Not sure that I agree with all of this Oldun. I think you may well be older than me, but my limited experience since the beginning of the Thatcher Government (and I think you may well be right that the Callaghan Government was certainly a disaster that brought on the catastrophe and punishment of the Thatcher years) - and the only conclusion I would draw is that any political party that hangs around for years eventually loses sight of accountability and is difficult to re-elect.

I don't think the scenario was as you suggested at the election of the Blair Government. If anything, the Major Government before Blair was an economic catastrophe - perhaps not of the scale we are going through now - and the Blair Government stabilised the economy and earned a reputation for sound economic management for many years.

I am also not entirely convinced that a Tory Government will come in and put right the things that this current Government has got wrong. Firstly - I am not sure that everything that has been got wrong is the fault of this Government. The current economic problems have largely been caused by irresponsible lending by banks. Before the collapse happened, everyone knew that banks should not be lending 5 or 6 times people's salaries without deposits, but before the credit crunch, no Government would have had public support to stop them doing so. And of course a lot of these problems have hit us from USA - and not a lot a UK Government could have done about that.

Secondly - your recipe that the Tories are going to come in and sort everything out. Whilst I have no idea whether the current Government does have the answers to the global economic crisis, I certainly haven't yet heard the Tories say anything about what they would have done differently or what they are going to do if they ever get into power. Certainly nothing that would suggest that the Tories have any ideas of how they are going to put right what is a massive global problem.

Sorry - I realise that this is nothing to do with walking - but I had to respond to what I consider to have been some very sweeping and incorrect analysis.

As regards Obama - at least there's a bit of hope there now. Enormous challenges to come, but at least Bush has gone . A president who rigged his election in the first place and a record that includes destruction of the world economy; a massive escalation of global hate and fear as a result of his disastrous wars; an appalling record on the environment; and policies developed on the basis of religious bigotry and intolerance. History will judge Bush a total disaster. Compared to that, Obama's a breath of fresh air.
Posted by: Lounge Lizard

Re: Change - 21/01/09 05:09 PM

Originally Posted By: uncle arthur
Change is coming to America and as ever it'll all end in tears.


Yes, it will.
Optimism never works.
If he is destined to do good he will go the way of Kennedy, if he is destined to let everyone down he will hang on for years like Bliar.
All doom and gloom yet again.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 21/01/09 08:25 PM

Originally Posted By: Bliss 60
Not sure that I agree with all of this Oldun. I think you may well be older than me, but my limited experience since the beginning of the Thatcher Government (and I think you may well be right that the Callaghan Government was certainly a disaster that brought on the catastrophe and punishment of the Thatcher years) - and the only conclusion I would draw is that any political party that hangs around for years eventually loses sight of accountability and is difficult to re-elect.

I don't think the scenario was as you suggested at the election of the Blair Government. If anything, the Major Government before Blair was an economic catastrophe - perhaps not of the scale we are going through now - and the Blair Government stabilised the economy and earned a reputation for sound economic management for many years.

I am also not entirely convinced that a Tory Government will come in and put right the things that this current Government has got wrong. Firstly - I am not sure that everything that has been got wrong is the fault of this Government. The current economic problems have largely been caused by irresponsible lending by banks. Before the collapse happened, everyone knew that banks should not be lending 5 or 6 times people's salaries without deposits, but before the credit crunch, no Government would have had public support to stop them doing so. And of course a lot of these problems have hit us from USA - and not a lot a UK Government could have done about that.

Secondly - your recipe that the Tories are going to come in and sort everything out. Whilst I have no idea whether the current Government does have the answers to the global economic crisis, I certainly haven't yet heard the Tories say anything about what they would have done differently or what they are going to do if they ever get into power. Certainly nothing that would suggest that the Tories have any ideas of how they are going to put right what is a massive global problem.

Sorry - I realise that this is nothing to do with walking - but I had to respond to what I consider to have been some very sweeping and incorrect analysis.

As regards Obama - at least there's a bit of hope there now. Enormous challenges to come, but at least Bush has gone . A president who rigged his election in the first place and a record that includes destruction of the world economy; a massive escalation of global hate and fear as a result of his disastrous wars; an appalling record on the environment; and policies developed on the basis of religious bigotry and intolerance. History will judge Bush a total disaster. Compared to that, Obama's a breath of fresh air.


For me the Tories deservedly lost the 1997 General Election,but they had become tired and aimless,which was - as you say - a result of being in power too long. However,the country was a bit more economically sound,but that did not fare with the electorate,and at least Bliar and Brown had something to work on,rather than the mess the Tories inherited in 1979. Labour deservedly won the election,and I welcomed them. As the months progressed,I noticed something of a bit of disliking towards Bliar - he was coming over as too in the face and phoney. Not wanting to start a debate about the monarchy,but when it was the golden wedding anniversary of the Queen and Prince Phillip,Bliar and the Wicked Witch took over the show. Also,when he was being interviewed in a kitchen (maybe his London home or Trimdon),he was holding a cup,as if there was tea or coffee supposedly in it. It was empty. A small thing maybe,but for me it was so phoney.
Indeed,he won the next two elections,but that was because there was no opposition and no alternative for the electors to ponder over. Why did he go when he did? Did he know of an oncoming economic meltdown,and decided to pass the buck? Did he know that he might lose the next general election and wanted to go out a winner.
I am not saying David Cameron can solve all the ills of this country,but this Labour administration is like the Tories of 1997 - tired and listless. So a change is needed over here as well.
FInally,one of the biggest tragedies to have happened in this country's politics in the last fifteen years was the death of John Smith,the man who replaced the hapless Neil Kinnock. I may not have agreed with John Smith's policies,but at least he was honest and stuck to his convictions. If fate hadn't dealt him a cruel hand,we might have been spared the Bliar years and a more sound Parliament might have been in operation,rather than the one festered with a one party chamber,riddled with sound bites,over promoted individuals and a bombastic Prime Minister.
I agree to an extent with Lounge Lizard,that President Obama has ridden onthe same euphoria that welcomed President Tone in 1997,but listening to him yesterday,he came over as stronger and I believed in him. In 1997,I had only hope in Bliar,and that hope disappeared a few months later.
Nimrod
Posted by: Bliss 60

Re: Change - 22/01/09 07:35 AM

Mark - I think your views probably echo the views of most people in the country now - and there's every chance that we will end up with Cameron's Tories - which frightens the life out of me - not least because I haven't heard anything yet about what they will do - and I'm not convinced that they know.

With regards Blair, I think you might be echoing what people think now retrospectively, but pre-war, Blair had huge popularity ratings. It was the war that did for him, and - yes - he went because he didn't want to lose an election, because post war he would have done.

I actually think that the Blair Government and the current Government are doing some good things - not the big headline grabbing things, but the bits and pieces that go towards making life happen for people - particularly people at the bottom end of society - things like the minimum wage, improvements in social housing, childcare facilities, Homestart centres etc etc.

But the reality is that politics is 5% about doing the right thing and 95% about getting things right in the media. I don't think Blair can be blamed for using spin and Alastair Campbell. Any sensible politician would do this because they know that the Sun, the Mail and the Express shape the way that people vote. te real reason why Brown is less popular than Blair is because he is not as good as managing the media and he's not as charismatic. And of course Cameron is as much of an addict of spin as Blair was - possibly more so - because as I say - can anyone tell me anything of substance that the Tories currently stand for?

And if anyone thinks that Obama is not using spin, they are being wonderfully naive. He has used it so effectively that some people may well think that he hasn't used it - and I suspect he has had his eyes set on his route for the last 10 years or more. But so what? The public expects spin and its only in the cynical UK that we complain about it when we are given what we want.

The key thing in all of this is what these people actually do in terms of the big questions but perhaps more importantly in terms of the little things that make a difference to ordinary peoples lives behind the scenes and out of the headlines.

My work is largely in council and housing association housing - and I know that under the Blair and Brown Governments there have been a lot of improvements for ordinary people. Under the previous Tory Governments, there was barely a policy for housing - and the people who lived in it were not considered an important policy issue. I want to know from politicians what they are going to do for the most weak and vulnerable in our society - the stuff that doesn't grab the headlines.
Posted by: Oldun

Re: Change - 22/01/09 09:12 AM

Bliss & Mark. A serious thank you for your comments following my recent post. Wonderful stuff.

I basically agree with what you both say. However, whether my initial comments were sweepingly inaccurate depends upon ones personal perspective and how life has treated you.

As you so rightly say, life has clearly shown that political parties go stale when they are left in power too long: immersed in their own incompetence. But it is us who re-elect them. So who is to blame?

