Boris taking a kicking on Andrew Marr show.

[Vroomer]

Great performance from Boris. it won't sway his detractors, but his supporters will like him even more.

[Gene Vincent]

On Jeremy Vine R2 now...

[vxr8mate]

Mr Snap said:

Daily Telegraph: "It is the function of BBC journalists to bash up polticians, particularly people like me." Mr Johnson told reporters.
He added: "Fair play to Eddie, he landed a good one."

Personally, I wouldn't vote for Boris. But you must admit that he takes his lumps with grace and doesn't call for the BBC to be closed down when they do their job.
I'd now like the BBC do the same with party leaders and those contending for leadership.

After watching this on iPlayer I agree with all of the above.

[Vince70]

Does anyone believe the buffoonery act that Boris puts on,
He is a scheming st and he will be taking over from the imbecilic two faced Cameron once he gets chucked out.

Michael Howard saw through Boris and that's why he chucked him out.
Also Lord Tebbit saw through Cameron and that's why he said vote for anything bar him.

The so called Tories are a joke you really can't tell the difference between them and the lib dem or labour, the problem is their all scheming sts on the make for their own good.

None of them care for us or country.

UKIP all the way for me for now on it seems to be the only party with any integrity.


Rant over

Edited by Vince70 on Tuesday 26th March 16:08

[Wadeski]

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

They had him bang to rights, he squirmed under the questioning, end of. I dont mind Boris, but he's just as much of a politician as anyone else in Westminster, he just has a better act.

[turbobloke]

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

It's not necessary, she manages it all by herself.

[RegMolehusband]

Vince70 said:

None of them don't care for us or country.

So that's good then, right?

[rohrl]

turbobloke said:

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

It's not necessary, she manages it all by herself.

Wadeski's right though isn't he?

[Vince70]

RegMolehusband said:

Vince70 said:

None of them don't care for us or country.

So that's good then, right?

Opps Sorry this Siri thing on my iPad is driving me potty, I've now gone back to typing

[turbobloke]

rohrl said:

turbobloke said:

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

It's not necessary, she manages it all by herself.

Wadeski's right though isn't he?

Not about all the people saying the interview was unfair as such. The issue raised is about more than fairness, which sounds like a feeble point to make on behalf of a senior politician - more importantly was it the best approach to take in order to discover Boris's motivation and policy priorities as PM, or simply a pre-determined personal hatchet job (at mates' rates for the beeb's political chums) to generate lowbrow coverage for the BBC to re-hash and serve up in the event of a Boris leadership challenge which they clearly fear - it was the latter for sure.

As to any BBC hack 'skewering' Harperson and the fall-out, well I can't recall it happening and can't imagine it either, unless she calls a pensioner a bigot or is personally damaging Labour's chances of election victory in some other way and needs slapping down. When Gove took her apart in a joint interview it was celebrated in a PH thread at the time, rightly so because it was done calmly and clinically and politely. Squealing = calm down dear.

Also there's no such thing as a single PH reaction. PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.

Boris's opponents fear his considerable chances of success in a General Election as a future Conservative leader and will stoop as low as necessary when trying to damage his prospects, this is the main message to emerge from the paxo-wannabe interview.

[Countdown]

rohrl said:

turbobloke said:

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

It's not necessary, she manages it all by herself.

Wadeski's right though isn't he?

Not at all. When the BBC or any other media give a Labour politician (or indeed any politician who isn't a right-winger) a hard time it's a fair and balanced interview which rightly exposes the Incompetent half-wit for the fool that he/she patently is).

On the other hand a similar approach to Boris or any of his ilk is a lefty media hatchet job.

FACT.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

rohrl said:

turbobloke said:

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

It's not necessary, she manages it all by herself.

Wadeski's right though isn't he?

Not at all. When the BBC or any other media give a Labour politician (or indeed any politician who isn't a right-winger) a hard time it's a fair and balanced interview which rightly exposes the Incompetent half-wit for the fool that he/she patently is).

On the other hand a similar approach to Boris or any of his ilk is a lefty media hatchet job.

FACT.

Rhetoric ^^

Must try harder when struggling to stereotype.

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

[AnonSpoilSport]

Wadeski said:

All the people saying the interview was unfair - if the BBC had skewered Harriet Harperson there would be squeals of delight here.

They had him bang to rights, he squirmed under the questioning, end of. I dont mind Boris, but he's just as much of a politician as anyone else in Westminster, he just has a better act.

Yep, I would squeal with delight, probably - well, if I overreacted like that and was a teenage girl. I'd definitely enjoy it, but, dependent on what was said, I'd also think it unfair and/or unprofessional journalism. If handled the same way. Might wince a bit too.

I actually enjoyed this, and the documentary, as entertainment; as a nervous-making 'laugh'. But did wince at times and felt a bit uncomfortable, and guilty that I was laughing. As I might even for Harpy. Huhne though, well that's another matter...

The worse thing - which happens from time to time - is if it produces some personal sympathy in me for a politician I personally dislike or am against the policies of. I prefer to be able to despise my politicians - just feels 'cleaner' that way!

[Gene Vincent]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

It has to be said that the zeitgeist of the regular political posters here is undoubtedly on the right of political thinking and that, without doubt, reflected in many of the sways and leans in such threads.

It's not massively aberrant but it is present.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

First question - yes. Second question - no.

Did your post add anything or was it just more vacuous invective?

[rohrl]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

Well turbobloke said it and he's the moderate, middle-of-the-road voice of sense and reason so it must be true.

Anyone to the left of him is a raving lefty and anyone to the right...

[turbobloke]

AnonSpoilSport said:

Huhne though, well that's another matter...

AnonSpoilSport said:

I prefer to be able to despise my politicians - just feels 'cleaner' that way!

Almost across the board, you're on a winner at the moment.

Dan Hannan?

[turbobloke]

rohrl said:

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

Well turbobloke said it and he's the moderate, middle-of-the-road voice of sense and reason so it must be true.

Anyone to the left of him is a raving lefty and anyone to the right...

On that ineffective and inaccurate voluntary offering, you're no Mair.

And for sure I'm not Boris.

[AnonSpoilSport]

turbobloke said:

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

PHers are generally well placed and well prepared to judge any event on its merits.
.

Is there any rationale to that statement? Or is just more unadulterated bullst?

First question - yes. Second question - no.

Did your post add anything or was it just more vacuous invective?

TB, you were leaving Countdown out of the original statement weren't you? No one would claim he was well prepared or well placed to judge much at all, surely...