CB Fry

The phrase "what the fu ck does that mean" suggested to mean you had never encountered the phrase "law abiding citizens" before. Otherwise why are you asking me what "the fu ck" it means? I just helped you understanding by showing it to be a phrase that Republican Presidents have used - Bush and Ronnie know "what the fu ck" it "means". So, are you now saying you DO understand "what the f uck" the phrase "law abiding citizen" means? Jolly good. I'll come back with your continual struggle to work out whether you agree or disagree with one simple statement in a separate post.

I think people understand how contracts work perfectly well, thanks. What people are getting at with regard to Long is why we were so keen buy someone another club had just signed on a long term deal, so much so we had to pay double what they paid six months before. We had to pay that much because his contract was huge, but we didn't have to sign Shane Long at all. If fees didn't matter then no one would ever describe any players as a "bargain" either now would they. But, guess what, they do. All that said, we've signed worse for more or similar amounts. And he's pretty lovable our Shane what with all the running and that.

"The only people I do have a problem with are negroes" #peoplesarmy

Go you. Vote UKIP to keep the Liberals out of Eastleigh. After all, we all remember Jeremy Thorpe and Asquith and David Steele and that.

We are never ever ever going to score.

Secondly, Sarnia, don't quite understand your objection to the phrase "law abiding citizen" as it doesn't take long to find fine chaps like GWB and RR using them: BUSH: Law-abiding citizens ought to be allowed to protect their families. BUSH: I believe law-abiding citizens ought to be able to own a gun. REAGAN: You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. Would you say "what the fu ck does that mean" to two ex-Presidents use of the phrase "law abiding citizens"? Personally I think both of those Presidents would agree with the idea that "restrictions on guns only limit law abiding citizens from protecting themselves" but you "don't think so". Strange.

You don't think restrictions on guns would limit your ability to protect yourself? You do understand what "restrictions on guns" means, right? It means you are restricted from having guns.

Is it? If they get anywhere near 40 MPs then both parties would be more than happy to. Personally I think they walk away from the last five years having done a decent job in the circumstances. They are going to get hammered in the polls but that's mainly because a) they can't pull off their usual trick of making Tory-lite promises in seats like Cheltenham and Labour-lite promises in seats like Brent. b) they can't do the "we're the alternative to the old politics" stuff having been in government for half a decade c) they've lost the idealistic student vote. Despite that, what they've done in government, I think, has been pretty good.

If they do they'll be looking straight down the barrel of a bidding war with QVC and Discovery Home and Leisure.

Possible but likely to be too much of a mish mash between Lab/SNP/Plaid/Lib Dem part coalition, part unofficial support deals. If Labour and Lib Dems get enough between them, then yes. But they won't.

UKIP made gains in the Euro elections in no small part due to gains from working class Labour voters. But primarily they are a right wing party for right leaning anti-EU types. They might nibble into Tory majorities in Tory safe seats but more likely to do Labour a favour in Tory/Labour marginals by splitting the right vote. Personally I think UKIP will get about 4 MPs. Faced with a minority government, Id think the Tories more likely to hook up with Clegg again than give in to UKIP for thimble full of MPs, two of which were Tory MPs about a year ago anyway.

Being that those broadcasters have announced their games, nothing is going to happen for a broadcaster to announce a Saints broadcast game and a move of kick off time. If you didnt know, the BBC don't broadcast PL live games. And I know people round the world can watch any game, as can most of us online, but those broadcasters don't impact match days/times. The TV games have been announced and that's it.

Not really. They haven't been anywhere near the play offs, or at serious risk of relegation all season. Their last twenty games are utterly meaningless win, lose or draw.

What about that three day week, eh?

This is Wes Tender we're talking about.

There's no question that decisions taken by Denis Healey is the hot topic on the doorstep in 2015. Also it's a disgrace they didn't spend a little longer discussing dead union leaders from the 1970s during the TV debate last night. Typical whitewash cover up censorship from pinko commie media lefties.

Pastor strikes again.

Like who?

Would restrictions on guns limit law abiding citizens from protecting themselves?

Not sure it qualifies as comedy, but Inside No. 9 just now was astonishingly good.

Surgeon's closing speech was a Nick Clegg 2010 tribute act.

Nutcase alert.

Leanne Wood for President #MEGALOLZ

The whole thing is a shapeless mess. Just annoying viewing. Clegg doing well and probably the right strategy for him to visibly attack Cameron. Farage and Sturgeon (who I cannot stand) doing okay. Milliband, meh. Cameron uncomfortable.

Saints away at Leicester and Sunderland is appointment to view TV for the neutral fan and no mistake. Sky, you have let the country down.