Case in point, I would bring your attention to the latest, now state run Northern Rock imbecility, of spending 10 million pounds of tax payer’s bail-out money in bonuses to employees at a time of media inflamed national crisis. Government incompetence? Personal perspective? Government by media?
Posted by: Sam Peps

Re: Change - 22/01/09 04:45 PM

Originally Posted By: Dr.BongoBingo
Originally Posted By: uncle arthur

There are even idiotic wimps on this site, who have nothing better to do than complain to the regulators



And if anybody questions the degree of "over-reaction" or "Little Hitlerism"
of such action perhaps they should proceed ,with caution, to the following link
where ,in my opening post, I quote a delightful selection of "odd controversial comments".

http://www.coast2coast.co.uk/forum/ubbth...=true#Post39313

Regards
Dr.BB


Yes, a timely reminder of "S" inability to cope with contra-opinion or fact based learning with anything other than a demonstration of his inner malady. Truly a sick and twisted man in the bitter winter of his years.
Posted by: Slogger

Re: Change - 22/01/09 06:40 PM

Just to add my bit. As I recall there was one major reason for the Conservatives losing the election after Thatcher, and that was the introduction of that awful Poll Tax. But for that they would have got in again.
Dave.
Posted by: tim smith

Re: Change - 22/01/09 08:13 PM

The hand that rocks the baby rules the world
and that hand spoiles the baby '' what baby want's baby gets ''
and if it means paying this year or next baby must have.
and that is the cause of all our problems.
Posted by: tim smith

Re: Change - 23/01/09 08:51 AM

i thought it was self explanatory
the people,as a nation, are spending money they have not got
Posted by: uncle arthur

Re: Change - 23/01/09 09:58 AM

Correct Tim, the PEOPLE, no one these days takes responsibility for their actions.

I detest the scum bankers as much as th next man, but they didn't hold a gun to these idiots heads and make them borrow 6 times there salary.

To many average dregs think they deserve a house in the fahionable part of Town, 2 cars in drive way, 3 holidays in the sun and eat in restaurants every night, all on 25k a year.

The big problem is it's the likes of me that end up bailng this scum out of trouble.

Change may be coming to America, but unless it comes to England soon we're all in the mire.
Posted by: tim smith

Re: Change - 23/01/09 11:57 AM

no even the goverment
borrowing more money to get out of debt.
going in to wars and then leaving to let some one else try and solve the problems.
if as much money that is spent on armaments was spent trying for peace we may get some where
but to many people making money producing arms
Posted by: uncle arthur

Re: Change - 23/01/09 12:37 PM

I know what your trying to say, but arms are only a fraction the Gross National Product of any civilised country.

As I see it we no longer make things that other Nations want to buy.This country's greatness grew out of our hard work and expertise.

We made better railway engines, better ships,cloth,china and machine parts than anyone on the planet.

This of course generated real wealth not the bogus bullshit wealth of which we have been living off for the past few decades.

This candy floss wealth, made from the service industries and dodgy bank deal was always destined to implode.

In short these scum bankers, have met their Waterloo.
Posted by: uncle arthur

Re: Change - 23/01/09 01:52 PM

That includes, your internet I presume.

If I didn't have so many silly old friends, who dont have a mobile, just land lines, then I wouldn't bother with a land line.

Everyone's ripping everyone off these days, sometimes I think I am the only honest decent bloke left.
Posted by: tonyk

Re: Change - 23/01/09 02:08 PM

Quote:
This candy floss wealth, made from the service industries


Its always baffled me as to what they actually service? How do you service something when you sit in an office hammering away at a keyboard? "Customer service" is another buzz word of the modern generation.Its almost meaningless unless the person using it is a prostitute.
Posted by: fiffeshni

Re: Change - 24/01/09 02:46 PM

I don't recall this amount of furore in the media with previous american election winners,ok,he's the first black president,why should this make any difference,now surely that is discrimination.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 24/01/09 03:48 PM

Originally Posted By: fiffeshni
I don't recall this amount of furore in the media with previous american election winners,ok,he's the first black president,why should this make any difference,now surely that is discrimination.


