1

(3 replies, posted in Match Reports)

In the spirit of our leader I have been "scouting" our opposition.  And by that I mean reading their forums to see what the Stoke fans are saying.  From public areas only of course.

Mostly, apart form a few comments about their back four being OK they point out a general lack of belief across the squad, discipline problems and the general feeling that if we put any less than five goals past them they'll be happy.

Talk is that the whole management structure is rotten and a lot of managerial staff are employed as mates of someone.  They're grumbling like we did in the bad old days.

One thing they're not really talking about is spygate.  Seems apart from us, Derby and the twitter twats, not many are fussed about it one way or other.

2

(3,345 replies, posted in Life)

wogga wrote:

Whilst trying to mend a cupboard handle with a bent spoon (don't ask) I think I've just come up with a fantastic new prime time game show format, along the lines of Bake off but better
Tool bag challenge were contestants are asked to make ever more difficult projects with a diminishing number of tools so built in double jeopardy
Final will be assemble a small nuclear reactor using just a bent screwdriver and gaffer tape
Hosts Andy Peters and Keith of the pottery show,he's good gets very emotional.

It's probably been done already.

4

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:
space wrote:
danpiesley wrote:

It has taken me some time to get here but the divisions are wide and raw, more so than I realised as I have been living in a news blackout.  It is a three pronged situation it seems.


Yes - I agree with Corbyn blocking the deal as did 118 tory MP's - because it is shit.  I also agree with him blocking because he wants a Labour government - if he didn't he would be odd and this is clearly an oppourtunity to achive that inn the fist instance and sort shit out like homelessness, UC and corporation tax.  All this shit is still going on. I think that a GE is the best situation in lots of ways - hopefully it will lead to a Labour government and it will suspend article 50.  Then we have to have a second ref.

The first was un-democratic in my opinion.

It was a simple in out choice and May telling me last night pre vote that if I had voted leave I knew it would have entailed a deal is utter horse shit.  I was not aware of that - the term hard Brexit had not even been coined as far as I am aware.  Cameron never thought we would vote leave so it was a catastrofuck from start to finish. 

A deal should have been negotiated then a ref on three terms.  Stay, Leave or leave with deal.  That, for me, is democratic and that is why I want a second ref.  I can never accept this will of the people bullshit.

'Not everyone who voted leave is a racist but all racists voted to leave'.  Or something, I read somewhere.

Effectively splitting the leave vote in two.  Riiiiiiiggghhht.


They split themselves in the vote on May's deal   So what you are saying is there maybe a current mandate for remain in both the country and in Parliament.

Do I honestly have to explain the flaw in the maths for a three way referendum?  It's hiding a yes/no decision within a three way split.  I know I'm autistic and shit but surely this is a middle school level logical problem.

5

(527 replies, posted in Life)

danpiesley wrote:
space wrote:

Someone whos name I dare not mention will block anything and everything to force a general election.  The details of the deal made no difference as it's just political capital.

What is best for the man on the street stopped being a driving force in British politics sometime around 1979 for the Tories and about 1997 for Labour.

It has taken me some time to get here but the divisions are wide and raw, more so than I realised as I have been living in a news blackout.  It is a three pronged situation it seems.


Yes - I agree with Corbyn blocking the deal as did 118 tory MP's - because it is shit.  I also agree with him blocking because he wants a Labour government - if he didn't he would be odd and this is clearly an oppourtunity to achive that inn the fist instance and sort shit out like homelessness, UC and corporation tax.  All this shit is still going on. I think that a GE is the best situation in lots of ways - hopefully it will lead to a Labour government and it will suspend article 50.  Then we have to have a second ref.

The first was un-democratic in my opinion.

It was a simple in out choice and May telling me last night pre vote that if I had voted leave I knew it would have entailed a deal is utter horse shit.  I was not aware of that - the term hard Brexit had not even been coined as far as I am aware.  Cameron never thought we would vote leave so it was a catastrofuck from start to finish. 

A deal should have been negotiated then a ref on three terms.  Stay, Leave or leave with deal.  That, for me, is democratic and that is why I want a second ref.  I can never accept this will of the people bullshit.

'Not everyone who voted leave is a racist but all racists voted to leave'.  Or something, I read somewhere.

Effectively splitting the leave vote in two.  Riiiiiiiggghhht.

6

(10 replies, posted in Wardrobe Department)

Dame Edna

7

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:
space wrote:

Someone whos name I dare not mention will block anything and everything to force a general election.  The details of the deal made no difference as it's just political capital.

What is best for the man on the street stopped being a driving force in British politics sometime around 1979 for the Tories and about 1997 for Labour.

I'd counter that the Labour manifesto of 2017 was significantly better than the alternatives for the man in the street and a tad worse for the man in the penthouse with his money in BVI.

I can't argue with that, but I do feel that the beneficiary was the aspiring educated house-owning comfortable labour voting public sector man in the suburban street rather than the zero hour minimum wage private land-lorded fucker barely getting by labour voter.

8

(3 replies, posted in Match Reports)

CharlieG wrote:

I'm saying nowt until I've seen what they're up to in training.

I did toy with the idea of a quick trip up the A38 to have a look.  I'm sure some nutter is going to do it though.

9

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Someone whos name I dare not mention will block anything and everything to force a general election.  The details of the deal made no difference as it's just political capital.

What is best for the man on the street stopped being a driving force in British politics sometime around 1979 for the Tories and about 1997 for Labour.

10

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Mol wrote:

I assumed you were referring to that QT piece, my bad.

That link won't open for me. But, does he say he would not issue a retaliatory strike as you originally posted or just confirming his long held stance that he would never choose to use nuclear weapons? Because they are not quite the same.


No.  From 1983 to 2015 he emphatically said that he would never use nuclear weapons under any circumstances.  This view only changed when he became leader.

11

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Jeremy Corbyn would instruct the UK’s defence chiefs never to use the Trident nuclear weapons system if he became prime minister in 2020, the new Labour leader has confirmed.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 … f-i-was-pm

12

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Mol wrote:
space wrote:

Reg.  Corbyn said what he said.  It's public record.

Well, it's not, is it? At all. I've just proven that.


The new leader of the British Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, has sparked a political firestorm by challenging the myths around nuclear weapons and Cold War deterrence. Corbyn announced that he would never use a nuclear weapon.

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index … s

13

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Mol wrote:
space wrote:

Reg.  Corbyn said what he said.  It's public record.

Well, it's not, is it? At all. I've just proven that.

No.  You posted something that Corbyn said when he was back pedalling from saying something different.  Like most things about Corbyn, he's only believable if you ignore the last 30 years of history.  Stick a mic in front of him and fuck knows what is going to come out.

14

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:

I swear Corbyn must have done you some grave disservice in the past.  The zeal with which you aim to discredit it him is almost religious......and either plainly incorrect or grossly exaggerated.


I find your self delusion about him quite endearing.  Which part was incorrect or exaggerated?  I'm willing to accept any facts you can prove.

15

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Mol wrote:
space wrote:

When Jezza declared that he would never issue an order to retaliate against a nuclear strike


See, i'm no Corbynite, he withers me, but that's a lie, or a serious error of memory on your part. What he said was he would not issue a 'first use' nuclear strike. Please get it right.



Mol.  That was a much later interview where Corbyn was back pedalling on his previously held views (and previously held for many decades) that he "would never use nuclear weapons".


[video]

16

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:

Germany have threatened to develop their own predominantly because they have concerns about whether the US was committed to NATO and as the 60 or so nukes in Germany were American don't you think it rather goes like that instead Space?

Reg.  Corbyn said what he said.  It's public record.  The German government said what they said.  Their declaration included the reasoning that Corbyn would undermine the basis of their treaties and that this would be the reason they would arm themselves.  This isn't my conjecture.  They said it.  How on earth can Corbyn saying what he said do anything other than negate Non-prof and NATO?

Reggie Perrin wrote:

I don't really give a shit about what other countries do, I want no part of them, I never have.  Putin is a Western bogeyman, we are conditioned to hate certain administration's as it suits our "leaders" so they can get up the nuts in the fear and arms trade.

I'm sure that the people of Ukraine feel exactly the same way.  And the people of Georgia, Chechnya, Crimea and the Syrian Democrats and Kurds.  Estonia, Belarus, Lativia, Lithuania? They're just fucking paranoid.  And don't forget the hoax, fake news, witch hunt that the 17 angry democrats started because Putin's just misunderstood.

17

(527 replies, posted in Life)

CharlieG wrote:
Travis Bickle wrote:

230 vote loss.....

