NJS

I'll have to agree with you here NJS. it takes a simple person to define politics in such a way. Obviously there are exceptions but comparing Bevan, Atlee, Benn, Smith and Foot against Thatcher, Tebbit, Joseph, Ridley, Osborne and Cameron seems pretty simple to me. Anyway it sometimes takes sophistication to see though complexity. Benn, Smith and Foot never had to serve in government though to be fair. How about Galloway, Derek Hatton and Blunkett (80s)? Benn and Foot served in Labour governments under Wilson. Hatton was a wanker but his love for Islam aside, I don't think Galloway is that bad.

I think broadly speaking there can be "divisions" of musical taste which at first glance can appear racist - as someone who pretty much exclusively likes guitar based music, there are very few black artists in my collection. I don't in anyway feel I have to justify that - it just reflects the tendency of the artists and fans within the genres. I knew that LM was into stuff like Free and assumed he had similar states to mine albeit from an earlier time but his Motown "credentials" should put paid to any accusations of simple racism.

I'll have to agree with you here NJS. it takes a simple person to define politics in such a way. Obviously there are exceptions but comparing Bevan, Atlee, Benn, Smith and Foot against Thatcher, Tebbit, Joseph, Ridley, Osborne and Cameron seems pretty simple to me. Anyway it sometimes takes sophistication to see though complexity.

My simplistic definition of politics has always been that decent people are socialists (which in the past meant Labour but obviously not now) and cunts were Tories. That's why I always had a problem defining Liberals - people like David Steel and Charles Kennedy always struck me as decent blokes so I could never understand why they needed to follow a third way. On this basis Clegg has found his natural home. On people being happy, I think they've fallen for the tough talk on cuts - it might change when they actually affect people they know or services they use.

I get what you mean but according to the article, that's not the only thing he did is it? I think he felt her tits as well and generally came out with a load of shit designed to impress her - sounds like cuntish behaviour but he's suggesting it works as a rule which is even more pathetic - even if very rarely true.

I think grabbing a lasses arse is a fucking pathetic thing to do but at the same time I'm not sure whether it warrants prosecution and being on the sex offenders list. It's one of those things - like a fight between two blokes where nobody gets really hurt as I've said before - that in some ways shouldn't necessarily be reported. I'd have no problem with the lass being able to slap the bloke/knee him in the nads but I suppose that could lead to something worse when dealing with scum. Maybe one of those fixed penalty things like being pissed in a public place that goes no further would be in order. This doesn't mean of course that I don't take real sex crimes very seriously indeed and it doesn't mean that lasses should have to put up with this shit either but a possible jail sentence seems OTT to me.

There used to be a show on Tyne Tees in the 80s I think called Friday Night live with a hideous scouse bint presenting it (Gillian Reynolds?) and I remember one where Paul Daniels' son (can't think of his name) outraged an audience of fuckwits by describing cold reading to them and saying that his Dad could be a "psychic" but had the decency to admit it was an illusion.

I'm always in two minds when it comes to con men of any kind - a lot of the time I think you could make a case for charging the victims with stupidity but when they prey on the vulnerable - which includes the bereaved - I think they are fucking scum.

I've watched a few of them - he's a bit too nice some of the time when he should really just tell the people how much they've fucked up their dogs.

I'd say it was our greatest strength

I do agree there are elements of a sort of faith in modern science and I also agree we should be sceptical - I just think you're exaggerating the "well science can't explain everything" position which usually comes from religionists which is probably what condused Fish. Of course my "faith" means I'm more likely to agree with the idea that brain irregularities/mass hysteria explains the supernatural than life after death but that position is backed by logic/evidence - maybe that's a circular argument but I want to live in a world where things "make sense" through rationality rather than one in which we throw our hands in the air and say "Who cares how it works".

I know the "half" is just an expression but my arbitrary guess would be less than 1% is unexplained to any great degree. How literal minded of you Yeah but your inference is that even though science is sort of good, it doesn't really measure up in the big picture - I think you're wrong on that.

I know the "half" is just an expression but my arbitrary guess would be less than 1% is unexplained to any great degree.

Misfiring brain chemistry - and cunts like that John Edwards who make money out of peoples' very human sense of loss should be fucking strung up.

I remember remarking in the last few years after semi-decent results against the top teams that we''ve gone to those places with better teams and lost worse and I stand by that - we've only given Man U a game at OT about 4 times - the 1-1 in the first year up, the 0-0 when Solkskaer hacked down Lee and probably the one two years ago come to mind. Those slagging off Willamson's comments should remember KK's from the game when we lost 2-0 in 95 when he mentioned the lions and tigers not turning up to the show - a reference to players as good as Lee and Ferdinand etc being overawed by the occassion. I'd love to have a team that is fearless in any fixture but LM and Stevie are wrong when they suggest we have had in the past just as a consequence of having better players or manager. That arrogance only comes with real success imo.

Without being completely Mr 360 I accept some of that - some signs were good but I felt that was more them not being at their peak (which was why it was a good fixture time) but with a bit of half-decent play as well. My worry is that in some respects it wasn't different to two seasons ago - I never felt that team was completely shit and at times played some decent stuff as they did last night but defensive mistakes and a lack of cutting edge cost us dear - and that was part of last night's story. Especially when everybody seems to think that last year somehow proved Collocini and Enrique were suddenly world beaters. Maybe 2 or 3 players could fix it - I don't know enough about Ben Arfa or the other couple of links and I'm quite happy to see Campbell in but having garbage like Shola and Xisco on the bench does not suggest any depth (Guthrie and Lovenkrands not withstanding).

Surprised you can sit on a chair with your knee jerking like that Honestly what were the doom preachers in here expecting last night? Were a promoted team who were playing man u away from home. Were any of you expecting different? Was anyone expecting something other than a tough season this year? I didn't expect anything else but why should that stop me from calling it as I see it? We may do better against shit teams but I don't see the point of hope - only a club sale would change that.

In the cold light of day it's the same shit team of two seasons ago minus the good players with barely good enough or down right shit replacements. As I suspected the much vaunted "team spirit" of last year was actually just a case of how shit the other championship teams were.

4th bottom - 37 games to maintain the target.

Ah, kneejerking already. As predictable as this scoreline. Not being funny but I fail to see how someone stating the obvious (which we all knew) is kneejerk tbh. Yeah, all our players are terrible to a man. You're quite right. Might as well write them all off now. Not terrible - just anything but good - I hope the rest of the teams are as shit as I suspect. None of the present team would get within a thousand miles of the 95/96 team - I know that makes me sad for saying it but why should we just accept the Nolans and Perchs of this world?

Don't agree with Routledge - too scared to try anything. Enrique has shown what I suspected - he looked good because of the level - he still cannot pass a ball 10 yards to a teammate on any kind of consistent basis.

Unsurprisingly the players who fooled a lot of people into thinking they were sort of good aren't. Face facts - we have no good players.

Saw him linked with Fulham - I'm not one of these people who blame him for leaving or think he somehow betrayed us or whatever but I'd still find it funny as fuck if he goes somewhere like that. Arsenal should really have signed him when Lehamn left or even when Seaman did.

Switched over and saw Cole get the red and really hoped it was as much of a mistake as his cheat loving mates were making out - it wasn't - the apologies were fucking sickening. 18 months ago they basically said Barton deserved a red for his tackle on Alonso just because he is Joey Barton - now Cole deserves a let-off because he's a nice, cheeky cockney chap. I fucking hate them all. As a side note I caught a reporter on SSN yesterday - I thing it was that fuckwit Craig - saying how Cole was taking Dalglish's number 10 shirt - proving once again that "Sky era wanker" refers just as much to all their staff as it does to too many fans.

Right/right for me. On a similar subject, can anyone explain the modern trend, button fly jeans apart, for blokes undoing their belts and trousers completely in order to piss? Is it some kind of macho thing that says "my knob is so big I can't get it out through the zip"?