Sometimes it’s necessary to be a little earthy

There is something called the refractory period. Between one bout and another the libido does flag. But that isn’t the issue here.

Now we’ve had that right royal buggering from the federasts for the past 67 years we’ve rather gone off the process. That is, it’s not our libido that’s at fault, it’s you and what you’ve done to us.

5 comments on “Sometimes it’s necessary to be a little earthy

  1. “Why won’t these stupid proles just learn to love being ruled by a distant, transnational, yet overbearing bureaucracy run by priggish, pencil-necked, unelected metropolitan soypeople who despise them?”

    It’s a shame Peter Falk died as only Lieutenant Columbo could’ve cracked this case.

  2. Funny story about Peter Falk someone told me the other day, despite having only one eye he was a very good junior baseball player, one day during a game he was so pissed off with an umpires call he walked up to him, popped his glass eye out and offered it to the umpire saying he clearly needed it more than him.

  3. Vote? C4 News on it’s anti-Con platform showed many spoiled “Brexit” “None of above, Brexit” ballots – C4 anti-Con trumps anti-Brexiit?

    .
    The toppling of Theresa: ]Day 29

    “Treacherous Theresa’s betrayal of her country over Huawei has led to the sacking of one member of the government who’d begun to get his act together in the country’s interests. If you are in any doubt please listen to Lord Dannatt, a former chief of the Defence Staff, interviewed on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme yesterday morning (at 8.19 am). Also read the Telegraph article by Rob Wilson which helps explain why Gavin Williamson, a convert to Brexit, was an infinitely more of a threat to Mrs May -determined to stay in power at all costs – than the in name only Brexiteer, Penny Mordaunt, who has less grasp on the principles at stake. It is all too depressing for words.

    To understand the full enormity of it and the anti-democratic/anti-America/anti-Nato and pro-EU civil service takeover of government under Kim May’s premiership, please read intelligence expert Bruce Newsome’s devastating posts for TCW on this, here and here where he writes in detail about the background to Theresa May’s embrace of Huawei – a scandal that in my book looks likely to eclipse all political scandals before it.

    She can’t hope to go without punishment. It’s started – from the voters. The Tories are suffering heavy losses as the local council election results come in. At the time of writing they are down 1,100 seats…”

    Do note the source: The Conservative Woman

    .
    Why May put Huawei before security

    “The Huawei scandal has exposed the executive power now wielded by civil servants and cost the Defence Secretary his job, but don’t let personnel machinations distract you from the scandalous sacrifice of national security, the US special relationship, and Brexit

    The National Security Council seems to be expanding its purview in order to hide public interests from the public, including even Brexit. The British government does not need to hide the debate about 5G. If the British government has evidence of suitability, it should be able to release it. The government isn’t proposing a military deal that deserves secrecy. It’s proposing a civilian telephone infrastructure. If the British government has decided that Huawei offers no risk, why on earth is it hiding this decision in the National Security Council? The whole process smacks of dirty tricks.

    Here is where the Huawei scandal links back to a larger scandal of machinations to favour the EU over the US, to favour macro-economic vanity over national security, to favour authoritarianism over democracy.

    May’s government is sacrificing national security, the special relationship, and Brexit in favour of Chinese money and EU integration.”

    May’s a frustrated socialist civil servant not a Conservative

    Will no one rid us of this turbulent woman?

  4. Claire Fox is a major candidate for the Brexit Party. Read this article in the guardian and tell me you would still vote for her.

    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/nov/19/comment.radio

    I quote the above linked article where it says, ‘In her time, she has stood up for Gary Glitter’s right to download child porn, libelled ITN journalists, backed GM technology and attacked multiculturalism.’
    So how can someone vote for such a party?
    And all this stuff about the IRA too.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.