91Èȱ¬

BELATED EDUCATION BY DEFAULT

When my boys entered the local comprehensive, I joined the emasculated, bogus PTA, and acquainted myself with the chicanery of the head and his acolytes. Every aspect of devious governence was there, in microcosm. I fought the law and the law won.

My other education was 'Yes Prime/Minister'. The two experiences were mutually reinforcing. Hence my drive to bring down the Westminster Ethos and its party political malaise.

Same game different name

Bombs away :-



I love the way the Americans give it - in ya face !

"Art is the way of finding the true meaning of the human spirit"

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEER'S TONY?

With Labour languishing in the polls, should he not have flown to Brown's side? Or have I missed something.

go1 saturday:
"Labour really are getting bizarre with Elvis impersonators"

It was all about the song.

no one else can understand me..everything I do is wrong ooohh oh oh oooooh.

And did you notice how Gordon never interacted nor took any notice of Elvis or that moment; it was a bit like the way Gordon ignores the electorate. "Gordon! we need to reverse immigration...no, nothing. Its as if he went deaf or summit"

What was more Bizarre was the fat lump slayer of dragons; St George at the Griffin rally. We all laughed at that one. Nuremberg it wasn't...but that will come...that will come. The BNP need a Leni Riefenstahl to improve on their image.

That should keep you busy for the rest of the day gango.

A question for Gof1, how large would she like to see the population of Britain get? Does she see 70 or 80 million as quite comfortable and acceptable?

David Grossman has been despatched to Belfast where William Hague is visiting today.

I have fond memories of Belfast. We used to sing songs to the british army whilst my older cousins threw bottles at them. It goes something like this:
You can stick your rubber bullets up your hole, You can stick your rubber bullets up your hole, stick your rubber bullets, stick your rubber bullets up your hole.

Religious division could be fun...once you overcame the fear and tyranny

#4 You're making me laugh even now Kev!

Yes St George did look a little stupid I have to say, I'm laughing now, almost as much as I laughed at Brown ignoring Elvis. I'm pleased it made you laugh as well as me. You learn such a lot from these attempts to appeal to voters.

"Play the race card - the human race card" - Janet Tavakoli talking a whole heap of sense:-



And did you see the look of fear on Darlings face when Paxman asked him about breaking up the banks - titty baby.

BYT

I did enjoy 'doing' a couple of Spanish pieces and hope that I wouldn't have offended their sensibilities if they'd had the opportunity to see me and hear the music at the same time.

It really is much more exciting to skate to my own music rather than the sentimental pieces they were playing this morning, for example.

mim

WHAT PROFIT A MAN IF HE GAIN THE WHOLE WORLD BUT LOSE HIS SOUL? (#8 link)

Perhaps the Quran is deficient in that saying? It certainly appears that one goat-herder, at least, had not heard of it. Had he done so, and passed it on to young Barack, the latter might have drawn back from BUYING his 'whole world' presidency, with obscene levels of financial backing. He is now in no position to invoke morality or validity, where money-power is concerned. Poor lost soul.

We are going the same way. Presidential, and with PMs raised to office on a tide of money rather than competence and dedication.

It would appear that the 91Èȱ¬ wishes to deny the electorate the chance to vote on whether to waste any more money on the Climate Change Scam. Despite the fact that " climate skeptic " UKIP got twice the number of national votes the Greens did at the last EU elections, for some reason ( non given ) they were excluded from The Politics Show Environment Debate even though the Greens were present. This is despite the fact that recent polling has shown that only 25% of the UK population actually believe that alleged " Global Warming " is 100% man made. ( as Justin Rowlatt amply pointed out at the beginning of said debate )

Fair enough Andrew Nieil gave all th politicians present a rough ride, especially the Lib-Demmic who was grudgingly forced to admit that they had plans to introduce road pricing. The Tories can't be trusted on Toll Roads either stating that tolls could be charged for any new build, but perhaps they had to say that considering their form on the M6 Toll.

One point for certain is that if the Lib-Demmics get into any formal coalition in a hung parliament they are likely to completely screw our future energy policy. Likewise screw the motorist for ever increasing taxes in one form or another, although perhaps more importantly jeopardise the survival of manufacturing jobs by significantly increasing road haulage costs.

