Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol 4)
Discussion
Jeremy Vine on the late evening news, wandering around in front of a 'green screen' Washington Monument while b
king on about the 2012 US election results. For effing minutes. It's meant to be news - if we wanted to watch a re-run of 2012 we'd go elsewhere to find it.
The fact that he presented the self same piece two nights in succession has annoyed me beyond reason.
king on about the 2012 US election results. For effing minutes. It's meant to be news - if we wanted to watch a re-run of 2012 we'd go elsewhere to find it.The fact that he presented the self same piece two nights in succession has annoyed me beyond reason.
OpulentBob said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37908648
Professionally fking offended student s who haven't got a fking blue razoo about life, getting all y and fking self fking righteous because of some perceived comment behind the scenes at Universally cockfaced Challenged and they "don't want to be oppressed" so they're boycotting. fking just fk off you absolute throbbing cockgobblers. Nobody gives a fk about you. You're Reading uni. fking READING. It's st there. I know. My sister lives there and it's fking st. Nobody gives a st if Reading Uni burns down. In fact they - we - would all cheer and nail the doors shut so you fking go up with it.
fking entitled student union pricks. Get a fking job you steaming turds. May your jap's eyes split and fester. s.
May I congratulate you Bob, on such an erudite and thought-provoking philosophical post. Professionally f
king offended student s who haven't got a fking blue razoo about life, getting all y and fking self fking righteous because of some perceived comment behind the scenes at Universally cockfaced Challenged and they "don't want to be oppressed" so they're boycotting. fking just fk off you absolute throbbing cockgobblers. Nobody gives a fk about you. You're Reading uni. fking READING. It's st there. I know. My sister lives there and it's fking st. Nobody gives a st if Reading Uni burns down. In fact they - we - would all cheer and nail the doors shut so you fking go up with it. f
king entitled student union pricks. Get a fking job you steaming turds. May your jap's eyes split and fester. s. 
However, I feel that in the light of today's world-changing news, this subject will be consigned to take a back seat in the grand scheme of things.
Shame really.
The fking BBC.
All those free-to-air, digital, and on line channels to fk about with, and what did I get this morning?
No Fking British News Whatsoever.
Seriously. If I want to know about the result of an election eleventy three bajillion miles away across the specific ocean, then let Naga "oh my stars, she's so damn cute" Munchetty, and Charlie "how the actual fk does he get his hair to stay like that" Stayt tell me on which other BBC channel the results can be found.
It's bad enough that most of the 'news' on the BBC Breakfast News show is actually more like 'opinion'. But listening to a panel of numpties second guessing the voting patterns of the American electorate ad nauseam? Seriously chaps - that st had worn thin within five minutes of tuning in. Nothing about just waiting until the results were in would have changed the results. So put BBC South To-fking-day back on BBC1 where it damned well belongs and just how the hell am I expected to cope all bloody day without my daily fix of Carol Kirkwood flirting with me (personally) right through her weather forecast?
The bloody BBC could have dedicated one, or perhaps two channels to this turgid bullocks. No need to force feed us with the same bloody st on every single channel you can muster. I'm not for one moment suggesting that they shouldn't mention the US election on the main Breakfast News bulletin, but it should be just one story among many, not the sole thread running through an entire morning's output.
And quit with those bloody "graphics". I don't need you to "pile the electoral college votes up next to the Washington monument". I can understand a crisp, clear graph just as well.
king BBC.All those free-to-air, digital, and on line channels to f
k about with, and what did I get this morning?No F
king British News Whatsoever.Seriously. If I want to know about the result of an election eleventy three bajillion miles away across the specific ocean, then let Naga "oh my stars, she's so damn cute" Munchetty, and Charlie "how the actual f
k does he get his hair to stay like that" Stayt tell me on which other BBC channel the results can be found.It's bad enough that most of the 'news' on the BBC Breakfast News show is actually more like 'opinion'. But listening to a panel of numpties second guessing the voting patterns of the American electorate ad nauseam? Seriously chaps - that s
t had worn thin within five minutes of tuning in. Nothing about just waiting until the results were in would have changed the results. So put BBC South To-fking-day back on BBC1 where it damned well belongs and just how the hell am I expected to cope all bloody day without my daily fix of Carol Kirkwood flirting with me (personally) right through her weather forecast?The bloody BBC could have dedicated one, or perhaps two channels to this turgid bullocks. No need to force feed us with the same bloody s
t on every single channel you can muster. I'm not for one moment suggesting that they shouldn't mention the US election on the main Breakfast News bulletin, but it should be just one story among many, not the sole thread running through an entire morning's output.And quit with those bloody "graphics". I don't need you to "pile the electoral college votes up next to the Washington monument". I can understand a crisp, clear graph just as well.
yellowjack said:
The fking BBC.
All those free-to-air, digital, and on line channels to fk about with, and what did I get this morning?
No Fking British News Whatsoever.
Seriously. If I want to know about the result of an election eleventy three bajillion miles away across the specific ocean, then let Naga "oh my stars, she's so damn cute" Munchetty, and Charlie "how the actual fk does he get his hair to stay like that" Stayt tell me on which other BBC channel the results can be found.
It's bad enough that most of the 'news' on the BBC Breakfast News show is actually more like 'opinion'. But listening to a panel of numpties second guessing the voting patterns of the American electorate ad nauseam? Seriously chaps - that st had worn thin within five minutes of tuning in. Nothing about just waiting until the results were in would have changed the results. So put BBC South To-fking-day back on BBC1 where it damned well belongs and just how the hell am I expected to cope all bloody day without my daily fix of Carol Kirkwood flirting with me (personally) right through her weather forecast?
