Daily Mail messageboard watch

Chris S · **Joined:** Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:10 pm **Posts:** 998

Winston O'Hoodie wrote:

I posted several messages on the 'reader's comments' news section of the Daily Mail concerning Prescott and the general state of the country, in which I didn't agree with the prevailing views of the other correspondents...yes - you guessed it! That makes about 20 unpublished in the last few months...out of about 20! I think that if you post an 'off-message' comment, you are forever banned. You can just imagine the regulars living in their little 'Blair stinks' bubble'..."Look darling, I posted a message about how Blair is trying to turn the country in the Somalia of Europe and how the third-world NHS is in terminal metdown...and look...EVERY OTHER POSTER AGREES WITH ME. How on Earth did Labour win the election....it must have been a giant fraud!"

I've always known this was true, but there can be no better evidence that this quote from the 'Prescott At Work' story.

Quote:

More to the point, it just shows how much contempt the voting general public have for New Labour. Read all the previous comments (NO support) there can be no excuse for this behaviour. To paraphrase a previous leader of this once fine country, "It's time for you to go, for all the good you have done, and in God's name, go now!"

- David Wallace, Birmingham, UK

Point proven, I think.

Timmy O'Toole · **Joined:** Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:46 pm **Posts:** 601

The Daily Mail: Free Speech For All (Who Agree With Us)

:////

Banning paracetamol though

Moggie · **Posted:** Sun May 28, 2006 6:09 pm

Adrian wrote:

Who voted for Labour?:

Quote:

I didn't. Apparently it was a very small minority who voted them in. Something like 22% of the voters. And the Tories got more actual votes but because of the way these things work, NuLabour got in. And the rest is history. Horrible, isn't it?

Posted by juneflowers

So where on Earth did the other 78% of the votes so then? Perhaps they were stolen by immigrants and asylum seekers.

I've got a feeling she's confusing two elections. It's true that, in the 2005 general election, Labour got only 22% of the total electorate, but it's not true that the Tories got more votes: they got only 20%. It was the "I can't be arsed to vote" party who got the most, because turnout was only 61%. The other election she may be thinking of is the US presidential election in 2000, when Bush won with less votes than Gore. Then again, maybe she's just making it up.

There have been Labour governments which got less votes than the Tories, in 1974 and 1923. And the Tories won in 1951 with less votes than Labour. What's the Daily Mail's position on proportional representation?

Timmy O'Toole · **Joined:** Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:46 pm **Posts:** 601

Probably dismissed it as a socialist plot to undermine our proud tradition of FPTP. Until they realise that the tories would have a better chance of winning under it.

Adrian · **Joined:** Fri May 26, 2006 7:42 pm **Posts:** 1014

hel wrote:

Quote:

People can hang themselves with rope or crash their cars to kill themselves, does that mean we should ban rope and cars?

Well obviously

hel · **Posted:** Mon May 29, 2006 12:55 pm

Adrian wrote:

hel wrote:

People can hang themselves with rope or crash their cars to kill themselves, does that mean we should ban rope and cars?

Well obviously

not to mention drowning themselves in the sea... BAN WATER NOW!

mattomac · **Posted:** Mon May 29, 2006 4:55 pm

Moggie wrote:

Adrian wrote:

Who voted for Labour?:

Quote:

I didn't. Apparently it was a very small minority who voted them in. Something like 22% of the voters. And the Tories got more actual votes but because of the way these things work, NuLabour got in. And the rest is history. Horrible, isn't it?

Posted by juneflowers

So where on Earth did the other 78% of the votes so then? Perhaps they were stolen by immigrants and asylum seekers.

I've got a feeling she's confusing two elections. It's true that, in the 2005 general election, Labour got only 22% of the total electorate, but it's not true that the Tories got more votes: they got only 20%. It was the "I can't be arsed to vote" party who got the most, because turnout was only 61%. The other election she may be thinking of is the US presidential election in 2000, when Bush won with less votes than Gore. Then again, maybe she's just making it up.

There have been Labour governments which got less votes than the Tories, in 1974 and 1923. And the Tories won in 1951 with less votes than Labour. What's the Daily Mail's position on proportional representation?

What a fucked up world she lives in

tuber · **Posted:** Mon May 29, 2006 9:12 pm

I like paracetamol when my stomach is feeling um, delicate in the morning

tuber · **Posted:** Mon May 29, 2006 11:50 pm

Jollity wrote:

wbodie - is he the same person who thinks Richard Littlejohn is a hero? I feel sure (s)he's been mentioned before.

Search function

actually with this one it's worth wading in to the dirt yourself, he has a lot of good posts

Craig · **Posted:** Tue May 30, 2006 1:24 am

tuber wrote:

he has a lot of good posts

You should've put "good" in quotation marks

Chris S · **Joined:** Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:10 pm **Posts:** 998

All right, which one of you was responsible for this?

From 'Downloads of Net porn hit record high'

Quote:

Ban this sick filth now!

- Angry, Kent, England

Esqui · **Posted:** Tue May 30, 2006 10:15 pm

Angry Kent? Name sounds familiar!

Timmy O'Toole · **Joined:** Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:46 pm **Posts:** 601

Heh, yeah they're having enough trouble stopping people putting really despicable stuff on the web, so I don't think they'll be bothering to try to remove pictures of naked ladies too. :roll:

Winston O'Hoodie · **Posted:** Wed May 31, 2006 2:50 pm

If Mr Angry, Kent doesn't like net porn, then perhaps he shouldn't look at it. I have looked at it on occasion (just out of curiosity, Honestly) and didn't instantly turn into a serial rapist. Much more dangerous are sites like 'hitlerisgod.com' and the rest of the anti-black, anti-gay, anti-jewish etc hate sites. Get angry about those.

tuber · **Posted:** Wed May 31, 2006 3:50 pm

anyone remember the poster geoff the chef?

his bewildering anger was alway amusing to me, for example he scored a hat-trick plus one recently:

geoff the chef on 02/05/06 at 10:02 AM wrote:

Re: words and phrases that irritate

I hate it when people say Gay the word is homosexual, another word hijacked by the political correct lobby call a spade a spade, I hate it when people say chairperson, the word is chairman, I hate when people say staffed when the word is manned, I hate it when people say person hole when the word is manhole shall I go on.

no please don't

Daily Mail messageboard watch

Who is online