/iplayer/episode/b00s781d/The_Daily_Politics_2010_Election_Debates_The_Environment_Debate/

I usually dismiss Elvis people as ravers and best avoided at all costs but this one could actually sing a bit...Brown ignores everyone even the missus, never know why she is being dragged around, she must have better things to do and she must feel a tad embarrassed, him not winning legit to be leader and hoping to sneak in under the counter even though he could be third...where's the morality in that? I like his wife but I think she could have done better....I know we could!

Nick Clegg saying that Labour are finished on 3rd June 2009.

Lib Dems rise in the polls is no fluke - Nick Clegg said all this last year!

Vote Brown - Get Balls!

A report from the Centre for Economics and Business Research published today says that public spending as a share of GDP is close to 50% - up from 37% in 1998/99 - and that in Northern and Wales public expenditure is about 70% of GDP.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

UK public spending only 50%?

It must be higher than that - I've seen figures as high as 60% reported (and ... yes ... I'm trying to remember where) - these are all estimates as our government itself does not keep proper accounts of our national finances - what is their source?

The last thing we need is more UK Chimpanzeed government statistics - this is now the most important statistic in the UK economy - the bloated UK public sector?

Vote Brown - Get 'Balls'!

BYT

As per Radio Times yesterday, I thought Jeremy would be having a rest until Wednesday and therefore so would I but I see he's on so I have no option but to watch Newsnight tonight.

mim

Tonight's report will show that government spending is 50% of the economy across the UK, and 70% in places like Northern Ireland and Wales. This is clearly unsustainable for our economy. It's time to reduce the size of bureaucracy because we cannot afford it. We need a real change of government, not a hung parliament, but a solid Conservative victory to turn the tide of waste and dependence, and return us to the kind of prosperity that can make Britain great again.

DUE TO LABOUR CANCELLING FUNDING IN 2005, ALL ROYAL NAVY & RFA VESSELS LACK "COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY (CEC)" THE ENTIRE ROYAL NAVY SURFACE FLEET HAS UNNECESSARILY BEEN MADE VULNERABLE TO KNOWN-FOR-OVER-10-YEARS THREATS AND THEIR RECENT VARIATIONS:

"Deadly new Russian weapon hides in shipping container", 26_04-2010:





1) Why, in 2004/2005 did Labour 'guillotine' previous commitments to fund the fitting of ALL of the UK's surface combatants AND new vessels- such as the planned aircraft carriers and Type-45 Destroyers- with the sensors & communications equipment required for 'Cooperative Engagement Capability' (CEC)?"

2) Why aren't any of the UK's currently in-service surface combatants & other vessels fitted with the sensors & communications equipment required for CEC?"

3) Why are all of the US Navy's front line surface combatants- such as aircraft carriers, Amphibious Assault ships, Destroyers (& even many attack subs)- fitted &/or being fitted with the sensors & communications equipment required for CEC?

CEC is vital for warships to share theatre data- especially important when threats such as supersonic sea skimming anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM's) & aircraft- may be approaching from 'over the horizon' (farther out than 20 miles) flying low, & thus not detectable by a targeted warship's/vessel's radar until 'no longer over the horizon' (less than 20 miles out) and less than 1 minute away...

CEC expands ships' incoming airborne-threat detection ranges out to, potentially***, hundreds of miles...

If the UK's new Type-45 Destroyers- & any under-attack vessels such as:

A) the RN's 20,000 tonne Helicopter carrier HMS Ocean;

B) the 2 almost brand-new 16,000 tonne LSD's HMS Bulwark & Albion;

C) the RFA's 4, brand-new 16,000 tonne 'Bay class' LSD's;

D) (when in-service) the planned new aircraft carriers

... cannot detect* AND TAKE ACTIONS TO DEAL WITH- airborne threats until they are closer than 20-miles out**, their reaction time is hugely dangerously limited...

Without CEC, ships in a squadron or naval task group that Type-45 Destroyers are tasked to defend against airborne threats, & that are farther than 4 or 5 miles away from the responsible Type-45 are, in effect, sitting ducks to foes with a modicum of common sense and only moderately up-to-date weapons....

(* either alone or in concert with CEC-equipped RN/allied warships and within-theatre CEC-equipped assets such as aircraft/satellites)

(** even if the Type-45's currently defective missile systems are fixed



)

It would be an unheard of and suicidal strategy for RN squadrons involved in a conflict situation to have all of the squadron's vessels remaining within 4 miles of each other...