Worse than expected.

Now she knows how Fat Frank felt on Friday.

18

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:
space wrote:
Reggie Perrin wrote:

I don't see how anything he has proposed could be deemed "unhinged".

Yeah.  Who needs nuclear non-proliferation.

I do.  I'm also a unilateralist.

It goes like this Reg....  Non-proliferation means that our allies, roughly speaking the non-nuclear powers in Nato agree not to develop their own nukes as long as we agree to use ours in their defence.  If we can no longer support this responsibility then the pact is broken and they are (and will) develop their own nuclear deterrent.
So instead of 2 European nuclear arsenals (France and Britain), you get a nuclear trigger in every European nation who can afford them.   And I doubt Russia will stand around and wait for these to get developed and deployed.  And no Reg, this is not paranoia.  When Jezza declared that he would never issue an order to retaliate against a nuclear strike Germany said that they would withdraw from the non-prof treaties should he ever become Prime Minister.

Therein lies the Catch 22 of the nuclear question.  If we remove ourselves from the game other countries will want to join in our place, and with Putin still in power that's a fucking game changer.

19

(527 replies, posted in Life)

Reggie Perrin wrote:
space wrote:
CharlieG wrote:

This.
JC was/is never going to be PM as he's been smeared to fuck as an unhinged lefty. You're average Joe, wavering voter won't have it, as far as I can discern and nobody would trust any of those with a Blairite background.
Keir Starmer, anyone?

I'm not usually ahead of the fashion but I did think he was an unhinged lefty before the smear campaign started - mostly because he was an unhinged lefty, and to be honest that's why I liked him.  It's only his post leadership wish to sell out to the political centre that upsets me.


I don't see how anything he has proposed could be deemed "unhinged".

Yeah.  Who needs nuclear non-proliferation.

20

(527 replies, posted in Life)

CharlieG wrote:
Reggie Perrin wrote:
placidcasual wrote:

Looking forward to the next 48 hours. Should be interesting..

My money is on, EU giving us more time and a General Election after she's resigned.

Corbyn has to go if labour have any chance to win.

I think there has to be a general election so that there can be a chance for a choice and a mandate for a way forward. 

I'm sorry to say it because he's transformed politics to an extent, well he's given us a left wing choice but my gut says they get a strong majority without him and Dianne Abbott.  I like him but I don't think he's a leader or at least what people want in a leader.  I kind of want someone who looks like they would punch a hole in a Labour club toilet wall.  I loved Bob Crow.

This.
JC was/is never going to be PM as he's been smeared to fuck as an unhinged lefty. You're average Joe, wavering voter won't have it, as far as I can discern and nobody would trust any of those with a Blairite background.
Keir Starmer, anyone?

I'm not usually ahead of the fashion but I did think he was an unhinged lefty before the smear campaign started - mostly because he was an unhinged lefty, and to be honest that's why I liked him.  It's only his post leadership wish to sell out to the political centre that upsets me.

21

(30 replies, posted in Wardrobe Department)

Loose Lips wrote:

Cigs and red wine? A little fois? Touch of pastry?

Gauloises and cheese that audibly hums.

22

(603 replies, posted in Life)

fredvomjupiter wrote:

Beto was in my hood. The fact that he came so fucking close made it all the worse, and we really didn’t expect that. Having said that I live in the Austin bubble, and there was one person in a ten mile radius with a Cruz sign.
Texas is certainly politically turning. I won’t bore you with it, but read any political analysis worth shit about what’s going on here.

Fred, if you find any interesting local analysis on the situation please post links. It's difficult to be bored while watching the largest car crash in history.

And hello.

23

(3,345 replies, posted in Life)

Put 8 pounds on over Christmas.

Howard Devoto was a Leeds lad.  Went to Leeds Grammar.

My daughter has managed to get a better paid job so by the end of February she should be almost self-sufficient.  We'll may have to cover her car finance for a while and get the odd Friday big shop in for her, but that's sustainable for us.

I reckon it will take the rest of the year for us to get straight with regards to the credit card that's kept everyone going since September.

So Universal Credit does what they say it does.  It gets the unemployed into work because otherwise they lose their benefit access because they're fucking homeless and starving.  I just pity the poor cunts who are on the sick or don't have a Mum and Dad to bank roll them through it.