pap

Hehe. I was commenting all through the match that Liverpool would have done better with Lambert. The missus eventually got the hump and started all the "one man team" bolox. But, as in so many of the contests we have, particularly on football, I am right and she is wrong. Lambert's scoring for fun, and I back him to do just the same in the Prem.

Gotta feel sorry for the American left. Can't call themselves Liberal, and given that they live in a country which asks each and every visitor if he or she has ever been a member of the Communist party, it'd seem that they have very labels left to claim

I suspect that is an import from American shores, where the term "liberal" is mis-applied almost continuously.

Can you please stop messing with my lightly held beliefs, saintbletch? I was working under the impression that as soon as you got £2,000,001 in your bank account, the authorities send you a nice big moustache to twirl. Next you'll be telling me that we have a number of Hollywood actors speaking from the heart on issues they should have no business caring about.

I think the discussion would go like this:- Sergei "How did Katie Price get so successful?" Business leader or prominent politician "Large teats, numerous trips to the plastic surgeon and countless disastrous relationships played out in public".

You'll have to forgive me, sir. I have grown fat on facepalms and the classic "no further questions your honour" trouser-isms that I have come to know and love. Consider me suitably admonished for ostensibly being a patronising git

Maybe in the mists of time (before Nick Robinson was Political Editor )

Nice one. Sergei - I'd like to hear your views on Bill Gates. He is a multi-billionaire and spends quite a bit of his dough on the needy.

Yes, Sergei. The intellectual set is all about knowing who Katie Price is boinking this week

Excellent question, trousers. You are making me work for my money today. You could argue that letting the child die in caveman times would have been the best thing to do for the group. But then, they lacked much of the stability and infrastructure that we have today. I'd also argue that they'd have a much different idea of what the human experience was all about. Incidentally, we still practice a form of this today. Expectant mothers undergo quite a few tests ( Downs, Spina Bifida, etc ) and can elect not to go to term if major issues are found. Not quite as brutal as the caveman alternative, but conceptually similar. Today, I think we recognise that many of the difficulties that a disabled person would present for the itinerant tribe would not affect our chances of survival in the same way. Further, history is littered with people wracked by physical disability that have shown that people can still add a lot to our understanding or appreciation of the world even if they lack the full range of human sensation or physical capability. Professor Stephen Hawkins would be a recent, obvious example. Stevie Wonder would be another.

Probably got a great deal to do with the fact that a five-year old can read it. Curse the Times and Observer's massive bias toward polysyllabic words!

Definitely agreed on Lord D's assessment of the situation. There I was, ready to insert the inflammatory notion that those on the right may be lacking in analytical facilities, only for Lord D to go and mess it all up with a balanced and measured post. Bit less of that sort of thing, Lord D. I have a cartoonish stereotype to maintain. Can't have you rocking the boat with a post like that However, Lord D is right to point out how we got here. I would add to that by saying that in the main, left and right don't exist anymore. Ties in very nicely to the electioneering politicians who play their tunes to a wider audience. I don't think that the British public understands the distinction between right or left, certainly not with the clarity that such terms carried before. I'm not sure that they care, either.

Just as it is littered with examples of people working together in common cause. The question is, which is the more natural state? I suspect the answer is not to look at the edicts of King and Pope, but simply, a bit of introspection multiplied up. I'm not convinced that people wake up in the morning thinking "who do I f*ck over today?".

Interesting question. Short answer is that we would never have come this far as a species without strong co-operation. If our natural instinct was to kill any competition, its doubtful we'd be having this debate. The market economy as we know it is a mere pup compared to the systems that were in place before.

Definitely. Apparently, trade between the two nations was estimated at £1.5 billion p.a. before Gaddafi was ousted and shot. In 2008/09 (Lockerbie bomber released in 2009) trade increased by 50% year on year. A case of abandoning morality for a better balance sheet.

This is an interesting comment in that it highlights the assumptions people make. I doubt you'd get too many left-wingers supporting the release of the Lockerbie bomber. In fact, you could argue that the release only happened to further trade relationships between Britain and Libya, with the Scots made convenient fall-guys.

And we have a batter for the right! Pander 1. To act as a go-between or liaison in sexual intrigues; function as a procurer. 2. To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploit their weaknesses: Is that really the left-wing's attitude to the poor? Help yourself and get a dictionary!

It is heartening to see you take such an interest in human affairs, Bearsy. It would seem like the West Wing's definition holds up on this very forum:- Left-wing : "Help them" Right-wing : "F*ck 'em" Or is that too simple a definition?

Strong views, but they chime a lot with some of my thoughts. I like the 1984 comparison, especially as we now seem to be in an unending war on both military and economic fronts. Who'd have thought Blair would have been so keen to ingratiate himself with the neo-conservatives? Supposedly left-wing leader cosying up to the most right wing US government in living memory.

As the title says really. This thread has been inspired by the designation of people into the left and right of the political spectrum. I'm having trouble working out what relevance the terms "left-wing" and "right-wing" have in Britain in the year 2012. The ends of this spectrum used to represent something quite different, with the left veering toward socialism/communism while the extreme right was home to capitalist nationalists. Not sure that's applicable now after the victory of the free market over communism. Further, all of our mainstream political parties have gravitated to the centre. I've heard it argued quite successfully that Labour and Conservative are just different strands of neo-Liberalism. All parties treat the market as if its a permanent fixture. That being the case, what do YOU mean when you say left-wing or right-wing?

Pretty much how I'd see it happening, only with the Tory MP acting like Catwoman in the 1960s Batman show, hissing and meowing whilst said beating was being administered.

I don't think it's an immediate possibility. However, if Nige continues the good work with Saints into the Prem then he is going to attract some major attention. And of the big clubs, I think it is Liverpool that'd hold the most interest for him. This cup success will keep Kenny in the Liverpool job well into next season.

Just watched this game with Ms pap. Liverpool's victory was the best thing for Saints. Cardiff looked heartbroken by the end. Better still, the silverware has sent Mad King Kenny's stock soaring. Far less chance of him getting the boot now, so far less chance of them coming in for Nige.

Brilliant! What a grade A nob.

Nice one. Hope you had a good wedge on. Oo-er, etc, etc.