-





Only six '1/4 equipped/fitted out' Type-45's are to be built, instead of Labour's commitment in the late 1990's to fund the construction of 12 'fully-equipped’ Type-45's.

Out of 6 Type-45's, only 3 or 4 can reasonably be expected to be operational and out of refit/repairs/upgrades status on any given day...

4) Can 3 or 4 Type 45 Destroyers protect the entire UK/its domestic & overseas’ interests and all of the RN's surface and civilian vessels involved in future wars, duties and conflicts??

5) Why aren't the UK's existing surface combatants- IE aircraft carriers, Type 22 and 23 Frigates as well as Type-42 Destroyers- being expeditedly fitted with CEC?

6) Why are there zero govt policies in place directing that ALL new UK surface combatants- and their aircraft- are to be fitted at-commissioning with the sensors and communications equipment required for
Cooperative Engagement Capability??
----------------------

*** -

"... The optimal sensor platform for (anti-ship) cruise missile detection, therefore, will be air-based...

"Even more importantly, air-based sensors can see over any obstructing terrain (such as high waves) that might otherwise be used to conceal a cruise missile’s flight path. An air-based sensor platform can also survey a wider area than a ground system, since it can see farther over the Earth's horizon than is possible from ground-level surveillance platforms.

"... the U.S. Navy's E-2D Hawkeye Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft



"are tasked with:

- "detecting and tracking airborne threats at the greatest possible distances, AND

- "with directing combat aircraft and anti-air (missile & radar guided machine-gun- rvl) batteries to deal with these air threats. The great advantage of... AEW aircraft is that they are already capable against (anti-ship) cruise missiles, an ability that only grows with time and upgrades...."

The E-2D Hawkeye is not operable from the UK's current and its planned new 'big deck' aircraft carriers as all ship-deployed E-2D Hawkeye aircraft require launch catapults...

The UK's current aircraft carriers don't have launch catapults and- in a dangerously short-sighted Labour govt money saving scheme- the planned new 'big deck' aircraft carriers are not being built with aircraft-launch catapults...

In order to be able to reasonably effectively conduct other than home-country coastal/littoral patrol operations, ship-borne AWACS aircraft AND CEC-equipped ships are needed for navies/squadrons/naval task-groups to prosecute missions & to defend against targets in all 4 main warfare spheres: sea-surface based; sub sea-surface based; air-based; & land-based.

7) How can the new Type-45 Destroyers be expected to provide anti airborne threat defences for most of the Royal Navy's vessels as well as civilian ships involved in future conflicts- AS IS THEIR GOVT ADVERTISED ROLE- if Type-45's- and the RN's other surface combatants/airborne assets such as the planned 'big deck' aircraft carriers- are not equipped with the communications and sensors equipment required for CEC??

8) Why isn't the Labour govt's 2005 canceling of previous commitments to fund the fitting of ALL of the RN's & RFA's in-service AND new vessels with the sensors & equipment required for Cooperative Engagement Capability being questioned in the election campaign?

... doesn't this situation demand ALL political parties involved in the UK election articulating their defence funding and procurement policies, if elected to form govt, regarding the level and quality of
weapons, sensors and related equipments that are fitted to currently in-service and new-build RN & RFA warships and other vessels??

________________
Roderick V. Louis,
Vancouver, BC, Canada

A few truths that don't get mentioned in the election-

Afghanistan, "reporting with British forces is banned during the campaign" AKA Don't Mention The War AKA Orwellian censorship-



UK losses from financial meltdown £1.8 trillion - £7.4 trillion, banks like dinosaurs waiting for the meteorite to hit, Bank of England speech by Haldane-



J. K. Galbraith comes to the conclusion that the whole financial crisis was caused by criminal fraud-

What an aggressive man Jeremy just interviewed - I wonder why people are disillusioned with politics..?

RJM6 19 - I'm sorry, but you are wrong. The "man" was not being aggressive - he was being understandably outraged at Jeremy's lack of mastery of the facts. For anyone who understands the facts / the numbers / the basic data, Jeremy's questions were insulting and shocking. No-one should stand by and accept such nonsense without speaking out against it - unless they want to be complicit in the dumbing down of this country. That 'man' is in fact a hero.

