Blog powered by Typepad

« Read this - and that's an order! | Main | What would old Bill Shakespeare have made of 'King' Donald? »

Tuesday, 01 January 2019

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Happy New Year!

David, thanks for that link...I love it! We too shall 'brunch' mightily in about 90 minutes.

We had friends over for a house party that lasted until the wee hours. All were originally from the Chicago area and remembered pub crawling the city's near north for past New Year's celebrations.

Sad to say, the last relative living in the city moved to Valparaiso, Indiana last year. Over the past 3 or 4 years there's been an exodus including 6 others and their families. Even though crime is down, it's not mostly isolated to well-defined parts of the city as it once was. Maybe worse, Chicago has become insufferably overcrowded, chaotic, and comparable to LA for traffic.

Through my personal morning fog of whiskey and champagne, best wishes for the new year.

Funny, isn't it, Bob, how many of those cities from which families are fleeing have been under Democratic control for years!

David, it's also funny that Chicago and others grew and improved in so many ways under Democratic control. It would simplify everything if politics were the only answer. Alas, it ain't so.

Note that although Churchill, as First Lord, planned the failed naval campaign (a dash up the channel, bombard Constantinople and get the Turks to go neutral, allowing Allied access to the Black Sea and up the Danube into Austria-Hungary and Germany)at Gallipoli he had no role or even considered the land campaign which was entirely the Army's doing. The land campaign ruined the reputation of General Sir Ian Hamilton who was put in charge by the Army following a previously solid career and he also had no part in planning the Gallipoli campaign! Churchill's idea was later described as the "only strategic idea of the war".

"Mind you, if we end up with both I’ll be joining the doomsayers."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/02/forty-years-ago-britain-faced-far-worse-situation-fearful-now/

Philip Johnston. Possibly the dunciest dunce in the history of dunces working at the DT.

Spends an entire article saying everything's ok and going to be nothing like it was 40 years ago which he describes in all its agonizing terror, then in a final throw away comment says but it just might be that bad.

Quite unbelievable.

He wholeheartedly endorses a change to UK foreign relations which he assures us won't be as bad as 40 years ago, then explains exactly how it might be - Wrinklies get no deal and Youf vote in Corbyn - rounding off with "so then again it might be (agonizing terror)".

This hack specimen went on strike for a 40% pay rise in 1979.

He's a saboteur and traitor to Britain, yet you guys probably applaud him.

Who's on Zog, BOE, eh?

SoD

I didn't say you were on Zog SoD, but from Zog. Subtle difference. In any case, I don't applaud this Johnson guy. And I don't buy the Telegraph.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)