Page 8 of 37

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2022 12:26 pm
by Abernathy
Well, yes, possibly Nad might well have been on the Thunderbird, but mostly, I think it's principally due to her being as thick as rhino shite.

Also, though, I get the impression that she sees "doing politics"- her career- as an ultra-tribal, my-party-right-or-wrong sort of game. She thought she had to defend Johnson, so she did the best that she could- which in her case was almost totally inept.
But she's merely the most egregious of the cavalcade of utterly uselessly inept sychophantic thickos that Johnson has been obliged to surround himself with.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:25 am
by Youngian
There's been some sympathy for Dorries from many who suspect she has alchohol and/or mental health problems. Fuck her, she signed her Faustian bargain with Johnson with her eyes open and now she's paying the bill.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:15 pm
by Boiler
Zero sympathy for the bitch.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 6:19 pm
by Boiler
Image

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 6:24 pm
by Boiler

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:36 pm
by Crabcakes
Well there is always another possible explanation for her loyalty…


Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:39 pm
by Boiler
A little bit of sick etc. etc.

"I'm in love with a fat Etonian/I once saw in a bar"...

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:58 pm
by Abernathy
Here’s the thing : It is entirely plausible that Nad is playing hide the sausage with Bodger.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:01 pm
by kreuzberger
Scousers, fuck me. They'd have us believe that they are the best of us.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:06 pm
by Boiler
kreuzberger wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:01 pm Scousers, fuck me. They'd have us believe that they are the best of us.
I give you Esther McVey.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:16 pm
by Boiler
Abernathy wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:58 pm Here’s the thing : It is entirely plausible that Nad is playing hide the sausage with Bodger.
Image

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:21 am
by Bones McCoy
Abernathy wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:58 pm Here’s the thing : It is entirely plausible that Nad is playing hide the sausage with Bodger.
There was me, logging on for a little pre-bedtime confirmation bias..

And NOW!!!

Image

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2022 2:01 am
by Oboogie

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 12:15 am
by MisterMuncher
Haven't lefties essentially owned any music worth hearing since for-fucking-ever?

And how in the name of Iommi can one dumb down panto?

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 9:00 am
by Andy McDandy
Remember when Stormzy played Glastonbury? A fair few on the right said "Why can't he do a pro-Brexit rap?". As if he were basically a jukebox, stick money in and get the tune you want.

Elements of "shut up and play some ball, boy" for sure. But also an attitude of money being the answer to everything. I have money, do as I want.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 9:30 am
by Oboogie
Mad Nad looking very shifty indeed, naked Boris just out of shot.


Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 10:16 am
by Bones McCoy
At least one politician doesn't perform in front of a collage of books.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 10:29 am
by Abernathy
She was brazen and appalling on the Today prog earlier. But she has at least learnt the script well. She’s repeating the arrant,, absurd nonsense that Johnson wasn’t simply hurling a gratuitously offensive slur at Starmer, but was actually making some sort of sophisticated jesuitical point about heads of organisations taking responsibility for what goes on in their organisations, which Johnson, errrr, doesn’t.

It’s not working, Nad.

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 10:35 am
by Boiler
Go, Nad...

I wonder if her constituency party are thinking she's an embarrassment?

Re: Mad Nad

Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2022 10:49 am
by satnav
In her bizarre interview on BBC Breakfast she tried to claim that Johnson had not lied to parliament because he had merely repeated the answers that his official had prepared for him. Such an excuse doesn't really wash given that close officially specifically told him not to smear Starmer with the Savile claim, and the false claim he made about employment figures has been called out on a number of occasions yet he has continued to make the claim in parliament.

Surely if he makes a claim in parliament that is subsequently found to be untrue he should immediately acknowledge the mistake and ensure that Hansard is amended to take account of the error.