bungle

Turned out to be a decent road. Probably got in the car in Fenny Stratford at half 9, and was back home around half 11. Happy with that. Would highly recommend the A420 as a road.

Agreed, players came over as normal. But then as soon as they noticed the morons trying to charge the pitch, most of the about turned and walked off. Thomas tried to encourage the morons back into the stand, and Holmes hung around for ages for no reason. Don't understand why the morons felt it necessary to go on the pitch, and that little kid needs to be told once and for all that if he charges on again he will be banned from football for a season.

I'll grate you in a minute.

A tough life.

Do you understand the meanings of the words "believe", "subjective" and "objective". I ask, because if you do then your opening statement makes absolutely no sense at all.

An excellent commentator, really made the games entertaining AND knew what he was talking about. RIP.

I do disagree, but as I have stated I do believe it is a difficult decision and a difficult situation to be in. I have confidence in my moral standpoint, and believe I am right, but that is not to say that I must be right. In response to a post above, there is a failing within our criminal justice system re: re-offending rates, but that is a separate debate.

An interesting point raised by Nick Clegg at PMQs. RBS, a British taxpayer owned bank, is lending Kraft the money to takeover Cadburys, which could put British jobs at risk. Not sure how I feel about the government politicising the banks, mind.

I believe that morals are subjective, rather than objective, and I would believe he was morally wrong in what he did.

Er, no. He just doesn't chase them down the road when they have already fled. No-one is saying they did anything wrong while they were still in the house, but it is what happened AFTER they had run away which is the issue here.

Indeed, but you can make much more rational judgments in the cold light of day, hence the rule of law should apply, and people shouldn't take justice into their own hands.

Indeed, had he injured him this seriously in self-defense the issue would be different. However, at the point the intruder had fled and was posing no danger. People can't just take justice into their own hands. It is very difficult, obviously heat of the moment and all that.

You probably wear skinny jeans, you thin person. You look the fool. All power to the moo-moo.

This is the guy who, having got rid of the intruder, and untied his family, then chased up the road and using a cricket bat caused permanent damage when he was no longer in any danger. Vigilante justice. Not as cut and dried as you think.

FYI: Big company has lots of money. And is making lots of money. Possible government decision will impact on their profits A: They say they will give donation to government party, if they drop policy B: They give huge donation to opposing party to campaign against legislation using half-truths and scaremongering. A: Policy gets dropped/watered down. B: Vicious scaremongering campaign ensues (in your case, you are easily fooled by blaming immigrants for everything. B: Either opposing party is able to stop the policy by scaring governing party into thinking of future electoral doom or wins an election in time to stop policy for no other reason than they got lots of money. This is the guide to how US politics works.

+1. Although I tried in more detail. I thought this might provoke interesting debate, but as I guessed it was worthless.

Hahahaha. You actually don't have a clue.

Slightly off topic, but some would say it's a much better system, as it stops one person/party running roughshod over everything. In our mighty electoral system, about 22% of the population voted Labour (and about 40% of those who voted), yet they can do whatever they want. There are various arguments on either side of the whole thing. My big problem with US politics is how simple the discussion is (it is worse than here!!), and how much big business and money is involved, and how there are only 2 choices. We should be looking towards European systems for reform ideas, IMO.

I think once again you totally miss the point. The private drugs industry make an absolute killing in the USA, and are unreceptive to any public participation in healthcare, as it will stop them filling their fat cat pockets with $$$.

Thin people look stupid.

For a thread in the Lounge it has to be said that your opening gambit is a total waste of time and space. It clearly a rather disasterous loss for the Democrat party, and it doesn't reflect well on Obama, but I think there are a couple of issues at play here. 1) Obama just can't force through what he wants, like our government can. He has been forced to tone down some of his reforms to try and get them through the Senate. This is true of healthcare - where Democrats in States with big drug companies running scared of reform. This has annoyed the liberal left in America, who were hopefully of massive change. By the way, if Obama gets through what he is currently proposing then it is still a big shift in US health policy. Climate change is also on the backburner, with Senate Democrats saying they couldn't get that and Healthcare through in one go. 2) The right wing of America has a lot of money behind it, and can make a big sensationalist impact (most of what they say isn't true, of course, but that isn't the point). They are finding it easy to scare people into believing what suits their agenda (big drug companies against government healthcare, because they won't get massive profits. Oh no!). American politics is still dominated by some very simplistic issues (race, abortion, religion, family). The right wing scare tactics work even better against a President who has promised such radical change. 3) So, we have left-wing Democrats frustrated and Republicans scare-mongering. Both are affecting Obama's popularity, which in turn leads to election difficulties. However, to compare Obama to Blair is ridiculous, as Blair had the parliamentary majority to do whatever he wanted, whereas Obama has to deal with many other factors.

Guns make us prepared, butter merely makes us fat.

I'm (not) surprised that no-one has blamed Redknapp for his ridiculous overspending. Or, indeed, that every club he manages has severe financial problems immediately after his departure.

Burkina Faso trying to go one better than Algeria today. A 0-0 draw with Ghana will see them through to the QFs without scoring a goal.

See you in the pub?