Toonpack

If she got elected (which she won't) it'd destroy Labour in it's heartlands, in my experience the "working man" ain't that enlightened sadly

I don't think he's very good, but at the same time I don't think a lot of the side's we'll be realistically competing with next season have very good strikers either. Is he significantly worse than Cameron Jerome, Zamora, Carlton Cole, Kevin Davies and the like? I don't think believe he is. I hope he's not one of our first choice strikers next season, because even with our budget we should be able to find better, but his scoring record each season is generally a goal every 3 starts, which isn't terrible. I've advocated us going after Boyd from Rangers for a while, because at the moment we don't have a genuine goalscorer in our squad (with the possible exception of Lovenkrands), but that won't happen and it looks like we're going to have to make the best of what we've got. Do I think Ameobi will be able to lead the line effectively next season? No. Do I think he is capable of being useful as a squad player? Yes. Kevin Davies is miles better than Ameobi. Who was the last striker to come out of the sunday league scoring goals against 3rd division standard opposition to uphole their reputation down here too ? If you're talking about the SPL, Steven Fletcher this season at Burnley. Came from Hibs and got 12 league goals in a terrible terrible side. we'll see how he progresses. Before him ? Even the most ardent Scottish football supporter would admit if they are honest, very few players up there are class. Look at the Rangers team that has won the league ? Its full of 2nd division players and ex premiership players who are past their best and/or were never much good anyway. There's very few Brits who are "class" full stop

I blame the Muslims, probably a Suicide-halibut from an extremist shoal

A handmade sporran from blokey in Braemar, North American Grey Fox fur, silver cantle, black leather back and mustard interior. Be ready in a few weeks.

Definitely a strong contender, though I'd put Robert Plant , Steven Tyler and Ian Gillan in there too. I only really know Gillan's voice aut of those to any depth but I don't think any of them match Dio for "proper" singing - ie carrying a song without shouting/screaming or going full out. I was listening to the first Rainbow album this morning and his singing on Catch the Rainbow is breathtaking. Not wanting to hijack the thread - you'd have to include Paul Rodgers in that list. Particularly in respect to the bit in bold. Plant has waned in his latter years, but Dio definitely did not. They played a HaH track on Rock Radio yesterday (the whole day was dedicated to him) which was recorded live 2yrs ago (when he was 65). He was pitch perfect. His operatic style didnt always appeal to me if I'm honest, but as I said earlier in the thread; Dio had power as well as range - unlike many of his contemporaries. He also had the ability to do it live, for a whole gig too. I heard an interesting fact yesterday also. Apparently, Dio never needed to warm up. He just walked out and sang like that straight off the bat. Without a shadow of a doubt. I'd also add Steve Perry of Journey (I appreciate it's totally different type of voice) but listen to Open Arms from the Live in Houston DVD absolutely spellbinding.

That is a bar steward of a drive mate, what you doing up there in Beggarsville? work up here IT project manager

Driving to and from Aberdeen every other week I get to see them at their finest. How come they spend half their lives looking in mirrors yet when they get in a car the just don't. On a dual carrigeway you'll come up to a queue of traffic with a slower car at front 7/10 times a woman (the other three it's a codger), pulled out to overtake something at the same speed they caught up with it at, don't accelerate to get past and don't pull back in for miles. Every time !!!!

Sad day RIP RJD Heaven and Hell one of the greatest ever rock albums, saw them on that tour an all, he was imense.

Unless of course we're going to buy some new players out of the increased revenue (which wouldn't be "new capital outlay") which will put us into loss, but maybe a smaller loss year on year, possibly !!!! (skinchies)

Best wheat beer I ever had was a Tucher, in Poland, bloody thing came with a slice of orange in it, but bloody hell it was fantastic. Tried to get it over here and cant even off tinternet

So when I empty the bath in 2012, the water'll go down the plug the wrong way, cool!!

You pull them up there and then, something like: "You don't know the facts and how is that relevant to this meeting??" Then you feed their family to soldier ants

Yes please Agreed, and to make up for it they should impose a levy on companies that fuck jobs off abroad and employ Indians called David and Brian (Aye right, course you are) to ring you up all the fucking time.

Been quashed

Thought I'd been banned an all, that said unlike the rest of you, pesky lefty no-nowt kid bassa's, my perceived banning was at least plausible

Could do with a Maggie back now tbh

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. From what I can see, the share of the vote is this: Con 39.1% Lab 30.3% LD 22.5% Others 8% Going by your figures of half (wasn't the turnout much higher than that?) Then we can deduce that around 20% of the country backed Cameron, 15% backed Brown and 11% backed Clegg. Ringing endorsment or not, it's clear the country as a whole preferred the idea of Cameron to Brown. Don't know where you have got those figures but the Beeb says CON 36.1%, LAB 29.0%, and LIB 23.0%. So not much more than 1 in 3 people who voted went for the Conservatives. I'd say that of the one third of people who did not vote for Conservatives or Labour, most of them would prefer to continue with Brown than have Cameron - especially those who voted Lib Dems (please feel free to disagree -I'd be interested).So I don't see how Cameron thinks he has any sort of mandate, he's basically taking the piss. Trouble is, Brown clearly has no mandate either. We need a re-election but who has the stomach for that, and what if the same thing happens again? That's a stretch of imense proportions. I'd rather have Griffin than the saggy faced bongeyed cunt then you're a bigger cunt than he is It was an illustrative (but exagerated) point, dickhead Who did you vote for? Tynemouth tory-boy Right, not liberal then. Commiserations btw. Point is, most Liberal voters are left-slanting, not right. In fact probably left of Labour nowadays. So put yourself in their shoes, who would they prefer in power if they had to choose between Brown and Cameron? Meenzer can probably give a definite answer to that. Well the one's I know despise Brown as much as Cameron, to say 50% of them would rather have one than the other, is as I said, a stretch IMO.

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. From what I can see, the share of the vote is this: Con 39.1% Lab 30.3% LD 22.5% Others 8% Going by your figures of half (wasn't the turnout much higher than that?) Then we can deduce that around 20% of the country backed Cameron, 15% backed Brown and 11% backed Clegg. Ringing endorsment or not, it's clear the country as a whole preferred the idea of Cameron to Brown. Don't know where you have got those figures but the Beeb says CON 36.1%, LAB 29.0%, and LIB 23.0%. So not much more than 1 in 3 people who voted went for the Conservatives. I'd say that of the one third of people who did not vote for Conservatives or Labour, most of them would prefer to continue with Brown than have Cameron - especially those who voted Lib Dems (please feel free to disagree -I'd be interested).So I don't see how Cameron thinks he has any sort of mandate, he's basically taking the piss. Trouble is, Brown clearly has no mandate either. We need a re-election but who has the stomach for that, and what if the same thing happens again? That's a stretch of imense proportions. I'd rather have Griffin than the saggy faced bongeyed cunt then you're a bigger cunt than he is It was an illustrative (but exagerated) point, dickhead youre the cunt who'd rather have the BNP in power than labour dickhead No, re-read my follow up post for fuck's sake. The question was not about Labour or BNP it was about the bongeye

