Only halfway through, but as I expected, the Murph is generally wiping the floor with the lot of them.
I say that as a Tory.
And someone who remembers that he got his place in Cabinet by piloting the EU Lisbon Treaty through Parliament without the promised referendum.
The other thing is that Space Cadet Robinson's head is even larger than when I last saw it.
What on earth is his diet?
I also note that he's married.
Curious.
Anna's birthday Day 1 - Buying a guitar
1 day ago
16 comments:
Cutting edge analysis, I'd expect a phonecall from the BBC any day now for you to appear as a pundit.
Why wasn't Alex Salmond there? Is he no longer the top man in the SNP?
Or is appearng inserious discussions not his forte?
Robertson being married. What's strange about that. Churchill was never an oil painting, even in his youth. Just look at his engagement photo.
Concerning Salmond, he is appearing alongside Murphy, Carmicheal and "Fluffy" on the Sky News debate on the 25th. This is due to it being broadcast throughout the UK.
@Aberdonian: So Scotland just isn't good enough for Eck.....
Bigger heid than waste, and that's saying something....
Its his ego getting ahead of him again. Why he is sending in the captain of his second XI to bat for him I have no idea.
This is not the first time he has done this sort of thing. Normally (except for the last one) he normally sends Nicola to do "Question Time" if it is coming from Scotland. However he is quite happy to be on the panel when the programme is coming from outside Scotland.
He is in a huff about not being treated equally with the other party leaders. He has reason to be annoyed. Even Cochrane thought he should be on the UK debates.
Quite interesting if they were doing this in theory 120 years ago. Would they have excluded Parnell since he and later Redmond did have parliament hung with an Irish Rope?
(SM would probably have had Parnell and Redmond hung instead:)
That should be bigger hied than waist....thought it looked wrong even as I clicked the button...
bigger heid than waist...
actually, it's ma heid that's wasted.....
On Salmond's ego: well, we all remember the time on Newsnight when he was sat next to David Cairns but refused to "debate" with him. Paxo just got on with interviewing them together, and His Immensity wound up looking like a pompous idiot.
His decision to only go on the Sky debate is frankly weird - setting up a Murdoch connection, and appearing on the one debate which will be seen by the smallest audience.
Ego overruling intellect. Again.
On Fat Head's marriage: just fishing for confirmation of something.
This blog thread is riveting.
Didn't watch the debate, but from what I have read it's only the Murphy groupies who think he won.
If it is OK to attack people for their physical appearance then wasn't it very funny when one of Murphy's own staffers compared him to one of the Addams Family.
Got to be Lurch.
Click click.
Was there ever a Scobby Doo episode where he met the Addams Family?
I am sure there was....
Scooby, even.
Anyway, on the subject of these debates in general I find myself rather bizarrely agreeing with the Labour candidate in my own constituency Glasgow South (aka the Bronx)
''Let’s be clear about why they are so desired by the media: they are seen as an opportunity to present politics and the decision we must make on May 6 as a version of reality TV. We live in a celebrity-obsessed culture, and therefore everything must conform to that obsession. Voters can’t work up an interest in serious politics? Then dumb it down! What’s that you say – they don’t want to listen to long and detailed analysis of policy? Then reduce each party’s manifesto to 60 or 90 seconds. See? Easy!
The debates were never going to be anything other than a stream of ultra-controlled soundbites deliovered by three people utterly determined to avoid mistakes. Because the media agenda in all of this was about hoping that one or other of the leaders would implode live on stage, make such a cock-up that it would scupper his party’s chances for the rest of the campaign. One BBC reporter even lamented the fact that the first debate hadn’t been “entertaining”! Well, of course it wasn’t entertaining – it’s politics! And hard though it is to accept, electing a government is actually more important than voting for the person who sang The Climb best.''
''One last thing: we live in a parliamentary democracy and we do not directly elect our Prime Minister. You may argue that we should. But we don’t. So a presidential-style debate involving parliamentary candidates from three different constituencies seems pretty pointless to me. No-one going into the voting booths on May 6 will be presented with a choice of those three particular candidates on the ballot paper.''
Couldn't have put it better myself.
"space cadet"
"diet"
"is he married"
When did this attack blog begin?
Golly, your coverage of the election has been dismal.
Aren't you reeling that a Hung Parliament is now looking likely with the emphasis and momentum being with those touting 'change', consitutional change being part of that message?
The 'old way's are dying.
Unionism is surely now defunct.
'Loyalist Devolutionist' is surely a better term for you and your ilk.
Post a Comment