Jeremy on top form tonight :o) - particularly his interview with Ed Balls, and a very interesting debate with Jean Winterson et al too. Loved the new Anthony Jay sketches played by Henry Goodman. Wish he'd write a new series for TV again......it's been too long. Look forward to seeing more :o)

That was a bit of a scuffle between Jeremy and the Welsh bloke insisting that that the Welsh should be getting even more than 70%. I'm not sure why London gets even more but I should imagine one of the reasons is that London does probably contribute to the coffers more than any other region with the costs of living also higher than anywhere else.

I don't think there is any escape but for all the regions, government departments, etc, etc having some sort of cuts or realignment of funds and workforce in order to reduce the unforgivable debts that Labour has 'created' aiding in the process statists and foe to make it even worse. Apart from the inevitable cuts, etc, the main objective will be to get the thrift of enterprise of the private sector helping the country move out of recession but with the proviso that the private sector obeys clear guidelines provided by the Parliament.

mim

at 19: "What an aggressive man Jeremy just interviewed"..

The welsh never got over king Edward (1st) castle building programme...it made them mental and this aggressive welsh number cruncher was double mental because he speaks English - rather well - and er, he crunches numbers, so he was triple mental. Jezza kept it together though, because he's a professional...unlike the Welsh fella who was...well, you get the jist. The time to cut the Welsh adrift has shortened somewhat after tonight. Mid-too-long-term aspirations of independence for the welsh has just gone into 'soon as'.. and that'll be an English decision..Jezza can cut the rope.

I thought NN was rather good tonight. The discussion with the Historian and Phil Blonde was excellent, the woman was clearly a lib(mental), so don't even bother next time, she had her chance and spoilt it for herself. Phil Blonde has a brain by the way, did you notice?

kevseywevsey - let's check and test your post.
"it made them mental" = either means it led to their cognitive superiority or you have a underdeveloped understanding of mental health. So, now we know that you undervalue intellectual capability and demean people with health issues. Check.
"aggressive welsh number cruncher" = someone who knows what he's talking about. So, now we know that you privilege presentation over content. Check.
"triple mental" = an expression used by ill-educated people to describe anyone who thinks differently to them. So, now we know you are ill-educated. Check.
"Jezza kept it together though, because he's a professional" = Jezza's exasperated sighs evidenced his lack of control. He lost it because he had zero mastery of the numbers. So, now we know that you think facts don't matter. Check.
"the Historian...Philip Blonde (soc)... the woman" = men have jobs/roles and names; women are defined by their genders. Plus you cannot spell. So, now we know you are sexist and illiterate. They often go together. Check
Let's summarise:you undervalue intellectual capabilityand demean people with health issues; you privilege presentation over content; you are ill-educated; you think facts don't matter;you are sexist and illiterate.
Just a guess: are you a Tory?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

On the shift in political parties allegiance isn't it the politicians who are out of step with the public?

Was it actually "the economy stupid" or was it the system that leads to people making such stupid mistakes and wrecking the economy that was the big issue?

Surely the big thing is that in a two party system you need two viable parties. But if both have form in terms of not doing what the public want such as the Poll Tax and Iraq how does the public proceed.

They are not thinking about the various permutations of PR but even if the Lib Dems were to win the popular vote they won't get the seats.

If you tell people you can vote for any party you want but it has to be one of the two then that is effectively PR coalition anyway - except that you rob the minorities of their votes and take no account of them in defining public policy. Thus we have the corruption that unaccountability breeds and disillusionment expressed in very low voting figures compared to PR countries.

That's something I don't think the Tories will mention much - nor how few other countries rely on first past the post.

#20

Mr Cameron, is that you?!

Madnessofcrowing(sic..me)@24

you wrote:
"you are sexist and illiterate"
Yes, and I'm also a racist
Let me expand.
Are there differences between Males and females? Yes, I recognise that fact, therefore I'm sexist. Check.
Are there differences between races? Yes, I recognise that fact, I'm therefore a racist. Check

I'm I illiterate, poor speller, moron..a hillbilly crackerhead? Yes, I recognise that fact, Im therefore illiterate. Check

The historian was NOT Phillip Blond(e) by the way. Blond is a thinktanker. As for the spelling mistake - Blond(e)sic blah blah - now your just splitting hairs there arn't you.

Are you Welsh by any chance?

