Friday 13th March 2015

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:20 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:I love releasing the Guardvarks.
I thought they were free roaming?

If you had free roaming Guardvarks you would know about it.

Visitors to your estate ripped apart like Termite Mounds, plus the beggars have a nasty habit of getting loaded on Fire Ants and crashing out in the Drawing Room.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:22 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Confession time. No not that, all in due course.

Something else.

I have two bathrooms. Please don't hold it against me.

I have one bathroom,one ensuite shower room and one ensured cloakroom.
I love champagne.
Can I still vote labour?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:26 pm

Thanks for the comments.

Ernst - the last time the government had an adviser worth the space he occupies (Professor David Nutt) they ignored him to the point he walked out. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has lost some very good people, including a pal of mine Eric Carlin.
It is now stuffed with eejits who have links to expensive treatment centres etc. and who wouldn't know a needle exchange from a sewing bee.

JA - I suspect that most politicians who have a smidgeon of common sense would, if you sat them down and explained things very very slowly, come around to decriminalisation. Bear in mind the debacle when the ACMD people walked or got pushed was under Alan Johnson/Labour.
Miliband may well know what should be done, I don't know, but it would be electoral suicide to do it right now.

When anyone who doesn't know anything beyond what they see on the telly and the odd acquaintance who's a bit of a stoner, they assume that "drugs" means what they see in the movies and on cop shows - viz: the worst possible state of tertiary heroin addiction.
There are people wandering about, working, doing stuff, whatever, who are perfectly decent human beings who are eminently capable of managing an opiate addiction - given the tools to do so.

Before the Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) and amendments (2004) there was a system of Schedules. Drugs of dependence and addiction were allocated a schedule to determine how they were stored, prescribed, and dispensed. Things like opiates and the stronger barbiturates were stored and prescribed under very controlled conditions; lesser barbs and benzodiazepines (like Valium) were also controlled carefully, as were the codeine based analgesias like dihydrocodeine (which is very addictive).
Back then, GPs could prescribe opiates and clean works (usually re-usable glass syringes, easy to sterilise) to injecting addicts, for example; patients were able to access pharmacy-grade diamorphine and keep away from the street crap. They had to sign a register, and that's where the expression "Registered Addict" came from. There were a lot of them - in the 60s and 70s there were still a few people around who had medically induced (iatrogenic) addiction from wounds or injuries sustained in WW2/Korea; it was also commonplace for people who survived multiple trauma to be in hospital for many months more than they are now, and they got addicted frequently.
It was very common when I was training in the 70s to have a patient in the ward who was a Registered Addict - you would not know from looking at them that they were dependent on opiates. They could be a bit of a challenge to prescribe for, as they were already using the sort of drugs we would normally give for post-op pain - but other than that they were just people! GPs would not register an addict unless they felt they could maintain them or reduce their use; once they got established on a maintenance dose they were self-caring.

The Misuse of Drugs Act changed all that. GPs were not allowed to prescribe diamorphine, it was very strictly controlled, and they had to give Methadone - this doesn't have the same effect, it causes no end of other health issues, and users ended up using street drugs again.
Overdoses were so common people were dropping like flies - if you don't know what you're doing, it's easy to under-estimate how much you need for a fix and of course you have no idea what the stuff you buy has been cut with.
They still do - and a recent project which brought back direct GP prescribing was a real success in that overdoses virtually stopped, the HIV rate fell, and once stable many addicts had another go at reducing; but it was stopped due to lack of funding.

Softer drugs should be decriminalised for other reasons too. I know a chap called Dr.John Ramsay who's an expert on all things pharmacological.
He did a little "drug amnesty" outside clubs in London and asked people to put their unused pills and poppers etc. in his bin.
When he analysed them, he found some E tabs that were made predominantly out of ground horsehair. Really!
People really have no idea what they're actually buying most of the time. There have been coke supplies cut with strychnine, heroin cut with brick dust, and skunk with opium in it.

The difficulty now, politically at least, is that the public's general perception of the milder drugs is that everyone does it anyway so whats the problem - plus there are parts of the UK where no copper will nick you anyway; and they have been so inundated with the horrors of opiate addiction they think that's all there is to it and have no idea that perfectly normal people can be addicts too, it's not all skin and bones and needle tracks and shooting galleries.

Decriminalising and rescheduling of prescribing could not only save lives it would save a lot of money. I think most people with any sense know this - but we seem to have this (almost) worldwide idiocy on the subject and it will take something special to shift it.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:26 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Confession time. No not that, all in due course.

Something else.

I have two bathrooms. Please don't hold it against me.
Only two? Peasant! Or do you make up for your shortcomings in the ablutions department by what you have behind the green baize door?
No don't spoil it you! My great grandparents dug a hole down the bottom of the garden.

I thought I was doing well, progress I think its called?

It's weird. People don't turn a hair at a couple of bathrooms, but two kitchens? Disgraceful.
I think two kitchens should be in every house. One for Mr Ohso because he leaves such a mess even making a cup of tea, and one for me.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:28 pm

I've gone down in the world.
Had en suite, bathroom & downstairs loo & utility room.
Downsized to one bathroom only.

Less to clean & heat is a plus.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:31 pm

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 2 mins2 minutes ago

Latest Latest @SportingIndex GE15 turnout level spread is 69-69.6% I think it could be lower

http://bit.ly/1DHtmVS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:31 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:
discordantharmony wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Life in California & life the UK are different.
The living is easier sometimes in California.
Until you have appendicitis, get hit by a car, lose your job or reproduce.
Then you up a tree.
Good afternoon All........

CJA - There is I am sure a song to be made out of those four lines.

I will naturally attribute your good self as the inspiration behind it should it make my fame and fortune

<rings Don Henly and the Eagles: "Boys? I've got a job for you. No, better than that. How about something that'll make Hotel California sound like The Birdy Song?">

One of the best gigs I ever went to was the Eagles, Twickenham Stadium, June 2006

Phenomenal night !

Apart from the various reviews in national papers, this lady wrote her opinion:

http://www.chrishigh.com/reviews/gigs/t ... review.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Think it's fair to say she enjoyed it

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:56 pm

There's a lot of money to be made out of benefit claimants.

Not just the likes of Maximus, Atos, Capita, Ingeus, A4E, G4S, Interserve, Working Links, Avanta, Serco, pertemps, et al.

Love Productions made £5,500,000 out of the first Benefits Street. (Mirror)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:59 pm

I'd better get on with my telephone canvassing this evening. Can't say I'm much looking forward to it (I'd much prefer door-step canvassing) but I'll bite the bullet . . . .

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 5:59 pm

Lib Dem spring conference starting tonight in Liverpool.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:04 pm

yahyah wrote:Lib Dem spring conference starting tonight in Liverpool.

My credentials must have got lost in the post. And that Nick Clegg bloke pledged that they would arrive in time. Still, it's probably for the best. I can't stand wide open spaces.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:10 pm

ephemerid wrote:On cannabis - from someone who worked in the drug/alcohol field!

The active ingredient is THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and more the plant is processed the stronger the hit from it. Buds are mild, resin/oil stronger.
It has 3 phases of psychoactive effect, it can be addictive (although withdrawal is not potentially fatal as it can be with alcohol and other drugs)

THC has been proven to be implicated in some cases of acute paranoia. Heavy use of stronger types of cannabis can cause this to develop as one of the side-effects of the drug anyway; in some people who may have a previously unknown/undiagnosed predisposition to mental illness, it can trigger acute psychotic episodes.

In some cases, the damage to mental health is permanent. The Royal College of Psychiatry has some excellent papers on this.

I am of the view that it should, like all other currently illegal drugs of dependence or addiction, be de-criminalised. It serves no useful purpose to charge people for recreational or medicinal use - and in the case of the latter, it would be better to have sources of the active ingredients which are dosage-standardised, tested and regulated as other drugs are, and available from doctors who can prescribe safely for patients who may not know how cannabis reacts with their existing drugs and are thus risking their health unnecessarily.

Cannabis is NOT harmless. No drug is harmless. Alcohol, nicotine - they're not harmless. Prescription drugs are not harmless.

It makes sense to de-criminalise ALL drugs; doing so would also allow for structured research into their effects, which under current legislation is very difficult. It would allow doctors to prescribe clean diamorphine to injecting addicts, it would allow people with neurological and other disease to ease their symptoms with standardised THC, it would allow people determined to get high to access what they want without risking their health they way they do now. Ketamine is what a lot of people choose to use when there isn't a lot of skunk around, or miaow-miaow - ketamine causes irreversible bladder damage (and plenty more) in people who use it regularly.

A bit of herb at a festival or on a weekend isn't going to do a lot of harm. Certainly no more than a bit of alcohol does.
But it is wrong to say cannabis is not harmful. It carries risks like everything else, and some of them are serious.

My ancient (late '60s?) copy of Materia Medica lists Tincture of Cannabis as 'sovereign for glaucoma' and goes on to say that other drugs/formulas simply treat the symptoms, leaving sufferers requiring a lifetime of interventions. It also states the date from which Tincture of Cannabis would become unavailable to the medical profession in the UK, even on prescription. At the time it was legal on prescription only, but it was given more years of grace than cannabis/marijuana plant, leaf, pollen, resin, and tisanes or other preparations of same, which had already been outlawed in this country.

I think it's beyond time that all drugs were de-criminalised, with any caveats based purely on the structured research you recommend. Legal limits (and warnings on packaging) for driving and/or operating machinery should remain in place unless and until they are proven unnecessary; and trading regulations need looking at, too.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:25 pm

yahyah wrote:Lib Dem spring conference starting tonight in Liverpool.

Did they manage to find a phone box to hold it in? I thought BT were getting rid of them.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:30 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
yahyah wrote:Lib Dem spring conference starting tonight in Liverpool.
Did they manage to find a phone box to hold it in? I thought BT were getting rid of them.

Luckily for Clegg, David Cameron's backside was available at short notice.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:30 pm

@ LadyCentauria

Ok. I'll come clean and risk looking a complete pillock (although it's probably too late to be worrying about that).

Please tell me - what's the significance of "I think they're for 1 a.m."?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:32 pm

Also - how do you get a message like that to appear under posts ?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:43 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote: http://may2015.com/featured/the-8-key-p ... or-labour/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Which implies that three in four SNP voters don't understand the voting system.
Historically, Labour hasn't depended upon Scottish constituencies returning Labour MPs to get a majority government.
http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and- ... e-parties/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Current Seats

Conservative 302 (of which 1 is in Scotland)
Labour 256 (of which 41 in Scotland)
Liberal Democrat 56 (11 in Scotland)
Scottish National Party 6 out of a total of 59 in Scotland
Total number of seats 650

Yeah - the Nats BTL in the G kept coming up with this historical "justification" during the run up to the referendum. It made my head hurt (and still does) because history doesn't alter maths.

Agreed - you're absolutely correct. The UK electorate has returned some incredible results - I write this to remind myself - this is why voting matters.
Look at the 4-5 year elections, the 2 general elections occurring in 1974 & the difference those results made to different parties forming governments following WW2 in particular.

I've found this website today & don't know a lot about it

Second reading
The House of Commons Library blog
http://commonslibraryblog.com/2014/01/3 ... 1945-2010/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...the result in terms of the largest party would twice (1964 and February 1974) have been different from that for the UK as a whole, without Scottish MPs.

On two further occasions (October 1974 and May 2010), the exclusion of Scottish seats would have given/denied a party an overall majority, on the basis of votes cast and seats at the time.

The data seems to correspond with the data found on this website I know more about.

UK Political Info
http://www.ukpolitical.info/1974Oct.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In more recent history - 1997, 2001 & 2005, Labour had a majority government without counting the Labour MPs returned to government each time.

General Election results, 1945-2010

Across the UK, Labour and the Conservatives have each had a majority of House of Commons seats at eight elections since 1945. Two General Elections have resulted in no party getting 50%+ of the seats, 1974 (Feb) and 2010.

In Scotland, Labour has had the majority of seats in all but two General Elections, 1951 and 1955; and the Conservative share of seats has been 2% or less since 1997.

http://commonslibraryblog.com/2014/01/3 ... 1945-2010/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:45 pm

In more recent history - 1997, 2001 & 2005, Labour had a majority government without counting the Labour MPs returned to government each time in Scottish constituencies, I meant to write.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:51 pm

discordantharmony wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Life in California & life the UK are different.
The living is easier sometimes in California.
Until you have appendicitis, get hit by a car, lose your job or reproduce.
Then you up a tree.
Good afternoon All........

CJA - There is I am sure a song to be made out of those four lines.

I will naturally attribute your good self as the inspiration behind it should it make my fame and fortune

It's all yours.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:52 pm

yahyah wrote:Waving hello to our newest member Swarthlander.

Great avatar, a reminder that differences need not be an obstacle to friendship.
Just wish I could remember that when the red mists take over.

Thank you and hello all.

I do have a confession.... I have two kitchens AND a utility room.

No rats though.

Post by **refitman** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 6:56 pm

yahyah wrote:Also - how do you get a message like that to appear under posts ?

You need to go to User Control Panel (top right) then to Profile (on the left) and then Edit Signature.

Post by **refitman** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:04 pm

I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:05 pm

Swarthlander wrote:
yahyah wrote:Waving hello to our newest member Swarthlander.

Great avatar, a reminder that differences need not be an obstacle to friendship.
Just wish I could remember that when the red mists take over.
Thank you and hello all.

I do have a confession.... I have two kitchens AND a utility room. No rats though.

Welcome, Swarthlander!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:09 pm

@ Swarthlander

Hello!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

Goodnight, everyone.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!

One of my best friends summed it up thus:
A home should have as many private, functional toilets as there are people occupying the dwelling.
I agree, though I would like to make clear, I'm perfectly happy with a properly functional compost toilet or anything else ecologically sound, even if I've got to brave holding onto the clothesline from the back door to the toilet in a blizzard & back to use it.

Post by **refitman** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!
I also only have one bathroom and one kitchen. I'm a prosecco socialist

Babycham for me.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

I only use my kitchen for making toast. (And tea. Obv.)
Where does that leave me?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

goodnight, PF

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:12 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:I only use my kitchen for making toast. (And tea. Obv.)
Where does that leave me?

Dining out a great deal.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:20 pm

I had a lovely little flat in Cheltenham that was about 18ft x 20ft - in total.
It has 1 bedroom that you could just get a double bed in, a longer that I could just get my sofa (i's big) in, a kitchen and a bathroom.
Plenty of room for me.

The only problem was when Show came to stay. This is a man with very long legs (like Twizzle - anyone remember Twizzle?) who has the ability to entirely fill a room no matter how big it is.
Seriously. He just sort of ....... spreads......

I have never ever had 2 kitchens or 2 bathrooms. Nor even a spare loo.

Next - IDS decides that there must be a kitchen tax which applies to all homes with 2 or more kitchens unless they live with titled in-laws.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:23 pm

refitman wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!
I also only have one bathroom and one kitchen. I'm a prosecco socialist
Babycham for me.

Ooooh you little floozie you.

You may only drink it from a flat glass with Bambi on it, and a glace maraschino cherry on a stick.

Posh, you are.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:26 pm

Swarthlander wrote:
yahyah wrote:Waving hello to our newest member Swarthlander.

Great avatar, a reminder that differences need not be an obstacle to friendship.
Just wish I could remember that when the red mists take over.
Thank you and hello all.

I do have a confession.... I have two kitchens AND a utility room. No rats though.

Hello, Swarthlander. Welcome

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:28 pm

refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!

I have a bathroom, en-suite and a cloakroom. Yay! I'm a Champagne socialist

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:29 pm

Evening, by the way

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:29 pm

Feelings may be too raw yet for analysis of the Scottish Independence Referendum.