It might have something to do with the fact after years of racial intolerance,an Afro-American has reached the White House. Anyway,I don't see him as being the first coloured President - I see him as the man who not only the USA needs,but also maybe the world. I like him - after all anything is better than eight years of Dubya.
Nimrod
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 24/01/09 05:09 PM

Originally Posted By: Mark Bradshaw
[quote=fiffeshni]

...the first coloured President



Mmmm....the spirit of Jack Smethurst has been channelled !
Posted by: Bliss 60

Re: Change - 24/01/09 06:13 PM

Originally Posted By: Dr.BongoBingo
[quote=Mark Bradshaw][quote=fiffeshni]

...the first coloured President



I agree that the use of the word coloured is unfortunate, but I agree with the rest of the Nimrod's sentiments. I generally quite like the things that Obama has done so far.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 24/01/09 06:25 PM

Originally Posted By: Dr.BongoBingo
Originally Posted By: Mark Bradshaw
[quote=fiffeshni]

...the first coloured President



Mmmm....the spirit of Jack Smethurst has been channelled !



I can assure you the spirit of Jack Smethurst (or should I say Eddie Booth) has not been channelled into me. I say "coloured" as opposed to "black" because he is of mixed parentage. As I say,his colour is immaterial to me - the person comes first,and the person I see I have admiration for.
Nimrod
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 24/01/09 07:03 PM

Originally Posted By: Mark Bradshaw


I say "coloured" as opposed to "black" because he is of mixed parentage.


Mark...stop digging a bigger hole !

Would you describe somebody with a English father and a Greek mother as a coloured?

OK...I know that there is no "Boothism" within your use of the word.
But I'll give £100 to the charity of your choice if you ever hear anybody refer to Barak Obama as the US's first coloured President.

Dr.BB
Posted by: Harland

Re: Change - 24/01/09 09:43 PM

Originally Posted By: sea shore sam
what have I done nobody seems to want to talk to me!!?


.
Posted by: Bliss 60

Re: Change - 25/01/09 06:53 AM

It should be up to the person concerned to define their racial and ethnic background, because it is as much a part of their personal identity as religion or sexuality. If Obama calls himself black - then we should call him black. If he calls himself mixed race - then we should call him mixed race. As Dr BB says, I don't think its very likely that Obama will call himself coloured.

Discussing the use of words can seem a little politically correct, but actually these things can and do make a lot of difference to the people concerned. The word "coloured" has some horrendous connotations from America's past in the deep south, and so black people don't like to be called "coloured".

I was doing an equalities and diversity training session for an all white group once, who were a good group, but they hadn't come across discussions of that nature before. When suggesting to them that black people don't like to be called "coloured", one of the group said - round here there perfectly happy to be called "coloured". I continued to assert that this was not the case, and, against my advice, the person took it upon himself to go and ask a black man who happened to be in another room in the building about it. He came back about 5 minutes later saying that what I had said was correct - the black man had said that he was black - and he did not like to be called "coloured".
Posted by: Lounge Lizard

Re: Change - 25/01/09 09:13 AM

Yes, it's all about what group do or don't mind being called.
We don't mind Brits, Australians don't mind Aussies but Pakistanis do mind Paki and Blacks don't like Coloured.
Posted by: fiffeshni

Re: Change - 25/01/09 11:10 AM

Someone has used the word coloured,what a big deal,as usual,the comment was misconstrued as being used in a negative way by the author when he was clearly praising Obama.
I have never been referred to as a coloured b****d in my life,but if someone refers to me as a coloured guy,why should I find that offensive? It surely depends on the intent in which the word used and not the word itself.
Come on guys,get a grip!
Posted by: Bliss 60

Re: Change - 25/01/09 11:33 AM

Originally Posted By: Lounge Lizard
Yes, it's all about what group do or don't mind being called.
We don't mind Brits, Australians don't mind Aussies but Pakistanis do mind Paki and Blacks don't like Coloured.


Sorry if people think I need to get a grip on this, but hey - I think this is an important issue. I don't for one minute think that Nimrod meant anything by the use of the word "coloured", and as far as I can tell, he's a good person who wouldn't mean to cause anyone offence. So my comments on the word were not particularly directed at him, but I do actually make a point of pointing out that the use of the word "coloured" can be offensive to some black people. I think that there are two reasons for this:

a) it was the word used by deeply racist people in the deep south of america when black people were being heavily oppressed.

b) saying that someone is "coloured" suggests that they have some "colour" added to what is the standard or normal skin colour - ie. in the minds of those who originated the phrase - the white skin (or as it should be - the pinky/yellow/red/brown skin with the odd freckle thrown in - who exactly is the "coloured" person?)

Similarly as Mr LL points out - "paki" is an offensive term, because it was and is used by racists to denigrate all people of south asian origin.