The bloody BBC could have dedicated one, or perhaps two channels to this turgid bullocks. No need to force feed us with the same bloody st on every single channel you can muster. I'm not for one moment suggesting that they shouldn't mention the US election on the main Breakfast News bulletin, but it should be just one story among many, not the sole thread running through an entire morning's output.
And quit with those bloody "graphics". I don't need you to "pile the electoral college votes up next to the Washington monument". I can understand a crisp, clear graph just as well.
And yet yesterday's headline on their (BBC) news website, all fking BBC.All those free-to-air, digital, and on line channels to f
k about with, and what did I get this morning?No F
king British News Whatsoever.Seriously. If I want to know about the result of an election eleventy three bajillion miles away across the specific ocean, then let Naga "oh my stars, she's so damn cute" Munchetty, and Charlie "how the actual f
k does he get his hair to stay like that" Stayt tell me on which other BBC channel the results can be found.It's bad enough that most of the 'news' on the BBC Breakfast News show is actually more like 'opinion'. But listening to a panel of numpties second guessing the voting patterns of the American electorate ad nauseam? Seriously chaps - that s
t had worn thin within five minutes of tuning in. Nothing about just waiting until the results were in would have changed the results. So put BBC South To-fking-day back on BBC1 where it damned well belongs and just how the hell am I expected to cope all bloody day without my daily fix of Carol Kirkwood flirting with me (personally) right through her weather forecast?The bloody BBC could have dedicated one, or perhaps two channels to this turgid bullocks. No need to force feed us with the same bloody s
t on every single channel you can muster. I'm not for one moment suggesting that they shouldn't mention the US election on the main Breakfast News bulletin, but it should be just one story among many, not the sole thread running through an entire morning's output.And quit with those bloody "graphics". I don't need you to "pile the electoral college votes up next to the Washington monument". I can understand a crisp, clear graph just as well.
king day, was Prince Harry's discomfort at some people saying things about his girlfriend. And you complain they don't run British news? Utterly bizarre.I am inclined to agree with you, Yellowjack, but that's not being annoyed beyond reason.
With the Beeb harping on about this debacle to the exclusion of everything else, we all have good reason to be annoyed with them!
Unless of course there is no British news at all, in which case they should have said so.
With the Beeb harping on about this debacle to the exclusion of everything else, we all have good reason to be annoyed with them!
Unless of course there is no British news at all, in which case they should have said so.
Edited by glenrobbo on Wednesday 9th November 11:30
MartG said:
What the fk is the plural of Weetabix ?
Weetabixes sounds clunky, Weetabi ?
Perhaps like sheep, fish, Lego and deer, it has no plural?k is the plural of Weetabix ?Weetabixes sounds clunky, Weetabi ?
An uncountable noun is the phrase, which is slightly wrong as Weetabix are extremely easy to count because it tells you on the box how many there are.
glenrobbo said:
I am inclined to agree with you, Yellowjack, but that's not being annoyed beyond reason.
With the Beeb harping on about this debacle to the exclusion of everything else, we all have good reason to be annoyed with them!
Unless of course there is no British news at all, in which case they should have said so.
Well. To update this farce, I caught a snippet on the traffic news on the car radio this morning.With the Beeb harping on about this debacle to the exclusion of everything else, we all have good reason to be annoyed with them!
Unless of course there is no British news at all, in which case they should have said so.
Edited by glenrobbo on Wednesday 9th November 11:30
Seems that there was a "derailment incident" involving a tram in Croydon that was causing some traffic problems in the area.
But wait? Apparently, now that we're done obsessing about all things Merkin, we're allowed to find out that this seemingly minor derailment is in fact a tram lying on it's side in the street, people trapped and "some loss of life". This is actual, real news, happening actually now, here in our own actual country. But hey? Some hicks have elected a man with a pubic wig on his head as their prime minister. That's far more important than stuff that actually might affect me now, today. Like a major emergency services operation that it'd be a good idea to give a wide berth to?
51 casualties to hospital according to London Ambulance Service. A likely fatal accident investigation to conduct, and then a bloody great tram to get recovered. The whole area could be in chaos for days. "The whole area has come to a standstill". Maybe people could avoid the area if the BBC wasn't stuffed up it's corporate arse droning on about "how many routes" there are for Trump to get into the White House. I always thought there were two routes? The front gate, and the back gate.
*Joke*: How many bullets would it take to clear out the entire BBC news and current affairs editorial team? Get 'em in a queue to fill in their expenses claim forms, and I reckon one good shot with a Raufoss .50cal API round should sort the feckin lot out.
Arrrrrrgh!
It most definitely IS a *joke* that I have to add that before some idiot tells me my humour is far too dark and sounds like an actual threat to kill. It isn't. For one thing, I've got no .50cal ammo, nor an AW50 to fire it from...
...sadly.
Edit to add:
The Trump farce is still the top story on the BBC website. The Croydon Tram disaster is story number seven, reading in the traditional left-to-right and top-to-bottom fashion...
Edited by yellowjack on Wednesday 9th November 13:05
BBC on Brexit - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
BBC on Trump - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
If they were posing a question to the losing side, fair enough, but no, it's just their general default take/premise.
BBC on Trump - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
If they were posing a question to the losing side, fair enough, but no, it's just their general default take/premise.
Balmoral said:
BBC on Brexit - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
BBC on Trump - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
If they were posing a question to the losing side, fair enough, but no, it's just their general default take/premise.
It's because the BBC is FAR from politically neutral. But I like the BBC's news output more than other channels'. It's why I read the Daily Mail too. To "bring balance to the force"... BBC on Trump - "What went wrong?" or "Who's to blame for this?", never "Who's to congratulate for this?"
If they were posing a question to the losing side, fair enough, but no, it's just their general default take/premise.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff