On Aug 30, 11:37*am, 1506 wrote:
On Aug 29, 8:22*pm, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote:



On Aug 29, 8:09*pm, wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 01:32:15 -0700 (PDT)

Tom wrote:
limits. *There's a graph around the net of the Tory share of the vote
since the war and it's clearly declining, which possible explains why

Really? Hmm, thats odd:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/el...ml/england.stm

Looks pretty blue to me in england. (sic)

That's because the Tories tend to do well in the affluent countryside
constituencies that cover the largest geographical areas. Even in the
event of a Labour landslide, those maps would still look pretty blue.

The countryside: That would be farms. *Farmers are the folks who work
long hours to put food on your table. *They are common sense people.
They vote Conservative because they have worked very hard for what
they have. *Do you have a problem with that?

The Conservatives are currently putting hard-working people out of
work just so that their friends don't have to pay more taxes. I
certainly have a problem with that. If people want to support the
Conservatives low-tax, low-spending attitudes, fine, but don't expect
any sympathy from the state if they fall on hard times. And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.

Nick

On 30/08/2011 20:51, Nick wrote:

The Conservatives are currently putting hard-working people out of
work just so that their friends don't have to pay more taxes.

Which could mean they are tackling persistent cable thieves so that
their constituents don't have to pay for the damage they cause....


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:16:15 +0100, The Real Doctor
wrote:

On 30/08/11 09:51, d wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:44:16 +0100
Charles wrote:

Btw, if there was something about that pretty simple sentence you
didn't understand just ask. Or are you practicing your latin?

Possibly more than you seem to be practising your English.

Fine. Point out the grammatical error then.

That should have been "Point out the grammatical error, then" - you
missed a comma. In your previous post it should have been "practising",
not "practicing".

He seems to have missed that he cocked up the usage of the English
language while alleging another's inability to understand it.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:51:06 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:43:09 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote:
Looks pretty blue to me in england. Of course with the system we have
somewhere
like London with its over representation of constituencies can nicely bias
the vote due to the high proportion of left voting ethnics.

"Ethnics" ? You are at least a thousand years too late to complain
about bloody foreigners[TM] coming into the country and taking away
all the jobs that you probably don't want to do yourself anyway.
snip

Ah , the old anglo-saxon/norman/hugenot/jewish came before bogus argument.

Since man didn't evolve on the british isles we're all ultimately immigrants
so how far back to you want to take that rather silly rationale?

What happened 1000 years or even 50 years ago is irrelevant, I'm concerned
about what's happening now.

How far back does your "now" go ? Do you see Big Mistakes MkI and MkII
as "irrelevant" ?

On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:52:03 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
Eastern europe barely produces enough for itself these days and if the whole
of
the EU suddenly sourced ALL its food from abroad , even assuming there was
enough spare, what do you think that would do to global prices? Suddenly that
lamb from argentina won't be available cheaper than local produce.

Nobody mentioned the EU, just Tescos.

I used Tescos as an example supermarket you numptie. I thought that was
pretty obvious.

B2003

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:23:10 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:16:15 +0100, The Real Doctor
wrote:

On 30/08/11 09:51, d wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:44:16 +0100
Charles wrote:

Btw, if there was something about that pretty simple sentence you
didn't understand just ask. Or are you practicing your latin?

Possibly more than you seem to be practising your English.

Fine. Point out the grammatical error then.

That should have been "Point out the grammatical error, then" - you
missed a comma. In your previous post it should have been "practising",
not "practicing".

He seems to have missed that he cocked up the usage of the English
language while alleging another's inability to understand it.

Its only people desperate to score a point no matter what who resort
to commenting on typos. If there isn't some usenet law about that then
there should be. It doesn't make you look clever - just rather petty and
sad.

B2003

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:33:31 +0100
Charles Ellson wrote:
What happened 1000 years or even 50 years ago is irrelevant, I'm concerned
about what's happening now.

How far back does your "now" go ? Do you see Big Mistakes MkI and MkII
as "irrelevant" ?

Shall we start with 1997 when the worse thing to happen to this country
in a generation got elected into power?

B2003

On Aug 30, 2:49*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message

...

[drivel snipped]

Adrian, I know you're reading this, despite claiming to have killfiled me..

Now, there's a good troll, listen up.

Apart from confirming Olbermann's dictum ("the right exists in a perpetual
state of victimhood"), your rambling, delusional and paranoid rants are
useless. They serve only to show that you are not all there, that you have
difficulty getting a handle on reality, and that you should seek medical
assistance at the earliest opportunity.

Ultra right-wing, fundamentalist zealots like Mr "Auer"-Hudson are a
dwindling minority, at least in this country. And I think they know
it. That's why they are soooo ANGRY all the time. They hate the fact
that they can no longer impose their bigoted views on the rest of us.

The same applies to Bottlar, but he, like you, has difficulty taking this on
board. Whatever.

Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a
retard. One ought to feel sorry for him, really.

On 31/08/2011 09:53, d wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:52:03 +0100
Graeme wrote:
Eastern europe barely produces enough for itself these days and if the whole
of
the EU suddenly sourced ALL its food from abroad , even assuming there was
enough spare, what do you think that would do to global prices? Suddenly that
lamb from argentina won't be available cheaper than local produce.

Nobody mentioned the EU, just Tescos.

I used Tescos as an example supermarket you numptie. I thought that was
pretty obvious.


I used Tescos as an example of a _British_ supermarket you numptie, I
thought that was pretty obvious.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 31/08/2011 09:56, d wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:33:31 +0100
Charles wrote:
What happened 1000 years or even 50 years ago is irrelevant, I'm concerned
about what's happening now.

How far back does your "now" go ? Do you see Big Mistakes MkI and MkII
as "irrelevant" ?

Shall we start with 1997 when the worse thing to happen to this country
in a generation got elected into power?


I thought Major lost that election?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail