Bladesman Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 I fail to see how a British Prime Minister (of any party colours) meeting a tireless pro-democracy campaigner could possibly be painted as something wrong and negative, but somehow the vitriol of the left on here manage to do it. I guess their politics of hate override any rational thought. -- Exactly and like a poster mentioned earlier had he not met with Aung San Suu Kyi he would of still been called pathetic. So should he of not met Aung San Suu Kyi then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 It would be nice if he stayed at home and dealt with the problems here rather than swanning off looking for photo opportunities, trying to look like a world statesman. He isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polo mint Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Give the poor twit a break. He was born with that face and he cannot help the way he talks, like he is sucking a boiled egg. He will be ok. He has the Cleggmiester to tuck him in and bring him his copy of "Choirboy Weekly" from the local newsagent. So what if he looks like a dead ringer for a slightly camp Sylvester Stallone? Im sure he is ok deep down beneath all that constant bullcrap he talks. Is he the most convincing Prime Minister weve ever had? Err, nope. But if you want grotesques doesn't Ed Miliband look like a stamped on Nick Park Wallace model who's voice is being done by a man with a couple of olives stuck up his nose, and who talks any old crap that he thinks the unions want to hear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 It would be nice if he stayed at home and dealt with the problems here rather than swanning off looking for photo opportunities, trying to look like a world statesman. He isn't. Ah, a late comer. He's drumming up trade for this country etc etc. All on page 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polo mint Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Ah, a late comer. He's drumming up trade for this country etc etc. All on page 1. You can't drum up trade. That might provide jobs and prevent us sliding back ito recession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 OK, at your invitation... You make it so easy to make you look like an idiot. All you had to do was a little bit of research before opening your big fat stupid gob. United Kingdom general election, 2005 Labour 9,552,436 votes United Kingdom general election, 2010 Conservative 10,703,654 votes Steady on Lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balpin Posted April 15, 2012 Author Share Posted April 15, 2012 Who do you prefer, David Cameron. Ed Milliband. Nick Clegg. Harold Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Cameron was the leader of the party which won the election, therefore we voted for him to be PM! Yeah some people will pin a blue rosette on a donky won't they? The cons didn't win the election anyway, which is why they had to bribe the libs into a coalition government but let's not split hairs eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 The cons didn't win the election anyway, It is a little puzzling that a party can have 1,200,000 more votes than the previous government, yet not win; It makes you wonder if there was some manipulation of the boundaries by the previous government, after all corruption was prevalent under the last government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
websters gue Posted April 15, 2012 Share Posted April 15, 2012 Going back to the thread topic, I've still not read any good reason why our Prime Minister shouldn't meet with leader of the pro-democracy opposition in Burma. Fancy that: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9205016/How-Burma-benefits-David-Camerons-mother-in-law-Viscountess-Astor.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.