Quote: Definitely Tarby @ 12th November 2019, 7:25 PM

The 'facts' are Russell was highlighting how ridiculous it was for the council to decide installing that was the best option. The family could have been rehoused to somewhere more accessible instead of spending £40k on that and the house had a nice garden before it was replaced with that. Everyone agrees that the girl and her mother shouldn't have to struggle whenever they leave the house but it was probably a lot less hassle the old way.

Russell wasn't making fun of the disabled girl or disabled people in general and wasn't suggesting it was their idea to have something like that installed.

View original

And a couple of other facts are that Russell made fun of the installation in front of an audience of millions, and that the girl, her mother and several loved ones have complained about being deeply hurt by what Russell did.

Indeed, the mother herself has accused Russell of making fun of her daughter.

She said to him, "I really thought you were one of the good guys, I'm truly gutted watching you laugh at my disabled child."

I always thought of him as one of the crap guys so it kind of evens up.

Quote: A Horseradish @ 12th November 2019, 7:46 PM

I always thought of him as one of the crap guys so it kind of evens up.

View original

A fair point, Horse: as comedians go, he might be good or crap or anywhere in between - depending upon one's point of view.

In terms of goodness or badness of character, however, as I suggested in my original post, I don't think he had any intention of causing distress to the 12-year-old disabled girl and her family.

Be that as it may, regardless of his intentions, that's exactly what he did.

Quote: Rood Eye @ 12th November 2019, 7:55 PM

A fair point, Horse: as comedians go, he might be good or crap or anywhere in between - depending upon one's opinion.

In terms of goodness or badness of character, however, as I suggested in my original post, I don't think he had any intention of causing distress to the 12-year-old disabled girl and her family.

Be that as it may, regardless of his intentions, that's exactly what he did.

View original

Get over it.

They could make a fortune in the media from it.

Him. Josh Widdecombe. I'm not saying that Michael Howard and Ann Widdecombe ever did have an affair but if they did their sons just having different surnames doesn't pull the wool over anyone's eyes. Disabled People 4 Twat Brothers 0.

The new ambulance chasing adverts following the end of PPI claims are for getting compensation for any investment plans you entered with your bank or other financial adviser that lost money. I've heard the ads on the radio a few times and I don't know how that could be successful because the small print of any investment will always mention risk and the contract is based on that understanding. If there was no risk then you could never fail. Invest and if you don't make money from it just sue for your money back and maybe even a bit extra for the hurt feelings. Would be nice if I could do that at the casino.

According to reports, Harry and Meghan are shunning the royal family on Christmas day and spending it either in their own home or across the ocean with Meghan's mum.

This comes after the couple's move away from London to Windsor and after they formed their own philanthropic organisation separate from the royal one with which Harry had previously been connected.

The pair have frequently been seen distancing themselves from William and Kate.

When Harry and Meghan announced their intention to marry, it was thought Meghan might have difficulties adjusting to royal life. However, it seems she's overcoming that problem rather cleverly by doing her best to avoid much of it altogether while introducing Harry to the joys of common (albeit rather wealthy) life.

Regardless of any other considerations, at least little Archie will have more fun climbing the trees around Frogmore cottage than he would doing posh things in the middle of London.

Boys will be boys.

Harry is the closest thing to "one of the lads" the royal family has ever produced and it might not be a bad thing if Archie follows in his footsteps.

Still with Harry and Meghan and their decision to stay away from the royal family this Christmas, it's now being reported that rather than choosing between staying at Frogmore Cottage and going to America to stay with Meghan's mum, they've decided to have the best of both worlds - they're bringing Meghan's mum over to Britain!

That is, in my view, the worst decision they could possibly make.

Why? Because if they go to America to stay with Meghan's mum, they can credibly claim that they couldn't see Gloria on Christmas Day while simultaneously seeing Harry's family on the same day and they had to make a decision to pay one visit or the other.

However, if Gloria comes here, for the three of them to stay away from the royal family on Christmas Day is an obvious snub.

There can be little doubt that if Harry had never met Meghan, he'd be with his family on Christmas Day this year.

Accordingly, the forthcoming blatant snub (if it happens) appears to be Meghan's doing.

Whatever happens, Harry will remain popular with the British public while Meghan digs herself further and further into the huge hole she's already in as far as the public's affections are concerned.

And she's supposed to be being guided by a top-notch PR team.

Why would anyone be arsed about what that crew get up to? Its just a massive dysfunctional family full of divorcees and foreigners living off the state.
You wait when Brexit comes they will be the first to be launched so that we can get some Sovereignty!
And for once I'm sure every right wing thinking man and his little woman and his young boyfriend will agree with me.!!!

One of the richest families, who are a byword in sovereignty, will be the first to be removed because of Brexit? You may need a poor man's revolution?

Prince Andrew will be on BBC2 on Saturday at 9 PM, in an interview with Emily Maitliss about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.

Again, there is mention of that 17-year-old girl being "coerced" into having sex with Andrew although, by her own admission, she was paid $15,000 for her services on the first occasion.

Andrew is coming in for a lot of stick with regard to his association with Jeffrey Epstein but I still haven't read anything about him breaking the law.

I'm certainly not a fan of Andrew or of the royal family in general but, if any or all of them want to go around the world having consensual sex with people who are over the age of consent, I can't see anything to get excited about.

Apart from the sex, of course - which can occasionally be exciting.

You Heard It Here First

The next President of the United States is going to be.........Hillary Clinton.

She is not formally a candidate and was not expected to run but Sanders is ill, O'Rourke and several others have dropped out, Biden is mired in controversy and unpopular while conveniently paving the way for an acceptance that the Democrats could field a pensioner. Ditto Elizabeth Warren. What is becoming obvious too is that all those young women that no one outside America had heard of have been merely flag bearers for Queen Hill, getting the public used to the idea of a woman President again and in particular her, probably with Michelle Obama or Whoopi Goldberg as her running mate. .

She's been in the British news not once but twice in the past three days - one with her views on Russian interference in elections and two about women candidates being subjected to online misogyny. And yet no one in the press has seen that this is so obviously the start of her Presidential campaign, So stick your mortgages at Paddy Power or Betfred on her now. It's all going to be about her taking on a Trump who is impeached and yet still allowed to run again for office. Yes it will have been agreed by the lizard race in Davos and they will ensure it. I am astonished I am the only way who can see it.

Quote: A Horseradish @ 15th November 2019, 4:41 PM

You Heard It Here First
The next President of the United States is going to be.........Hillary Clinton.

View original

I doubt it. If she runs and gets the Democratic nomination it will mean only one thing. Four more years of Trump.

That's the only reason he got in last time. It was not so much a pro-Trump vote but a stop-Clinton vote. Does she not realise that?

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 15th November 2019, 4:46 PM

I doubt it. If she runs and gets the Democratic nomination it will mean only one thing. Four more years of Trump.

That's the only reason he got in last time. It was not so much a pro-Trump vote but an stop-Clinton vote. Does she not realise that?

View original

She might realise that but I don't think that would stop her.

WW3 wouldn't stop her.

It's different now (and I say that as not the biggest critic of Trump - I think he's part good and part bad).

Anyhows, you are entitled to your views.

But you are going to look a right Charlie when it happens and I become through betting a multi-millionaire.

Quote: A Horseradish @ 15th November 2019, 4:41 PM

You Heard It Here First
The next President of the United States is going to be.........Hillary Clinton.

View original

I'm not sure I'd want to put my house on it but I certainly see where you're coming from.

Looking at the odds, the bookies clearly think Trump is almost a sure thing whereas Hillary is available at 33 to 1 with SportingBet and at 30 to 1 with Paddy Power and on the Betfair betting exchange.

If you want to back Hillary in a way that makes less money with less risk, you could back her on Betfair and then, if her odds shorten, lay her (i.e. bet against her) on Betfair.

That way, you will make money if the odds shorten - even if she gets nowhere near winning.

Luvvly Jubbly!

Quote: Rood Eye @ 15th November 2019, 4:57 PM

I'm not sure I'd want to put my house on it but I certainly see where you're coming from.

Looking at the odds, the bookies clearly think Trump is almost a sure thing whereas Hillary is available at 33 to 1 with SportingBet and at 30 to 1 with Paddy Power and on the Betfair betting exchange.

If you want to back Hillary in a way that makes less money with less risk, you could back her on Betfair and then, if her odds shorten, lay her (i.e. bet against her) on Betfair.

That way, you will make money if the odds shorten - even if she gets nowhere near winning.

Luvvly Jubbly!

View original

33 to 1.........well, there you go.

Cushty.

You know it make's sense.

(What you have to bear in mind is that Team Remain - and she is one - refuse to believe there has been a 2017, 2018 and 2019 : for them it is still 2016 and as they say it is, we are wrong. I wouldn't be surprised if 2021 is officially renamed 2017.)