PC
A class post if ever I saw one!
TVN posted:
I am a 36 year old Mail reader, and proud of it. I have a friend who is a 34 year old mail reader, and very proud of it. My brother is a 26 year old mail reader and proud of it.
Not only that, we are all really nice people. I take the train daily, most of the time I am endorsing in the Daily Mail. Perhaps you should take the train in my area more often.
Now the thing about the 'little people' what exactly is that supposed to mean? Are giants generally observer readers or something? Perhaps you mean that it is insignificant people who read the mail? I am sure Margaret Thatcher reads the mail, the best and most significant PM we have ever had.
Now crawl back under that yellow, crap infested rock, called the Lib Dems which you appear to come from, and never speak about the Daily Mail and its readers like that again.
Not only that, we are all really nice people. I take the train daily, most of the time I am endorsing in the Daily Mail. Perhaps you should take the train in my area more often.
Now the thing about the 'little people' what exactly is that supposed to mean? Are giants generally observer readers or something? Perhaps you mean that it is insignificant people who read the mail? I am sure Margaret Thatcher reads the mail, the best and most significant PM we have ever had.
Now crawl back under that yellow, crap infested rock, called the Lib Dems which you appear to come from, and never speak about the Daily Mail and its readers like that again.
A class post if ever I saw one!
TV
So the cats have got their claws out again. There's a surprise.
Can I please remind you Halloween isn't till a week tomorrow?
Thank you so much. Now if we can get back to the question of BBC bias?
Can I please remind you Halloween isn't till a week tomorrow?
Thank you so much. Now if we can get back to the question of BBC bias?
JA
Classic Daily Mail rant. It's a bit like the Daily Express - all that sh!t about them "standing for good manners" and "standing for truth" when all they're standing for is because they can't afford any seats - they've spent the seating budget on their tireless Diana twaddle.
You've come across as not only a classic Daily Mail reader, but also a classic "old-Conservative". Middle-aged, middle-class, probably wants nothing to do with lower classes and abhors anyone speaking out of turn about their values.
You, sir, or madam, are a nitwit.
I do hope you don't mind me forwarding that to all of the people I know as the best post of the year.
TVN posted:
I am a 36 year old Mail reader, and proud of it. I have a friend who is a 34 year old mail reader, and very proud of it. My brother is a 26 year old mail reader and proud of it.
Not only that, we are all really nice people. I take the train daily, most of the time I am endorsing in the Daily Mail. Perhaps you should take the train in my area more often.
Now the thing about the 'little people' what exactly is that supposed to mean? Are giants generally observer readers or something? Perhaps you mean that it is insignificant people who read the mail? I am sure Margaret Thatcher reads the mail, the best and most significant PM we have ever had.
Now crawl back under that yellow, crap infested rock, called the Lib Dems which you appear to come from, and never speak about the Daily Mail and its readers like that again.
Not only that, we are all really nice people. I take the train daily, most of the time I am endorsing in the Daily Mail. Perhaps you should take the train in my area more often.
Now the thing about the 'little people' what exactly is that supposed to mean? Are giants generally observer readers or something? Perhaps you mean that it is insignificant people who read the mail? I am sure Margaret Thatcher reads the mail, the best and most significant PM we have ever had.
Now crawl back under that yellow, crap infested rock, called the Lib Dems which you appear to come from, and never speak about the Daily Mail and its readers like that again.
Classic Daily Mail rant. It's a bit like the Daily Express - all that sh!t about them "standing for good manners" and "standing for truth" when all they're standing for is because they can't afford any seats - they've spent the seating budget on their tireless Diana twaddle.
You've come across as not only a classic Daily Mail reader, but also a classic "old-Conservative". Middle-aged, middle-class, probably wants nothing to do with lower classes and abhors anyone speaking out of turn about their values.
You, sir, or madam, are a nitwit.
I do hope you don't mind me forwarding that to all of the people I know as the best post of the year.
:-(
A former member
I'm actually starting to wonder if that post isn't taking us all for a ride -- All seems a bit too ranty to me. Are there really people like that?
MA
I must point out that your original post was not about BBC bias.
It was about a report in the Mail of a "secret meeting" - so secret it was streamed live on the web. Here's the BBC response.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/index.html
tvarksouthwest posted:
So the cats have got their claws out again. There's a surprise.
Can I please remind you Halloween isn't till a week tomorrow?
Thank you so much. Now if we can get back to the question of BBC bias?
Can I please remind you Halloween isn't till a week tomorrow?
Thank you so much. Now if we can get back to the question of BBC bias?
I must point out that your original post was not about BBC bias.
It was about a report in the Mail of a "secret meeting" - so secret it was streamed live on the web. Here's the BBC response.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/index.html
DV
And modest, too.
That is a matter of opinion.
TVN posted:
Not only that, we are all really nice people.
And modest, too.
TVN posted:
I am sure Margaret Thatcher reads the mail, the best and most significant PM we have ever had.
That is a matter of opinion.
AN
Is this the same Daily Mail that called Oswald Mosley's fascist plans for Britain a "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine"?
In my mind, the Daily Mail is part of the vast organ of mainstream media that pimped war against Iraq without putting the Government to proper scrutiny. Just like the Beeb, in fact.
It is a superlative-strewn, minority-targeting piece of ****. Rather like this Government of liars and exaggerators.
In my mind, the Daily Mail is part of the vast organ of mainstream media that pimped war against Iraq without putting the Government to proper scrutiny. Just like the Beeb, in fact.
It is a superlative-strewn, minority-targeting piece of ****. Rather like this Government of liars and exaggerators.
TV
I have to admit, one of my attractions to the Mail is my disillusionment with this so-called Labour government and its dispicable attempts to police our thoughts and interfere ever more in our lives. When the Tories return to power, my choice of paper may well change...
All New Johnnyboy posted:
In my mind, the Daily Mail is part of the vast organ of mainstream media that pimped war against Iraq without putting the Government to proper scrutiny. Just like the Beeb, in fact.
It is a superlative-strewn, minority-targeting piece of ****. Rather like this Government of liars and exaggerators.
It is a superlative-strewn, minority-targeting piece of ****. Rather like this Government of liars and exaggerators.
I have to admit, one of my attractions to the Mail is my disillusionment with this so-called Labour government and its dispicable attempts to police our thoughts and interfere ever more in our lives. When the Tories return to power, my choice of paper may well change...
SE
You may be waiting a long time then Simon
To be perfectly honest, I do not believe for a second that a Britain led by David Camerons Conservatives would be a lot different from what we have now. They can lie, backpeddle, spin, and feather their own nests like the best of them, and this would be no different for any of the other parties.
But alas this is not a discussion for here. Perhaps you would like to join us over at Metropol to continue?
tvarksouthwest posted:
When the Tories return to power, my choice of paper may well change...
You may be waiting a long time then Simon
To be perfectly honest, I do not believe for a second that a Britain led by David Camerons Conservatives would be a lot different from what we have now. They can lie, backpeddle, spin, and feather their own nests like the best of them, and this would be no different for any of the other parties.
But alas this is not a discussion for here. Perhaps you would like to join us over at Metropol to continue?
AN
Well, we definitely share a dislike of NuLab0ur, Simon.
As alarsne53 so eloquently put it, David Cameron is the new Tony Bliar. No rolling back of the ID-card state, no rolling back of the Christofascist war agenda, no rolling back of the huge tax hikes. For example, Brown complains that people don't save for their pension, but he introduced a new stealth tax in 97/98 which taxed personal pensions. The result? £100bn removed from people's pensions in nearly 10 years. Liars, hypocrites and opportunists - what scumbags.
The BBC is biased, but I don't think the average Daily Mail reader is intelligent enough to understand how they are biased towards the powers-that-be, not the people wanting to change it.
tvarksouthwest posted:
I have to admit, one of my attractions to the Mail is my disillusionment with this so-called Labour government and its dispicable attempts to police our thoughts and interfere ever more in our lives. When the Tories return to power, my choice of paper may well change...
Well, we definitely share a dislike of NuLab0ur, Simon.
As alarsne53 so eloquently put it, David Cameron is the new Tony Bliar. No rolling back of the ID-card state, no rolling back of the Christofascist war agenda, no rolling back of the huge tax hikes. For example, Brown complains that people don't save for their pension, but he introduced a new stealth tax in 97/98 which taxed personal pensions. The result? £100bn removed from people's pensions in nearly 10 years. Liars, hypocrites and opportunists - what scumbags.
The BBC is biased, but I don't think the average Daily Mail reader is intelligent enough to understand how they are biased towards the powers-that-be, not the people wanting to change it.