Food & Drink0 min ago
Clegg Bleats
http://
Whatever the rights and wrongs of water cannon use, does it really matter one tiny bit if Clegg likes them or not ? Its just a faint bleating in the background.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of water cannon use, does it really matter one tiny bit if Clegg likes them or not ? Its just a faint bleating in the background.
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Couldn't agree more Dodger. Actually I quite like him. He appears to be a harmless enough chap, just out of his depth. He would make a good Scout Leader, or a keen young Curate.
He reminds me of a character out of Last of the Summer Wine, just a tad too young. Wandering around without anything important to do, but not quite old enough to fully retire yet.
He reminds me of a character out of Last of the Summer Wine, just a tad too young. Wandering around without anything important to do, but not quite old enough to fully retire yet.
Well, Bernie, I remember another Cleggie lookalike, call John Major, who struggled on for 5 years until disaster struck. He too would have made a wonderful Scout Master. He would have been a really nice next-door neighbour, who would have lent you all those attachments for your Black and Decker that you didn't have. He would have done a smashing job as a youth cricket team coach ! But as an incumbent in Number Ten he was a unmitigated disaster. Basically a nice chap though...but we never seem to hear anything from him these days do we ?
I wasn't part of AB in the months leading up top the 1997 Labour landslide, but I wonder what our resident right-wingers were saying back then ?
I wasn't part of AB in the months leading up top the 1997 Labour landslide, but I wonder what our resident right-wingers were saying back then ?
That nice Mr Major does pop up from time to time , Mikey. I seem to recall him recently commenting on the whitewash that is the so-called Chilcot enquiry. I also recall him resigning his membership of the MCC (probably the most significant thing he ever did apart from signing the Maastricht Treaty) over a dispute about the redevelopment of Lords' cricket ground. In many respects he was my idea of the ideal politician - he tried very hard not to achieve too much and was almost successful.
Mr Clegg is a different kettle of fish entirely. He has the spare keys to No 10, and knows that he will never have the master set. He is prepared to jump into bed with just about anybody to retain them. Anybody who believes he agreed to form the coalition "for the good of the nation" needs their bumps felt. He did so for the good of Mr Clegg and a few of his friends, nothing more. He knew that it was just about the only chance they would have of any say over the way the UK is run and they were not going to turn it down because of the trifling matter of standing by their principles.
Fortunately his party faces obliteration at the next General Election and so it is of little consequence what he thinks as this government stumbles on, propped up only by the outrageous Fixed Term Parliament Act (which Mr Clegg demanded when joining the coalition as a way of ensuring at least five years in office). I doubt they will be in a position to do a deal with anybody and they will slink back into the obscurity which they have enjoyed for so long, their five years of glory fading into a distant memory. In twenty years time people will look back at this coalition and ask "what the **** was all that about then? Why didn't the country have a proper government?"
However, it will not be the last we hear of Mr Clegg. He is an arch europhile with fingers in many pies within that corrupt organisation. He will do a "Kinnock" and find himself (and probably a few members of his family) a nice little post in Brussels/Strasbourg and spend his days as an unelected official wielding enormous power to interfere in the lives of 500m people. One thing is for sure - he'll not have to worry himself over the tiresome little matter of getting people to vote for him.
Mr Clegg is a different kettle of fish entirely. He has the spare keys to No 10, and knows that he will never have the master set. He is prepared to jump into bed with just about anybody to retain them. Anybody who believes he agreed to form the coalition "for the good of the nation" needs their bumps felt. He did so for the good of Mr Clegg and a few of his friends, nothing more. He knew that it was just about the only chance they would have of any say over the way the UK is run and they were not going to turn it down because of the trifling matter of standing by their principles.
Fortunately his party faces obliteration at the next General Election and so it is of little consequence what he thinks as this government stumbles on, propped up only by the outrageous Fixed Term Parliament Act (which Mr Clegg demanded when joining the coalition as a way of ensuring at least five years in office). I doubt they will be in a position to do a deal with anybody and they will slink back into the obscurity which they have enjoyed for so long, their five years of glory fading into a distant memory. In twenty years time people will look back at this coalition and ask "what the **** was all that about then? Why didn't the country have a proper government?"
However, it will not be the last we hear of Mr Clegg. He is an arch europhile with fingers in many pies within that corrupt organisation. He will do a "Kinnock" and find himself (and probably a few members of his family) a nice little post in Brussels/Strasbourg and spend his days as an unelected official wielding enormous power to interfere in the lives of 500m people. One thing is for sure - he'll not have to worry himself over the tiresome little matter of getting people to vote for him.
Wise words NJ.
On another subject, I have called for your advice on the Rebekka Brooks trial. There are some on here that seem to think that she and the others will only get small, non-custodial sentences, if the Jury comes back with guilty verdicts. I have always understood conspiracy to be a very serious offence. and Brooks herself has been charged on two counts of conspiracy.
I know there is a maximum sentence Is there a minimum sentence for conspiracy ?
On another subject, I have called for your advice on the Rebekka Brooks trial. There are some on here that seem to think that she and the others will only get small, non-custodial sentences, if the Jury comes back with guilty verdicts. I have always understood conspiracy to be a very serious offence. and Brooks herself has been charged on two counts of conspiracy.
I know there is a maximum sentence Is there a minimum sentence for conspiracy ?
Conspiracy to do something usually attracts the same penalty as the substantive offence itself, Mikey. I'm not actually sure what Ms Brooks and her mates are accused of (I lost interest in the matter after about week 94) so cannot really say.
On a general note there are no statutory minimum sentences that I can think of for any offence. Murder carries a mandatory "Life" sentence though, as we all know, "Life" is open to wide interpretation. Other less serious offences such as, say, driving with excess alcohol, carry minimum length driving bans, but these measures are seen as "ancilliary orders" to the substantive sentence.
On a general note there are no statutory minimum sentences that I can think of for any offence. Murder carries a mandatory "Life" sentence though, as we all know, "Life" is open to wide interpretation. Other less serious offences such as, say, driving with excess alcohol, carry minimum length driving bans, but these measures are seen as "ancilliary orders" to the substantive sentence.
The Tory/LibDem alliance will need to be severed before the election. They cannot be fighting each other on the hustings while part of the same Government.
It will take something like this, a clear disagreement between Clegg and Cameron to trigger a parting.
With the LibDems, Labour and the Home secrectary again cannon, it looks like Boris will have to splash out in another direct.
It will take something like this, a clear disagreement between Clegg and Cameron to trigger a parting.
With the LibDems, Labour and the Home secrectary again cannon, it looks like Boris will have to splash out in another direct.
1 to 18 of 18
Latest Posts
Starmer And The Southpost Triple...
News2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
Crosswords4 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.