The Historians name - whose name escapes me presently, an awfully nice chap who pops up from time to time on the tube - well, I think he's a bit of a Tory..not that you asked, mind.


You asked me, I'm I a Tory?!?..er No. I'm Like a welsh nationlist but remove the word 'Welsh' and insert the word English. I hope that answers your question.

Would you like me to help you dig that hole your stood in go a little bit deeper..."Gordon!, can I borrow your spade a wee while"

Are you Welsh by any chance?.....
Check... I could real push it and say 'checkmate'..but I wont.

#28

It's the pudsey bear, Kevseywevesey, still hoping to have his wounds licked. He couldn't care less what nationality he is/was. All he cares about is to lay his little fingers on the 'treasure' and rule the world.

mim

kevseywevsey @28.
No, I'm not Welsh and the rest of your post is mainly evidence of your inability to read carefully what I actually wrote. Tory or English Nationalist - help me out, what's the difference between them?

:o) Jeremy's interview with Ed Balls last night has made it to The Guardian!



Oh and Alex Salmond's favourite interviewer is Jeremy!



I'd call that a result :o)

M76UK @31. I really enjoyed the Balls interview. One of the more enlightening episodes in the campaign so far, I thought.

Gordon Brown argued it was "arrogant" to discuss Westminster deals before voting happens

When Mr. Brown talks of arrogance, I for one certainly take note. Not a word I'd have thought he'd want to closely associated with him and his merry band after the last 13 years.

And I must say that I'd also be a smidge less than impressed if the deals MY VOTE STILL DEPENDS UPON before, during or after the election take place WITHOUT MY KNOWING WHAT I MIGHT BE VOTING TO SEE GET IN.

Like vote who, get what? The notion that this need not be very clear, up front, and honoured (not promptly dropped like all manifestos, guarantees or pledges), is risible.

OK it seems that he's lost the election, but the plot as well.

11. At 7:53pm on 26 Apr 2010, brossen99 wrote:
" climate skeptic " UKIP got twice the number of national votes the Greens did at the last EU elections, for some reason ( non given ) they were excluded from The Politics Show Environment Debate even though the Greens were present

/iplayer/episode/b00s781d/The_Daily_Politics_2010_Election_Debates_The_Environment_Debate/

I am sure there is a perfectly good explanation. 91Èȱ¬?

Equally why Ms. Lucas seems a near permanent fixture?

#31

Mistress76uk

Re: Jeremy being Alex Salmond's favourite interviewer

I wonder whether it's something to do with Jeremy being straightforward with his questioning making politicians focus on the real issues at stake /?/.

mim

HOW ARROGANT OF BROWN TO PRESUME TO TELL US WHAT IS ARROGANT! (#33)

With you again Junkk.

And how ARROGANT of Brown (and the other two) to think WE can't follow the mental gymnastics that lead to each pronouncement. He could just as easily have told us that 'it is INSULTING not to reveal one's possible alliances to the voter, BEFORE they vote.

We ALL used these pathetic tricks WHEN SMALL, and the grown-ups saw right through them. It is 'fool or knave' time again again again. Soulless politicians are more than happy to have a small number incandescent (but impotent) and the majority bamboozled - it is the nature of the Westminster Beast. No shame, no embarrassment, no guilt - nothing but raw ambition and lust for power. GOVERNANCE? WHAT GOVERNANCE!

OR IS IT BECAUSE ALEX WINS ON POINTS - EVERY TIME? (#34)

Here's one for the notebook Monika.

MEN: Must not been seen to lose. Hence: if Salmond feels Paxo gets the better of him (in their childish games - aka: edgy interviews) he will declare Jeremy 'his favourite interviewer'. Conversely (?) If Salmond trounces Paxo, he will rub salt in the wound by DECLARING JEREMY HIS FAVOURITE! It's a sort of verbal smirk.

In summary: they are both little boys posing as big men, out of need. All the world's a stage . . .

I believe that Shell were the leading corporate multinational backing Brown's position on " carbon trading " etc when he went to Copenhagen, bunch of environmental hypocrites the lot of them ?

BROOKE KINSELLA

What next - the skull of a dead soldier?

