salmonbuddie

Read it again, faraway, that's not what I said - don't go down the oxter rabbit hole. I'm with Douglas Adams on this one - I know the answer, it's how we get there I struggle with.

That's not the case with Sarwar, though, is it? How to deal with inherited wealth and its inherent privileges is the biggest issue we need to face if we're ever going to fully achieve the four things I cited earlier.

Why? She's nothing to do with the party Keir Hardie founded.

Really? Where did anyone say any of that? You really are incapable of comprehending the English language, aren't you. Your pathetic ad hominem attacks won't work, either. To summarise, and speaking for myself only. Do I, personally, understand parents doing anything in otheir power to give their kids a 'better' start in life? Of course I do, I'm a father and a grandfather. Would I have paid for private education for that reason? I genuinely don't know, I would've had lots of thinking to do. The end result of generations of sending kids to private education is exemplified by the fekkers currently in power at WM. Would I pay for private health care for me or my family? If it was life threatening, in a heartbeat. However, those are subjective views. Looking at things objectively (that means looking at the bigger picture, oaky, I know you struggle with these things) then I firmly believe that taking away the opportunity to buy these things and jump the queue (there's the important bit) because you're financially well off is just wrong. If that makes me a 'plastic lefty' rather than a Peter Weir then so be it, I can live with that.

No, I'm saying that being a millionaire means that you're not the right person to be leading the party supposedly representing the working class. They'd be fine in the Conservative party... [emoji846]

1 - should've said equal and free access to education. Private schools are an unfair advantage. 2 - for now, maybe, I strongly suspect there are people in power looking to use the NHS to line their own pockets. Quelle surprise... 3 - how did they manage that? Does social housing (or lack thereof) ring a bell? Enabling people to buy their houses from the council was misguided but I got it. Tying up the money raised from those sales thereby preventing replacements being built was unforgiveable. 4 - I have some experience down here. It's only my view but I can live with the fekkers ripping us off if it means that someone who genuinely needs help gets that help.

I hate say I told you so but it's on the interweb so it must be true

And there's the "not understanding" part. Between this and Peter Weir you're having a mare, oaky, stop while you're behind.

Well done on not reading my posts, far less understanding them.

Where did I say that? Socialism, which this pair is supposed to represent, isn't hard or complicated (to me anyway), it's the battle to attain four things: Equal access to education for all (get rid of private schools) Equal access to healthcare for all A roof over everyone's head (that wants one) No-one going hungry I'm not blaming him for using private schools, I get it, I understand it, I might have done it myself for my son if I could've. It's the hypocrisy of doing that and leading Labour I don't have any time for.

I didn't say he was perfect... [emoji846] Seriously, though, this is about Starmer and Sarwar, heads of the party supposedly representing "the common people". How about addressing that instead.

"Sir" Keir Starmer to the likes of us, never forget the "Sir" part. "Sir" anything in charge of the Labour Party, think about that for a minute. The original Labour Party Keir will be spinning in his grave. Sarwar in Scotland, the millionaire whose family don't pay their workers minimum wage. Wonder if they think he's "bright and personable"? Never mind, I'm sure he has the founding values of Labour at his core and sending his children to private school is a reflection of those values. Is it any wonder we refer to Labour as Red Tories these days?

Words fail you? I don't care that you don't care, I'm enjoying this too much. [emoji23][emoji1787][emoji23]

The gift that keeps on giving! Thanks, oxter, you've made my day with that... [emoji23][emoji1787][emoji23]

You okay, h*n? There you go, some plastic sympathy from a Peter Weir. [emoji846]

I don't even like popcorn but this has made it all worthwhile. [emoji1787][emoji23][emoji1787]

Peter Weir, for example? I should hope not... Go on then, apart from one being a footballer, what's your definition of the difference between the two? ETA - where's the popcorn when you really need it?

Forgot h*n is banned on here...

You okay, ***?

Also still making an arse of it? [emoji846]

Still making an arse of it...

Told her about my dilemma before the game started so she knew it was win-win for me no matter the result. Tbh I would probably prefer Rangers out at this stage for the fun I could have but seeing the look on that fekkers face is pretty good compensation.

I'm in a quandary here, missus is a Rangers supporter so the Cup game's on and they're 4-0 up. Is it okay to be happy with that for the look on Hartley's face? [emoji846]

You've seen who posted it and expect sense? [emoji846]

Who? [emoji846]