I guess that the terms Brit and Aussie are OK because they haven't been used in a derogatory fashion ever, although - whilst I'm not going to make a meal of it - I probably would do a double take if someone called me a Brit - because I'd be worried that it's main usage might be something like "Brits abroad" - ie. the seemingly large body of people from our country whose holidays abroad seem to be about taking Britain with them - and who may not respect the indigenous cultures of the countries they are visiting - which I wouldn't particularly want to be associated with.
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 25/01/09 12:24 PM

Originally Posted By: fiffeshni
Someone has used the word coloured,what a big deal,as usual,the comment was misconstrued as being used in a negative way by the author when he was clearly praising Obama.


Sir/Madam

Allow me to help tighten your own grip over this matter.

With respect, I think you have misconstrued the posts.

Nobody suggested that Mark,per se,was being offensive. The response was merely an enquiry as to the validity of that particular word to describe an ethnic race.
And since you state that it's all about "intent" I assume that you agree with the dormant possibility of it being an inappropriate word.


Quote:

I have never been referred to as a coloured b****d in my life,but if someone refers to me as a coloured guy,why should I find that offensive?


How could I possibly answer that ? It's for an individual to cultivate their own repertoire of offense.
However, if a complete stranger, with a hateful countenance, addressed you as a "coloured b*****d", how would you gauge the intent ? Offensive ?

Kind Regards
Dr.BB
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 25/01/09 03:35 PM

Originally Posted By: Bliss 60
Originally Posted By: Lounge Lizard
Yes, it's all about what group do or don't mind being called.
We don't mind Brits, Australians don't mind Aussies but Pakistanis do mind Paki and Blacks don't like Coloured.


Sorry if people think I need to get a grip on this, but hey - I think this is an important issue. I don't for one minute think that Nimrod meant anything by the use of the word "coloured", and as far as I can tell, he's a good person who wouldn't mean to cause anyone offence. So my comments on the word were not particularly directed at him, but I do actually make a point of pointing out that the use of the word "coloured" can be offensive to some black people. I think that there are two reasons for this:

a) it was the word used by deeply racist people in the deep south of america when black people were being heavily oppressed.

b) saying that someone is "coloured" suggests that they have some "colour" added to what is the standard or normal skin colour - ie. in the minds of those who originated the phrase - the white skin (or as it should be - the pinky/yellow/red/brown skin with the odd freckle thrown in - who exactly is the "coloured" person?)

Similarly as Mr LL points out - "paki" is an offensive term, because it was and is used by racists to denigrate all people of south asian origin.

I guess that the terms Brit and Aussie are OK because they haven't been used in a derogatory fashion ever, although - whilst I'm not going to make a meal of it - I probably would do a double take if someone called me a Brit - because I'd be worried that it's main usage might be something like "Brits abroad" - ie. the seemingly large body of people from our country whose holidays abroad seem to be about taking Britain with them - and who may not respect the indigenous cultures of the countries they are visiting - which I wouldn't particularly want to be associated with.


Thank you for everyone sticking up for me. A word wrong - apologies.
Nimrod
Posted by: Slogger

Re: Change - 25/01/09 05:34 PM

Mark,
I dont think you should apologise. I do not see anything wrong with the way you expressed your post, in the context that it was made.
Dave.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 26/01/09 12:38 PM

Anyway,I President Barack Obama all the best in the world. He has a tall order to meet,but he has the energy and will to face it. I just wish we had someone like him.
Nimrod
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 26/01/09 03:06 PM

Originally Posted By: Mark Bradshaw


I just wish we had someone like him.



Ah, but we do....

somebody with an even greater passion, knowledge and sense of right and wrong. A great orator and the sharpest, intelligent mind to which no other politician can compare. A man who carries the very essence of "socialist"
equality in the very fibre of his being.

He's a fighter, a lover (and a fan of Brian Glover)
With a punch and a parry (and affection for John Barry)
He'd love you to let him be the cat

Step forward (for we need you more than ever)

The Blessed George of Galloway.

BB x
Posted by: Oldun

Re: Change - 26/01/09 03:25 PM

Sometimes Bongo you totally amaze me. Your ability with the English language is a knockout and a great lift after the load of piffle I have read on this site.

Getting down to knitty gritties:

I was born in England and tan easily in the sun. My father was Scottish, my mother was French with a tinge of Arab and Jew in her. My wife was a raving Irish woman with a temper that would scare Odin. My daughter was raised in the French part of Switzerland from a very small size, in a totally multicoloured, multicultural, multi ethnic society. She sees absolutely no difference between anyone no matter where they come from or look like.It is how they treat her that is important.

Question: What race would you say my daughter is?
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 26/01/09 07:12 PM

Originally Posted By: Oldun


Getting down to knitty gritties



Funny you should mention that.

Yesterday I descended from Yewbarrow via the scree slope at Dore Head and having engaged prudent usage of the BingoBongo Bottom I can confirm that there is indeed much to commend in getting down in gritty knickers.

Bing McBongworthy
Posted by: Stottie

Re: Change - 26/01/09 07:13 PM

Originally Posted By: Oldun
Sometimes Bongo you totally amaze me. Your ability with the English language is a knockout and a great lift after the load of piffle I have read on this site.

Getting down to knitty gritties:

I was born in England and tan easily in the sun. My father was Scottish, my mother was French with a tinge of Arab and Jew in her. My wife was a raving Irish woman with a temper that would scare Odin. My daughter was raised in the French part of Switzerland from a very small size, in a totally multicoloured, multicultural, multi ethnic society. She sees absolutely no difference between anyone no matter where they come from or look like.It is how they treat her that is important.

Question: What race would you say my daughter is?


Answer: Luckily for her, and you, and all of us, she is a member of the HUMAN race, and a good one by the way you write about her.
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 26/01/09 07:20 PM

Originally Posted By: Oldun

I was born in England and tan easily in the sun. My father was Scottish, my mother was French with a tinge of Arab and Jew in her. My wife was a raving Irish woman with a temper that would scare Odin. My daughter was raised in the French part of Switzerland from a very small size, in a totally multicoloured, multicultural, multi ethnic society. She sees absolutely no difference between anyone no matter where they come from or look like.It is how they treat her that is important.

Question: What race would you say my daughter is?


Could you give us a clue ?
Posted by: Slogger

Re: Change - 26/01/09 07:31 PM

Swiss.
Dave.
Posted by: Mark Bradshaw

Re: Change - 26/01/09 07:58 PM

Some delightful pictures in the Daily Mail today of the CinC and his wife and their two daughters on Inauguration Day,all behind the scenes.
Nimrod
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 26/01/09 10:23 PM

Originally Posted By: sea shore sam
Caribbean?


No...she went of her own accord.
Posted by: Harland

Re: Change - 26/01/09 10:57 PM

That was Jamaica!
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 27/01/09 12:02 AM

Originally Posted By: Harland
That was Jamaica!


I know.

It's the fact that nobody even mentioned Jamaica that makes my misappropriated punchline such a lateral wheez.

Geddit ?
Posted by: Lounge Lizard

Re: Change - 27/01/09 05:48 AM

Originally Posted By: sea shore sam

How very nice Mark,

I am ill with the Flu and have not been well enough to go out yet. A burning fever sore throat and chills aches and pains all over and head ache, any idea on medicines?

Sam


Morphine - or a one-way trip to Switzerland if it gets worse !
Posted by: fiffeshni

Re: Change - 27/01/09 01:01 PM

Dr.BB.Are you a rockclimber by any chance?
Posted by: Lounge Lizard

Re: Change - 27/01/09 02:36 PM

Originally Posted By: sea shore sam

Woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning LL. No I don't want a one way trip to Swiss as life is to good at the moment to want to end it and anyway him above knows when my time is up so I'll leave to him.

Meanwhile I hope he does not take away the people I care most about either as there are then one who keep me going if u know what mean.



Sammy,
No, I always wake up the same side of bed.
It's your perogative to dismiss whatever well meaning advice is offered to you, but I'm sure that 'Oldun' has no regrets about emigrating to Switzerland, a country whose healthy alpine air would do you good and some splendid walking there too if and when you are feeling better.
Posted by: Dr.BongoBingo

Re: Change - 27/01/09 06:06 PM

Originally Posted By: fiffeshni
Dr.BB.Are you a rockclimber by any chance?


I might seem bonkers but I'm not that bonkers !

A noble pastime but my limits of hairy-chested activity stop at Aonach Eagach.

Are you ? If so, what is your scariest climb thus far ?

BooBah
Posted by: fiffeshni

Re: Change - 28/01/09 06:47 PM

The north face of my garden shed,I on-sighted it and gave it a grade of E1-5a,fair made my sphincer twitch let me tell thee...