IT'S A 'NO' DAVE.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

'ITS ABOUT HELPING THE WORST OF'

The saintly Iain Duncan Smith, leading light of the 'Centre for Social Justice' and the Tory leader who SINGLE HANDEDLY SAID 'YES' TO THE UNJUST BOMBING OF IRAQIS, which made them considerably 'worse off' - even maimed and dead.

Might the good Mr Paxman apply some edgy questioning to this paragon of virtue at their next meeting? NB the worst off in Iraq are still suffering from Tony's (aka IDS's) War.

#28 kevseywevsey

"
You asked me, I'm I a Tory?!?..er No. I'm Like a welsh nationlist but remove the word 'Welsh' and insert the word English"

You were wittering on about not wanting to reveal your politics the other day having talked up "the Griff" - the champagne national socialist who was running off to the police to report his colleague Collett for threatening to kill him.

So do you get down to the English Defence League meets?

Is there any word on the street about the Collett-Griffin spat?

#6 kevseywevsey

"I have fond memories of Belfast. We used to sing songs to the british army whilst my older cousins threw bottles at them. "

Ah the English "nationalists" and their campaign stance to bring "our boys" back home from Afghanistan.

Such coherence of thought and such deep morality.

#28 kevseywevsey

"Check... I could real push it and say 'checkmate'..but I wont"

Is it the number of syllables that hinders you?

#5 ecolizzy

"A question for Gof1, how large would she like to see the population of Britain get? Does she see 70 or 80 million as quite comfortable and acceptable?"

Assuming gof1 is me I have said many times that I think there should be a long term approach to deciding what is a sensible level and how such a level could be maintained. There are many complex social, economic, religious and perhaps security considerations.

It would take a long time but I think, like many, that we need stronger immigration controls in the meantime.

That does not mean that I see any racial basis for discriminating against would be immigrants nor do I see anybody who was not born in the UK as non-British or less British.

Bluntly those on the far right who have wittered on here about race and IQ and genetics have been shown to be snake oil salespeople.

The reason that the BNP could not resist the EHRC on their racial membership rules is that there is no science that they can rely upon for their views on race.

Nor is there any evidence that these people have amassed in seventy plus years that they could take off to court to show that there is a Jewish "hegemony".

Baz36
"In summary: they are both little boys posing as big men, out of need. All the world's a stage . . . "

All is vanity Baz, all is vanity. And we all have it going on..and this is our stage. Evidence is littered here amongst and within the opinion, the rant, the poem and the strange. We all swim in the pool of ego.

I'm asked by Madness whats the difference between a Tory and an English nationalist.

A Tory is someone who wears a blue rosette. He'll promise you the earth but won't deliver it. Which is always a great disapointment but at least he won't financially cripple you. Unlike the Socialist leninist Marxist.
The Labour fella, he who could not run a lemonade-stand because he's too busy interferring in other peoples lives and starting disputes amongst the wealth creators. A socialist is one who can't make it on their own,
in business or even life, he needs the company of fellow plebs; Jack Straw MP is a good example of this Socialist trait.

An English Nationlist is someone who recognises the need for Borders, language and culture. Rather evident in the Welsh as well as the Scots would'nt you say. You could say Enoch Powell - Praise be upon him - was a Tory and an English Nationist.

You can be raised a Catholic in Belfast and live in England and be English in mind and spirit. I got passed the bigotry of hating the prods and the English, and having a Scottish name of note does not sway me either. I was assimilated happily as English..unlike some.


whats a syllabulls?...is it a kinda tattoo

kevseywevsey @45. Are you happy? You sound very sad. I feel sorry for you. How can I help? Perhaps, if you are willing to work hard at it, it would help you to get some education first? Research shows that learning can help you get rid of the anger and negativity that is eating you up. I know that most people are laughing at you but I really do pity you. Good luck - I hope you get some help - but first you need to acknowledge your condition.

'ENOCH POWELL - PRAISE BE UPON HIM' (#45)

Priceless Kev - P R I C E L E S S!

On Monday's programme, Jeremy Paxman kept pressing ED Balls for his views on a hung parliament. He said he was asking the question because that is what everyone was talking about. That is not true. The only people interested in a hung parliament are political commentators and news presenters like Paxman, who practically orgasm in their seats when discussing it, theyre so excited. Everyone else is actually interested in the detailed policies of the main parties, of which I am still not sure given the rubbish coverage on programmes such as Newsnight. Stop focusing on theoretical possibilities and get your act together!