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. From what I can see, the share of the vote is this: Con 39.1% Lab 30.3% LD 22.5% Others 8% Going by your figures of half (wasn't the turnout much higher than that?) Then we can deduce that around 20% of the country backed Cameron, 15% backed Brown and 11% backed Clegg. Ringing endorsment or not, it's clear the country as a whole preferred the idea of Cameron to Brown. Don't know where you have got those figures but the Beeb says CON 36.1%, LAB 29.0%, and LIB 23.0%. So not much more than 1 in 3 people who voted went for the Conservatives. I'd say that of the one third of people who did not vote for Conservatives or Labour, most of them would prefer to continue with Brown than have Cameron - especially those who voted Lib Dems (please feel free to disagree -I'd be interested).So I don't see how Cameron thinks he has any sort of mandate, he's basically taking the piss. Trouble is, Brown clearly has no mandate either. We need a re-election but who has the stomach for that, and what if the same thing happens again? That's a stretch of imense proportions. I'd rather have Griffin than the saggy faced bongeyed cunt then you're a bigger cunt than he is It was an illustrative (but exagerated) point, dickhead Who did you vote for? Tynemouth tory-boy

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. From what I can see, the share of the vote is this: Con 39.1% Lab 30.3% LD 22.5% Others 8% Going by your figures of half (wasn't the turnout much higher than that?) Then we can deduce that around 20% of the country backed Cameron, 15% backed Brown and 11% backed Clegg. Ringing endorsment or not, it's clear the country as a whole preferred the idea of Cameron to Brown. Don't know where you have got those figures but the Beeb says CON 36.1%, LAB 29.0%, and LIB 23.0%. So not much more than 1 in 3 people who voted went for the Conservatives. I'd say that of the one third of people who did not vote for Conservatives or Labour, most of them would prefer to continue with Brown than have Cameron - especially those who voted Lib Dems (please feel free to disagree -I'd be interested).So I don't see how Cameron thinks he has any sort of mandate, he's basically taking the piss. Trouble is, Brown clearly has no mandate either. We need a re-election but who has the stomach for that, and what if the same thing happens again? That's a stretch of imense proportions. I'd rather have Griffin than the saggy faced bongeyed cunt then you're a bigger cunt than he is It was an illustrative (but exagerated) point, dickhead

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. From what I can see, the share of the vote is this: Con 39.1% Lab 30.3% LD 22.5% Others 8% Going by your figures of half (wasn't the turnout much higher than that?) Then we can deduce that around 20% of the country backed Cameron, 15% backed Brown and 11% backed Clegg. Ringing endorsment or not, it's clear the country as a whole preferred the idea of Cameron to Brown. Don't know where you have got those figures but the Beeb says CON 36.1%, LAB 29.0%, and LIB 23.0%. So not much more than 1 in 3 people who voted went for the Conservatives. I'd say that of the one third of people who did not vote for Conservatives or Labour, most of them would prefer to continue with Brown than have Cameron - especially those who voted Lib Dems (please feel free to disagree -I'd be interested).So I don't see how Cameron thinks he has any sort of mandate, he's basically taking the piss. Trouble is, Brown clearly has no mandate either. We need a re-election but who has the stomach for that, and what if the same thing happens again? That's a stretch of imense proportions. I'd rather have Griffin than the saggy faced bongeyed cunt

It certainly is. +1 The same few tossers who got us into the sorry mess in the first place Aye but it's not a real mess is it, it's a mythical mess perpetuated for gain (by a very few) Just been a graph on sky of the £, up and down like a whores drawers, now back up again (over the space of a few hours) some cunts made a fortune

What pisses me off, is the "ooh we've got to make sure the markets are happy" merchants (who've already been on the box) In other words our economy and wellbeing is at the whim of the same few cunts (and institutions of cunts) who throw billions of pretendy £££'s $$$'s yen etc around. It's fundamentaly fucking shite.

To be accurate it’s 36% of the half the electorate, which is about 18% of the country. It's hardly the ringing endorsement Cameron is making it out to be. After 15 years of any government and an election in the midst of a global financial meltdown the opposition would normally stroll to a majority. This result really is a bit of an embarrassment for the Conservatives. If that's the case it's a monstrous kick in the nads for Labour

No. 10 doesn't have an outside lock on the front door. You can only open it from the inside. Trivia-tastic. Pisser if you're home alone and fancy a pint in the pub next door. Brown reaching out to Lib Dems, wants PR referendum. Desperate