Question Time Commentary

Remember whn HIGNFY used a tub of lard because the politician (name escapes me) kept on pulling out at the lat minute?

They should do something like that.

Perhaps a small hippo, if they can get it to stay in the seat.
Roy Hatsley was the tub of lard. My tinfoil hat on, the BBC watch this site. They are whipping us into a frenzy gentlemen. We want Diane, We want Diane!
Might do a fake twitter account tomorrow, Are you teasing us Diane like you teased JC in Germany?
 
On this week, peter Hitchens eating Andrew Neal, priti Patel and the other weasel Alan Johnson Alive
He doesn’t give any ground and isn’t intimidated by Brillo, unlike many others. Pritti, as usual, completely out of her depth.
 
He doesn’t give any ground and isn’t intimidated by Brillo, unlike many others. Pritti, as usual, completely out of her depth.
I'm finding that these political programmes just don't give enough time for a serious exchange of views backed up with facts. I know everyone has a short attention span but these are just sprint ambushes, throw sound bites in and some bluffing pseudo facts. HaLf the ******* obviously have a vague idea what is going to be addressed and superficially revise the key points aligned with their party position but utterly fail when they come across someone who has deeply researched all the relevant material and had an understanding of it and are confident in their analysis of it

For the record I have polar opposite view to almost everything Hitchens believes in but his idea that facts are absolute shouldn't be some sort of exotic thinking that can be shrugged off
 
Last edited:
He doesn’t give any ground and isn’t intimidated by Brillo, unlike many others. Pritti, as usual, completely out of her depth.

The problem with people like Hitchens (and Paul Johnson) is that they start off on the left and veer sharply to the right. Hitchens used to be a member of the forerunner to the Socialist Workers Party. Who'd trust the judgement of people like this?
 
I have retreated into a bottle of Chardonnay and an eat static live at mega dog you tube.A MUCH MORE SATISFACTORY WAY TO SPEND A NIGHT
 
Remember whn HIGNFY used a tub of lard because the politician (name escapes me) kept on pulling out at the lat minute?

They should do something like that.

Perhaps a small hippo, if they can get it to stay in the seat.
Roy Hattersley I think.

You could use a tub of lard but with it being white you would leave yourself open to the classic accusation. Might I suggest a plank would be accurate and suitably neutral.
 
The problem with people like Hitchens (and Paul Johnson) is that they start off on the left and veer sharply to the right. Hitchens used to be a member of the forerunner to the Socialist Workers Party. Who'd trust the judgement of people like this?
He doesn’t deny his past, unlike some.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Glad you said 'vintage'. If you'd said 'antique' I'd have replied in a harsh font (hot metal, naturally).
That reminds me, AY was absent from the jollity tonight.
I have stopped watching QT as it is a repetitive and boring exercise now. Every programme is the same subject/questions which the politicians on the panel go out of their way not to answer.

Dimbleby needs to go and the production team need to sharpen up. The show used to attract the top minds of the political parties along with non politician guests with some intelligence and the ability to talk about a variety of subjects.

Now we get politicians scared out of their wits and no intention of dealing with the subject matter other than to trot out the current party line - none of them have an original thought in their bodies. The nkn-pol guests are often witless "celebrities" there just to give the panel a bit of "glamour"

The show, IMHO, has lost all of its edge, Dimbers is weak and terrified if a panelist tries to be controversial and is easily intimidated by some panelists. The show needs a presenter who does not appear to be in awe of the panel and willing to allow frank discussion, both by panel and audience.

In the meantime I don't bother with it, only watching occasionally when really bored.
 
Last edited:

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The problem with people like Hitchens (and Paul Johnson) is that they start off on the left and veer sharply to the right. Hitchens used to be a member of the forerunner to the Socialist Workers Party. Who'd trust the judgement of people like this?
If you’re not a socialist before you’re twenty-five, you have no heart;
if you are a socialist after twenty-five, you have no head
. Unknown/disputed first author
 
I have stopped watching QT as it is a repetitive and boring exercise now. Every programme is the same subject/questions which the politicians on the panel go out of their way not to answer.

Dimbleby needs to go and the production team need to sharpen up. The show used to attract the top minds of the political parties along with non politician guests with some intelligence and the ability to talk about a variety of subjects.

Now we get politicians scared out of their wits and no intention of dealing with the subject matter other than to trot out the current party line - none of them have an original thought in their bodies. The nkn-pol guests are often witless "celebrities" there just to give the panel a bit of "glamour"

The show, IMHO, has lost all of its edge, Dimbers is weak and terrified if a panelist tries to be controversial and is easily intimidated by some panelists. The show needs a presenter who does not appear to be in awe of the panel and willing to allow frank discussion, both by panel and audience.

In the meantime I don't bother with it, only watching occasionally when really bored.
Oh I thought you were just out with your pals from Craiglang.
 
If you’re not a socialist before you’re twenty-five, you have no heart;
if you are a socialist after twenty-five, you have no head
. Unknown/disputed first author
It's not the fact that they've changed over time (most of us do that) it's the fact that they've lurched from one extreme to the other.
 
Yes, Emily: that's where it's gone wrong to some extent - cops calling the public "mate" instead of "sir/ma'am" and allowing the public to get away with starting to be gobby and over-familiar instead of stomping on cheek and insisting on being addressed as sir/ma'am/miss or constable/sergeant. As happened when I was a lad.

To borrow from RSMs of Sandhurst since time immemorial: "Now then, young man. I need to have a word with you. During this interaction I will do you the courtesy of addressing you as 'sir.' You will extend me the same courtesy. However, you will mean it."
Legal visits at the jail. "My name is Susan & this is Tracey, we're from so & so police (followed by handshakes all round), We'd like to talk to you about blah, blah, blah.
WTF! I'm DC & this is DC, we're here to question you.
 
It was mentioned that those of a certain colour are eight times more likely to be stopped & searched.
Shame no one mentioned that they are four times more likely to be in prison than would be expected given their proportion of the total population.
That was the result of a review by David Lammy, who for once has actually stated a fact.
The reason is probably that they are four times more likely to commit a crime that results in a custodial sentence, a fact that he (& most of those in a position of power) totally avoid.
The colour of the perpetrators involved in the recent spate of knife & gun crimes in London will, without a doubt, reflect that.
Stop & search has nothing to do with discrimination.
 
The problem with people like Hitchens (and Paul Johnson) is that they start off on the left and veer sharply to the right. Hitchens used to be a member of the forerunner to the Socialist Workers Party. Who'd trust the judgement of people like this?
I'm a firm believer that you should be allowed to change your mind/alter your position. Politicians being locked into a position to the death is what is ******* the UK up.

Life isn't binary
 
It was mentioned that those of a certain colour are eight times more likely to be stopped & searched.
Shame no one mentioned that they are four times more likely to be in prison than would be expected given their proportion of the total population.
That was the result of a review by David Lammy, who for once has actually stated a fact.
The reason is probably that they are four times more likely to commit a crime that results in a custodial sentence, a fact that he (& most of those in a position of power) totally avoid.
The colour of the perpetrators involved in the recent spate of knife & gun crimes in London will, without a doubt, reflect that.
Stop & search has nothing to do with discrimination.
Change colour for socio economic group and you may garner some support. Otherwise you are just saying black people are criminals and there is a causal link between melanin and criminality. Which is one of the basic tenants of racism and I'm sure you aren't racist
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top