I'm going to write this though - it's my opinion regarding the heart & motivation of three men.
Labour party leadership & MPs knew the consequences electorally for the Labour party in Scotland by asking Scottish people not to choose independence.
Labour party leaders did this for the good of the country in its entirety, placing the well-being of the whole above the Labour party.
Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling & Ed Miliband.

One other man, Dave Cameron, made one speech I think may have reminded people of a blessed truth & so also may have helped people in Scotland to choose to vote no to independence.
It was the "Tories aren't going to be in government forever & I'll not be PM forever but choosing independence at this time is forever" speech.
I doubt I'll ever hear a more sincere, truthful word out of Cameron's mouth - none of us will, I suspect.

Please don't hesitate to tell me what you will regarding what I've written.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:30 pm

I also have three baths...

...in the fields for the horse's water.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:30 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

Night PF

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:30 pm

daydreamer wrote:
refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!
I have a bathroom, en-suite and a cloakroom. Yay! I'm a Champagne socialist

You got a cloakroom? Those are one of the most useful rooms in a home.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:34 pm

citizenJA wrote:
daydreamer wrote:
refitman wrote:I have 1 bathroom & toilet and 1 kitchen. Champagne socialists the lot of you!
I have a bathroom, en-suite and a cloakroom. Yay! I'm a Champagne socialist
You got a cloakroom? Those are one of the most useful rooms in a home.

Yes they are citizen, though mine is very small.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:36 pm

Swarthlander wrote:I also have three baths...

...in the fields for the horse's water.

You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:42 pm

daydreamer wrote:
Swarthlander wrote:I also have three baths...

...in the fields for the horse's water.
You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff

You have a gaff? We used to dream of having a gaff...

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:42 pm

daydreamer wrote:

You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff

No-one is too posh for this gaff or to be a socialist.

By the way, I'm a homebrew socialist.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:43 pm

PorFavor wrote:@ LadyCentauria

Ok. I'll come clean and risk looking a complete pillock (although it's probably too late to be worrying about that).

Please tell me - what's the significance of "I think they're for 1 a.m."?

It's the punchline to a wonderful short-story/long-joke (written, I think, by Dennis Norden) about Descartes and Madame Descartes hosting a late dinner party. It appears in a book called An Anthology of Nonsense, which I can't find at the moment. More and more guests appear, including Descartes' best friend, the food gets delayed and delayed, there are some vol-au-vents (I think) on the sideboard and Descartes' friend drifts towards them as he's getting very hungry. Descartes touches him on the arm, as he reaches for one, and passes him a hastily scribbled note which reads, "I think they're for 1 a.m."

Which has, ever since, been misread and misreported as, "I think, therefore I am." but made his reputation as a philosopher of note...

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:44 pm

Swarthlander wrote:
daydreamer wrote:

You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff
No-one is too posh for this gaff or to be a socialist.

By the way, I'm a homebrew socialist.

I am training my horse to only trample Tory voting peasants. Does that help?

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:48 pm

Swarthlander wrote:
daydreamer wrote:

You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff
No-one is too posh for this gaff or to be a socialist.

By the way, I'm a homebrew socialist.

Hmm, homebrew.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:49 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:

I am training my horse to only trample Tory voting peasants. Does that help?

Only if they have use of more than one pig-sty.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:49 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
daydreamer wrote: I have a bathroom, en-suite and a cloakroom. Yay! I'm a Champagne socialist
You got a cloakroom? Those are one of the most useful rooms in a home.
I need somewhere to hang swords, like they have in the HoC

With a handy little closet to stash your wig.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:50 pm

I live next door to a pub so I don't really need a kitchen. They even do breakfasts.

Welcome Swarthlander.

daydreamer · Post by **daydreamer** » Fri 13 Mar, 2015 7:51 pm

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Swarthlander wrote:
daydreamer wrote:

You have horses (plural)? You're too posh for this gaff
No-one is too posh for this gaff or to be a socialist.

By the way, I'm a homebrew socialist.

I am training my horse to only trample Tory voting peasants. Does that help?

Well, it's a start