• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Rory Weal - A future Labour gobtulipe and bulltulipter"

Collapse

  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by bobspud View Post
    I think that it's ironic that the very party that he joined, has spent the last decade pissing away the Tory built government surplus of the 90's. and further more, if they hadn't gizzed the lot up the wall. We would have been in a far better state and he would probably still have a nice house to inherit one day. Instead he is sat with the very lot that screwed him...
    Nothing to do with ironing, the kid is stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • bobspud
    replied
    I think that it's ironic that the very party that he joined, has spent the last decade pissing away the Tory built government surplus of the 90's. and further more, if they hadn't gizzed the lot up the wall. We would have been in a far better state and he would probably still have a nice house to inherit one day. Instead he is sat with the very lot that screwed him...

    Leave a comment:


  • xoggoth
    replied
    Most lefties are hypocrites, students demanding huge government expenditure until they have to start paying taxes, rich sorts in posh areas well away from the problems their support of mass low skilled immigration brings, Labour MPs against private schools who send their own kids to them, minority sorts who blame whites for all their problems while bleating about racism, union leaders who rail against privilege while taking huge salaries and perks.

    So what else is new?

    Leave a comment:


  • geoff from contracta IOM
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    This isn't exactly a slum. Take away the pebbledash and it could be quite smart.

    Life on the breadline ? The little tw*t hasn't the first idea and it says a lot about the f***wits who let him up there to spout his crap about being " poor " they clearly struggle to know the meaning of it too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    The schooling *may* be free, however the Uniforms/travel etc cost money.
    That's the same for any state school.

    My son went to a state grammar, my daughter went to a state secondary. Both incurred the same costs, including travel.

    Leave a comment:


  • wobbegong
    replied
    This little ditty comes to mind . . .

    So you've been to school
    For a year or two
    And you know you've seen it all
    In daddy's car
    Thinkin' you'll go far
    Back east your kind don't crawl

    Play ethnic jazz
    To parade your snazz
    On your five grand stereo
    Braggin' that you know
    How the n***ers feel cold
    And the slums got so much soul

    It's time to taste what you most fear
    Right Guard will not help you here
    Brace yourself, my dear:

    . . . etc.

    "Holiday In Cambodia" (Dead Kennedys)

    Leave a comment:


  • Mich the Tester
    replied
    This isn't exactly a slum. Take away the pebbledash and it could be quite smart.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Nope, there'll be more dirt to dig, rocks to look under etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arturo Bassick
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    Agreed.

    Anyway. It won't be long before his whole history is laid bare in the tabloid press...
    Rory Weal: Child star of the Labour conference and the truth behind his 'life of poverty' | Mail OnlineLike this?

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by Arturo Bassick View Post
    As they do for any school.
    Agreed.

    Anyway. It won't be long before his whole history is laid bare in the tabloid press...

    Leave a comment:


  • geoff from contracta IOM
    replied
    I read the little scro*um " would not rule out becoming PM one day" fecking marvelous just what we need another career politician with no concept of life in the real world or in fact even in a proper job, raised at the knee of party coffers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arturo Bassick
    replied
    Originally posted by Churchill View Post
    The schooling *may* be free, however the Uniforms/travel etc cost money.
    As they do for any school.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    There are about 160 state grammars in the country. They are all free, so it doesn't matter whether your family is on benefits or not.

    This is something the Labour party never quite got to grips with - a grammar school is for any bright kid, not just "the rich", but it goes against their philosophy.
    The schooling *may* be free, however the Uniforms/travel etc cost money.

    Leave a comment:


  • Churchill
    replied
    Originally posted by Pondlife View Post
    Why do you think he would have to pay to attend?

    My understanding is that these schools have greater control in pupil selection but are still state funded.

    The mail mentions that he was selected not that he was paying to attend. If he got there on merit then good luck to him.
    As I said, it depends on his personal circumstances of which at present we are unaware.

    I am aware that certain Grammar Schools do have scholarships/bursaries etc to help with the cost of uniforms and such.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
    Because the majority of Labour voters who are working and not on benefits can't afford to send their kids to grammar school.
    There are about 160 state grammars in the country. They are all free, so it doesn't matter whether your family is on benefits or not.

    This is something the Labour party never quite got to grips with - a grammar school is for any bright kid, not just "the rich", but it goes against their philosophy.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X