Discussion of article from the Mail's columnists and RightMinds contributors
:sunglasses: 60 % :grinning: 40 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
By Captain Klutz
Membership Days Membership Days
#48649
I can't believe he doesn't already have his own thread in here, he's a purveyor of fuckwittery to rival the great Littlejohn himself.

His latest offering is a snipe at the Lib Dems, which is as patronising as it is tedious and unfunny. Also contains a typical piece of Mail-columnist compassion:
We can probably discount these as populist dreams but I was struck by a passage in which Mr Cable talked of the new 'mood of austerity' in the land, 'a reaction against greed, excess, waste and self-indulgent behaviour, a craving for sobriety and discipline'.

Sobriety? From the party that gave us Charlie Kennedy? I like it!
Ha ha ha, because Charles Kennedy is an alcoholic. God, you're funny, Quentin.

He must feel a bit put out at having a much smaller group of cheerleaders than LJ. Only 4 comments so far and none of them as rapturous as the sort of drivel you get in LJ's column. He does get this one though.
I must read Letts more often. Astounding man, simply astounding...

- EelDaiMun, Merthyr Tydfil, Wales, 16/9/2008 11:48
Piss-take, maybe?

Incidentally, why do DM readers never just feel that one of their columnists writes good stuff from time to time? Why is it always 'You are a genius and always tell it like it is, I wish you were PM, come take me roughly up the arse and have my babies'. The levels of hero worship are a bit disturbing. You can see why they like the Nazis.
 
By DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells
Membership Days Membership Days
#48687
Captain Klutz wrote:His article about how the Left are all really horrid people who are filled with hatred towards misunderstood right-wingers like Margaret Thatcher and Adolf Hitler was one of the funniest things I've ever seen.

Well okay, he didn't really mention Adolf Hitler.
Rothermere was a peer for 20 or so years before he actually went to the house of lords, where he said pretty much the same thing about hitler - lefty rabble rousers were giving him a bad name.

I've got the copy of time magazine where they reported on it somewhere.
 
By AOB
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#48691
Letts does the theatre reviews sometimes, as well as the occasional opera. Wouldn't surprise me if he does wine reviews at some point and I bet he's in a bridge club. Seen him once or twice on the telly,he's just a pipsqueak. The type you'd just throw eggs at whereas with Littlejohn it would be darts.
 
By Daley Mayle
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#48764
When the Daily Mail was pushing the MMR jab as a 'possible' cause of autism (note the quote marks around possible) Quentin Letts wrote an account of his son's autism and why it shouldn't happen to the hard working middle class and asked why Blair didn't say whether his son had had the jab. The piece ran alongside another that was attempting to suggest there WAS a link (might have been that one-woman pressure group, JABS).

The only thing was that his son's autism had nothing to do with the jab, it having been diagnosed before having the MMR jab.

I know journalists have to sell their soul to The Dark Lord Dacre but it was the most disgusting bit of writing I've seen in The Mail. I only hope that he wakes up at 3am in the morning in a cold sweat thinking that he dreamt he wrote such a vile pile of crap then realisations dawns that he did indeed use his son's condition to push the Mail's editorial stance.

The man's a prick.
By Captain Klutz
Membership Days Membership Days
#49278
Today he sounds like he's writing for Punch, circa 1870
We were told that David Miliband would speak for just seven minutes. Oh, if only.

The fool, the egomaniacal fool, he dribbled on for nearly 22 minutes, posing, preening, pausing like some teenage Hamlet.

He thought he was playing grown-up but all he did was drain the day of drama.

Mr Miliband – the man-child, some would have us swallow, who will be our next Prime Minister – managed to strike a tone both patronising and adolescent.
and on and on. Jesus.
By Paul
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#50536
From Princess Di to the man who invented mini-roundabouts ...fifty people who have wrecked Britain

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... itain.html

5 Diana The 'People's Princess' was a liability, a souffle of false ideas, a supermodel with all that that entails. She was the glamorous tool of cleverer men, a plaything for the powerful, a delusion worshipped only by the impressionable.
The Princess may have been a loving mother. She may also have been photogenic and able to convey an easy charm. But the sorry truth is that this adored concept, this packaged, airbrushed Diana, weakened our society. She made us more neurotic.
After Diana, it became so easy to emote it was hard to tell if people meant their tears or if they were simply trying them on. Diana robbed us of the stoicism and understatement which had served Britain well.
Thanks largely to Diana we have become a country in which the words 'crisis' and 'disaster' are devalued from overuse, a country of emotional incontinence where adults will weep if they fail to win a talent competition yet where no one bothers to welcome home soldiers from a war zone.
Diana was a danger to the stability of our kingdom. She mixed in circles that were disreputable and, in some cases, neurotically anti-British. Her death was shocking, horrible and a waste of beauty.
But Diana was a naive menace, an odd mixture of simpering shyness and galloping egomania. God rest her soul, she was a mirage, a false harbinger of egalitarianism, and we were foolish ever to think otherwise.

17 Margaret Thatcher Many of Margaret Thatcher's political decisions improved our country. She revived the acumen of our business tycoons. She prevented the Falkland Islands falling into the hands of a murderous junta and reminded us it was worth being British.
She took a painful, but wise, decision to weaken the Unionists' grip on Northern Ireland. She allowed taxpayers to keep more of their earnings and enabled council tenants to buy their homes.
But it was in the pursuit of the trade unions - specifically, Arthur Scargill's National Union of Mineworkers - that Mrs Thatcher did lasting damage to our country.
The miners were industrial has-beens led by a politically suicidal maniac who could not be allowed to succeed. True.
Yet there was something hungry in the way she persecuted the war. Her radicalism had an ugly, vengeful side. Think how much more skilful her friend Ronald Reagan or the media-savvy Tony Blair would have been handling such a strike.
The miners themselves should not have been a target for her ire. They were a remarkable body of men who did unspeakably tough jobs with great stoicism and humour. They supported their families and had a strong sense of community and patriotism. They had the sort of values which Mrs Thatcher herself could and should have recognised.
She failed to project any such understanding. She underestimated and undercherished her opponents. The subsequent closure of nearly all of Britain's coal mines makes it hard to deny that the Government intended, all along, to wreck the country's coal industry.
Scargill lost, but not before he had convinced a large part of the North of the United Kingdom that he was the victim of a southern Tory Government plot.

The North-South electoral divide slammed into place like a prison door.
To see how emotive a subject the miners' strike remains, you have only to visit the musical Billy Elliot in London's West End: artful propaganda feeding on perceived victimhood.
I'm sorry to say that Mrs Thatcher created that sense of pique - and unless Cameron's Tories get down and grovel, it will last for many more years.


Has he gone mad?
 
By jonnyhead
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#50540
Tim Westwood? Fucking hell. I mean, yeah the guy is pretty absurd, but he's hardly fucking wrecked Britain by committing himself to promoting hip-hop for 20-odd years. I'm so bored of people taking a shot at Westwood these days, I say mad props to him for sticking with what he's doing in the face of pretty much universal criticism. There's no denying he genuinely loves his hip-hop.

It seems he was really struggling to find things to be angry about. Greg Dyke for moving the nine o'clock news? John McEnroe for shouting at a referee?

Letts has such a tediously moralistic worldview. For example, I agree with him about the 'fcuk' campaign, not because it was shocking but because it for many years managed to sell plain black t-shirts with completely uninspired slogans for ridiculous prices to twats who thought it was clever. Letts has to go too far though:
Is bad language not often a precursor of other forms of anti-social and violent behaviour? If we do not protest about bad language, what hope have we of stopping thuggery and vandalism?
What?

His bit about Ted Heath seems nasty too, he includes him for the crime of sacking Enoch Powell, which, he says "made it almost impossible for British politicians to criticise immigration for the next 40 years", which ultimately meant that "By 2005 we had become a country in which the separation of cultures had fed an ethnic grievance culture which bred British Islamic terrorists". Ethnic grievance culture, indeed.
Kreuzberger liked this
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 57
By-Elections

The right-hand side fluttering like that suggests […]

The sad faces of wronged Mail readers

Well, he's deleted it now. Which is what I would d[…]

Boris Johnson

They're Tories. If it means the survival of their […]

Toby Young

Toby was on GMB this morning defending Boris, my s[…]