The "default" being that the Incompetent Incumbent had to go. And the predecessor to the Incompetent Incumbent is a crook and liar so untrustworthy that even that bag of snakes of the Parliamentary Tory party couldn't stand the idea of him coming back. And that Sunak was the only one left who didn't seem like a raving lunatic?
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
The Ghost of '99 wrote:The "default" being that the Incompetent Incumbent had to go. And the predecessor to the Incompetent Incumbent is a crook and liar so untrustworthy that even that bag of snakes of the Parliamentary Tory party couldn't stand the idea of him coming back. And that Sunak was the only one left who didn't seem like a raving lunatic?
Is there a hint of some grudging admiration in there somewhere To be fair the incompetent incumbent as you affectionately call her he did beat your hero fair and square in the election to be the Tory leader With regards to the predecessor of the incompetent incumbent it would seem telling a few porkies came naturally to him, but to actually call him a crook seems a bit excessive unless you have evidence to back up your claim, just an observation but maybe your allowing your obvious bitterness towards the government cloud your judgement somewhat
chissitt wrote:Is there a hint of some grudging admiration in there somewhere To be fair the incompetent incumbent as you affectionately call her he did beat your hero fair and square in the election to be the Tory leader With regards to the predecessor of the incompetent incumbent it would seem telling a few porkies came naturally to him, but to actually call him a crook seems a bit excessive unless you have evidence to back up your claim, just an observation but maybe your allowing your obvious bitterness towards the government cloud your judgement somewhat
This big question is, whether Sunak will be the Tory leader and PM come the next General Election. Re-appointing Braverman as Home Secretary seems to be an error of judgement.
A Home Secretary, sending official government stuff on here personal email sems to be a pretty poor error for someone in her position, regardless of whether it was "top secret" or "regular business".
The utter lunacy from the Truss regime beggars belief. We had the bank of England trying to cool inflation and "crazy Liz" doing the absolute opposite and although Hunt has settled things down a little, what on earth was she doing ?
Joined: Jun 01 2007 Posts: 12647 Location: Leicestershire.
chissitt wrote:Is there a hint of some grudging admiration in there somewhere To be fair the incompetent incumbent as you affectionately call her he did beat your hero fair and square in the election to be the Tory leader With regards to the predecessor of the incompetent incumbent it would seem telling a few porkies came naturally to him, but to actually call him a crook seems a bit excessive unless you have evidence to back up your claim, just an observation but maybe your allowing your obvious bitterness towards the government cloud your judgement somewhat
Crook, noun, a person who is dishonest or a criminal.
Dishonest, I think we can take as a given. Criminal - his role in the plot to assault Stuart Collier or in criminal damage as a member of the Bullingdon Club… do I need a question mark for that?
I’d take Truss back a thousand times before him. She was just daft; harmfully so, admittedly. What he did to the national psyche, with the support of millions of culpable wallies, was an atrocity against decency.
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Mild Rover wrote:Crook, noun, a person who is dishonest or a criminal.
Dishonest, I think we can take as a given. Criminal - his role in the plot to assault Stuart Collier or in criminal damage as a member of the Bullingdon Club… do I need a question mark for that?
I’d take Truss back a thousand times before him. She was just daft; harmfully so, admittedly. What he did to the national psyche, with the support of millions of culpable wallies, was an atrocity against decency.
Fully agree with this.
Truss was just laughably incompetent.
Johnson though was - and remains - downright dangerous. With what he's done to this country and with the cult of personality that he fostered he will go down as perhaps the worst and most destructive Prime Minister in history. And I include Neville Chamberlain in that. At least he was doing his best in what he thought was the country's interests.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 69 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum