Nick_G
pfm Member
Sure. I engage, Nick. You don't.
More like 'EV is engaged and will only let his spin doctor speak for him'.
Sure. I engage, Nick. You don't.
Scotland isn't my favourite subject.
Interesting how it plays out. It looks like the Queen has elected to be in Scotland at the end of her life. She enjoys far greater respect from that country’s political leader than she did from the last British Prime Minister who lied to her over his unlawful prorogation of Parliament then had an illegal drinks party on the eve of her husband’s funeral. Isn’t it appalling that she had to deal with that scoundrel in her final days?Scotland isn't my favourite subject.
Interesting how it plays out. It looks like the Queen has elected to be in Scotland at the end of her life. She enjoys far greater respect from that country’s political leader than she did from the last British Prime Minister who lied to her over his unlawful prorogation of Parliament then had an illegal drinks party on the eve of her husband’s funeral. Isn’t it appalling that she had to deal with that scoundrel in her final days?
More like 'EV is engaged and will only let his spin doctor speak for him'.
The offending Prime Minister’s behaviour is a matter of record (criminal in one instance) and his behaviour to the monarch stands as an utter disgrace to his office. No shabby denials or deflections in prose will expunge it.I saw this yesterday, and thought that you would have had the self-awareness to have deleted it by now. It's a bit of a gem, even by your standards. To manipulate the narrative of The Queen's death to create an excuse to grind out, yet again, your op-ed piece on Johnson's dissolutness and Sturgeon's quasi-saintliness is bad enough, but then to assume insight into The Queen's thoughts, motivations and opinions is both extraordinarily patronising, and eye-wateringly arrogant. You've excelled yourself.
It's funny that yesterday's apparent tidy-up of this threat omitted to remove that bizarre post.
The offending Prime Minister’s behaviour is a matter of record (criminal in one instance) and his behaviour to the monarch stands as an utter disgrace to his office. No shabby denials or deflections in prose will expunge it.
It looks like the Queen has elected to be in Scotland at the end of her life.
Whats up with you? it was a perfectly reasonable post. Johnson has behaved like a sh1t to the queen and lied to her...fact.I saw this yesterday, and thought that you would have had the self-awareness to have deleted it by now. It's a bit of a gem, even by your standards. To manipulate the narrative of The Queen's death to create an excuse to grind out, yet again, your op-ed piece on Johnson's dissolutness and Sturgeon's quasi-saintliness is bad enough, but then to assume insight into The Queen's thoughts, motivations and opinions is both extraordinarily patronising, and eye-wateringly arrogant. You've excelled yourself.
You’re not selling his gin, you’ve been selling him: reciting Farage in the Telegraph, he was right about Europe, his expense claims were unremarkable etc occasionally remembering to hold your nose when it became apparent just how politically aligned you are with him and here you are on the Boris thread pulling exactly the same stunt! It’s just so obvious. These are two of the most rancid moral vacuums to occupy British politics, so your nose peg is well placed, given your proximity to them.
Oh and btw, don’t bother with the ‘Dame Sibyl Thorndike does moral outrage’ for the RADA first year class.
Whats up with you? it was a perfectly reasonable post. Johnson has behaved like a sh1t to the queen and lied to her...fact.
The queen very obviously loved Scotland and spent most of her free time there, and had for many years...fact.
Sturgeon has always treated the queen with respect...well, as far as I know, but maybe you could give instances otherwise?
I think the only time I've recited Farage in the DT was when he was expounding exactly the same policy as you and the rest of the pfm left-illiberal political massive. I can understand why that got under your skin, what with all the 'fellow travellers' nonsense that came before. There's nothing like a bit of hypocrisy to make the skin tingle, eh? As for Europe, I've no idea whether he is right or not, but from what I've heard of him, I would say he certainly is on the EU. As regards his expenses, I merely refuted a seemingly inaccurate claim that they were disportionate, as they fell roughly in the median for MEPs. Its this sort of disinformation that gets people like you all hot and sweaty. Its good to prick it once in a while with some facts. It quite clearly stung you.
Got any more insight into The Queen's inner thoughts for us?
No, it isn't....it is difficult to equate Sturgeon's monocular obsession with 'respect' for HM.
Great post, Nick. Don't strain the old grey matter too hard though, something might break.
No, it isn't.
You think the queen wasn't a good enough judge of character to recognise and herself respect a sincerely held belief? You think this trumped being lied to her face?
If this is all you've got, it's pathetic.