Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2023 8:44 am "Sapphist coppers"?

That's the name of the short video that made an impression on him the time he did some 'research' into PornHub.

I had* to Google it. Pete's the top result. After that, it's rule 34.

*I didn't really [/Phoebe Waller-Bridge]

The irony of fucking Hitchens describing anyone else as a puritan is off the charts.

Peter’s had a few pints of Champagne and doesn’t need anyone. Fug New Year and fug the lot of yer.

Well, Peter, nobody else is going to publicly comment on your lack of a social life.

Hitchens the Lesser would be laser focused on anyone else giving an empty 'virtue signal' just like he did. But it's different when it comes to him, oh no - "If I can't be happy, no one else should be".

Youngian wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 5:09 pm Peter’s had a few pints of Champagne and doesn’t need anyone. Fug New Year and fug the lot of yer.

Something, something ... Berlin calendar!!

He ‘s off his fucking chump.

There’s plenty of talking head grifters who’ll be writing this stuff to order. Just business but not off their fucking chumps. But Peter Hitch is.

Do you remember those far-off, halcyon days of 2019, when the Tories claimed to be the true champions of the working class?

davidjay wrote: ↑Sat Dec 30, 2023 5:22 pm Do you remember those far-off, halcyon days of 2019, when the Tories claimed to be the true champions of the working class?

One of their MPs cheekily suggested renaming the Conservatives "The Workers Party" which I'm sure sounded good until they realised that there was already one such party with that name already standing for elections.

I would donate various bits of anatomy to see "Boris Johnson Is In The Stickies" sprayed on a West Belfast wall

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... hered.html

He's got religion. He gets it, nobody else does, not those vicars and bishops, not those historical figures who created the CoE so a king could dump his wife, not those clever science types, and definitely not those other people in his church. Just him.

In other news, he's had an idea for a film, so everyone's wrong for not making it. And something about Nelson and H&S and fuck it, he's just Littlejohn with a thesaurus.

What a shocker. The last living Puritan on par with the pilgrim fathers thinks the church should be more about misery, veiled threats of hell and moral lecturing rather than inclusive, modern and actually attempting to live up to the lessons of selflessness and love for all that the bible puts forth. (Well, when it’s not talking about stoning people to death for eating fish on a Wednesday or other such bullshit.) But as ever, it all comes down to Hitch minor’s over-riding personality trait - supporting literally anything that either makes him look or feel superior, and/or allows people like him to get a head start. His Wikipedia entry is just a list of terrible ideas he sticks up for for doubtless the worst reasons: FPTP, capital punishment, grammar schools, no lockdowns, anti-vaccination, harsher penalties for even minor drug use, leaving the EU, revoking same sex marriage, denial of man-made climate change, anti-Ukraine. It’s just a laundry list of being on the wrong side of any sort of progress. And all the things he does support (including nonsense like imperial measures) are all - remarkably - things where he as a middle aged upper class white man stands to benefit or at the very least suffer no penalty.

His column could just be replaced with a picture of his sneering, disapproving face every week and its content would be almost exactly the same.

The only positive which we can take from this is that he is profoundly unhappy.

thinks the church should be more about misery, veiled threats of hell and moral lecturing rather than inclusive, modern and actually attempting to live up to the lessons of selflessness and love for all that the bible puts forth.

Should become a Catholic, then

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2024 3:13 pm What a shocker. The last living Puritan on par with the pilgrim fathers thinks the church should be more about misery, veiled threats of hell and moral lecturing rather than inclusive, modern and actually attempting to live up to the lessons of selflessness and love for all that the bible puts forth. (Well, when it’s not talking about stoning people to death for eating fish on a Wednesday or other such bullshit.) But as ever, it all comes down to Hitch minor’s over-riding personality trait - supporting literally anything that either makes him look or feel superior, and/or allows people like him to get a head start. His Wikipedia entry is just a list of terrible ideas he sticks up for for doubtless the worst reasons: FPTP, capital punishment, grammar schools, no lockdowns, anti-vaccination, harsher penalties for even minor drug use, leaving the EU, revoking same sex marriage, denial of man-made climate change, anti-Ukraine. It’s just a laundry list of being on the wrong side of any sort of progress. And all the things he does support (including nonsense like imperial measures) are all - remarkably - things where he as a middle aged upper class white man stands to benefit or at the very least suffer no penalty.

His column could just be replaced with a picture of his sneering, disapproving face every week and its content would be almost exactly the same.

Given all this, would it be unfair to describe his Mail On Sunday column as Wingnut Welfare? IMO he's be unlikely to gain a similar opinion column in any other national newspaper.

Watchman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2024 5:02 pm

thinks the church should be more about misery, veiled threats of hell and moral lecturing rather than inclusive, modern and actually attempting to live up to the lessons of selflessness and love for all that the bible puts forth.

Should become a Catholic, then

Too much drink.

Popery!

Besides, it's followed by all those Celtic and Latin types, with their catchy music and tendency to party.

Spoonman wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2024 5:20 pm
Given all this, would it be unfair to describe his Mail On Sunday column as Wingnut Welfare? IMO he's be unlikely to gain a similar opinion column in any other national newspaper.

I suspect he would get a column elsewhere, but it’s whether he’d take it. After all, he left the Express for moral reasons, and ended up working for Paul ‘cunt cunt cunt’ Dacre, one of the most morally bankrupt people in Britain. Which might explain why he always made a point of saying he writes for the MoS, as that bit of absurd mental gymnastics means he can continue to enjoy his fat salary and sit on his high horse. So if he goes now and works for Murdoch or the Barclays - both abhorrent fuckers, he’ll be clearly hypocritical. And we can’t have that.

I think he’s trapped himself on a bitter, hateful rag churning out sub Alf Garnet rants for pennies to pensioners and bigots, because they’re the only people left who see him as some sort of intellectual.