Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Picture of Theresa Coffey

How often do Tories commentators like Nad drool over Johnson going down the zip wire at the London Olympics or when he used to pretend that he was going out running dressed like a bag of shite?

That's eccentricity, being a character.

As ever, money (or coming from it) makes anything acceptable.

satnav wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:36 pm How often do Tories commentators like Nad drool over Johnson going down the zip wire at the London Olympics or when he used to pretend that he was going out running dressed like a bag of shite?

Please don't use the words "Nad" and "Johnson going down" in close proximity. It's not a good image.

True to type, Johnson got stuck on that zip wire because he lied about his weight.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -nowt.html

Dorries on something for nothing culture, bringing up your background all the time, accepting freebies, playing the system, and pot/kettle differentiation.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 25, 2024 1:48 pm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -nowt.html

Dorries on something for nothing culture, bringing up your background all the time, accepting freebies, playing the system, and pot/kettle differentiation.

I must have sourced my Irony meter from Hamas.

Nad is on Newsnight plugging her new book (of course), seemingly an expose of un-named male Tory MPs cavorting nekkid in an office in Portcullis House and getting their photies taken in flagrante. Nad has seen the images, but of course, she is keeping schtuum about who exactly was involved. Oh and Nad was at pains to point out that everything in her book has been cleared by expert lawyers (at the insistence of her publishers, apparently).



It’s all a load of old shite, of course, but hey, Nad’s got a book to flog.

Yeah, getting a copy of Rivals and updating all the references and crossing out "TV executive" and pencilling in "MP" might just require a lawyer or two.

Review in The Grauniad is an entertaining read :
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/ ... ies-review

Downfall eh!

"Mein Johnson, you aren't the Prime Minister any more."

<<A shaking hand removes his glasses>>

Meanwhile outside, Nad's friend reassures her.

"I'm sure the Damehood's just delayed in the post"

Abernathy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 25, 2024 11:48 am Review in The Grauniad is an entertaining read :
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/ ... ies-review

Indeed.

https://www.smry.ai/proxy?url=https%3A% ... strup.html

It's been a while. What's she talking about?

First, there's her revelation that in fact it was all Question Time's fault that she got laughed at. And her opinion of Mariella Frostrup?

Take the rather fabulous Mariella Frostrup, a veteran broadcaster and acclaimed campaigning journalist. You couldn’t wish for a nicer and more fun person to sit down to dinner with – if you’re talking about anything but politics.

Mariella’s contribution to the programme was to make the case for refugees....

[snip]

Sadly, like every champagne socialist I know, she was speaking without, I suspect, her own life ever having been particularly impacted by the out-of-control number of asylum seekers and illegal migrants arriving here and the knock-on effect on already over-stretched public services....

[snip]

Mariella is married to a very successful human rights lawyer, lives in a house in leafy Somerset, and I am sure that her financial status means that if she can’t get an NHS appointment, she could pay for a private one. As ever, hypocrisy is lost on a liberal bleeding heart.

"Leafy Somerset" got me wondering. First, isn't anywhere not an inner city (and especially in the countryside) going to be a bit "leafy"? The countryside where we're all told everyone votes Reform? And since when does "leafy" indicate luxury? I remember a few years ago Carole Malone saying that Jeremy Corbyn's policies might "Go down well in a church hall in his leafy Islington village", which seemed to suggest she has a rather odd idea of north London. Anyway, back to QT. Nads has a plan to fix it:

There is a way for Question Time to fix this problem – by having an audience made up of a percentage of members of respective political parties based on the poll ratings of the previous week.

Public opinion shifts so quickly in a world of rolling news that the BBC should not be relying on an outdated model of selection. Membership of political parties or organisations should be checked and proof of membership provided at the time of application and entry to the venue where the programme is filmed.

In the words of Malcolm Tucker, is the weather nice in your reality? So, rather than getting 'ordinary' people, everyone in the audience is a committed member of a party. And what about where it's broadcast from? How will that affect the selection?

Anyway, her theory about QT ("long been the suspicion" and "I believe" doing a lot of work here) is topped off with a claim that she's no careerist, and that she was never one to obey the rules. Ahem.

Moving on, she touches on Britney Spears, whose ex-husband seems to be a bit of a shit. He's published a 'tell-all' memoir, which wily old Nad reckons is a sneaky opportunity to exploit his links to the singer. Well, what a fucking profound insight! And it's also an excuse to list some of Britney's odder-seeming acts, couched in a 'just saying' disclaimer. In other words, who'd want to be married to that mad bat?

Finally, she's cottoned on that Andrew and Fergie might be bit fucking toxic.

And yet they have one powerful ace up their sleeve. Andrew, reportedly his mother’s favourite, has lived through every royal drama of recent decades, while Fergie was at one time close to Princess Diana.

If either of them was to kiss and tell all, it would be sensational, miring the Firm in yet more controversy.

It would also further damage the standing of their daughters, Beatrice and Eugenie.

I'm no monarchist or follower of royal gossip, but I'm guessing that the relevance and impact of any such revelations would be somewhere between fuck and all.

Seriously, have a read. Someone thinks she deserves paying for this shit.

Has Nad’s life ever been affected by “out of control asylum”, bar the fact she was part of a government that allowed the system to end up the mess it’s become?

Like her ex seat (that she didn’t visit for about a year) hardly suggests there would be a major issue. Also probably should be elsewhere considering her move to reform, yet the bin would be best for her and her views.

It’s hard for these people to hear an alternative argument.

The same Nadine Dorries that fucked off from her constituency (for "security reasons") to live in a Cotswold village.

Last time I checked, the Cotswolds were pretty "leafy" too.

The way to deal with "out-of-control number of asylum seekers and illegal migrants" or rather politicians like Dorries claiming they are, is use them in TV ads. Reform will then produce verifiable stats showing what a tiny percentage of the population they are.

soulboy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 30, 2025 7:32 am The same Nadine Dorries that fucked off from her constituency (for "security reasons") to live in a Cotswold village.

Last time I checked, the Cotswolds were pretty "leafy" too.

Near Tewkesbury, apparently. The town itself is pretty average, but I expect it was a nice village she lived in.

Tewkesbury now has a Liberal Democrat MP, with a 6,200 majority.

An interview with Richard Murphy when he first came to prominence described him as living in 'leafy Downham Market.' Its in the Fens there's less trees than Lambeth.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 25, 2024 1:48 pm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -nowt.html

Dorries on something for nothing culture, bringing up your background all the time, accepting freebies, playing the system, and pot/kettle differentiation.

For once, the Mail has sourced from a subject matter expert.