Chomper Higgot

Opinions differ.

So does BS, and these days there’s no shortage of that in Florida.

An example of complete ignoring the reality before you. And of course hyperbole, North Korea/China, get a grip.

Rightwing political interference and censoring in the BBC has been exposed.

He was being magnanimous in victory, as you should be in defeat.

My goodness, you’re having a bad start to the day. The BBC manage have backed down because of the splendid response from Gary’s co presenters, public support for Lineker and the fact they know they haven’t got a leg to stand on.

It’s not about the migrants, it’s about the politically motivated censoring of Gary Lineker. The BBC management have seen sense and U-turned. Sorry that is such a disappointment to you, but it is what it is.

Gary Lineker has responded on Twitter: ”A final thought: however difficult the last few days have been, it simply doesn’t compare to having to flee your home from persecution or war to seek refuge in a land far away. It’s heartwarming to have seen the empathy towards their plight from so many of you. We remain a country of predominantly tolerant, welcoming and generous people. Thank you. “ Pure lass Gary, thank you too.

Absolutely nothing to do with Lineker’s criticism of the language used by the Government when discussing migrants.

Envy isn’t a good look.

Maybe the Blob could stand against DeDantis. It would be nice to see him defeated by a Green Candidate.

62 % of Americans support the plan. Money not spent on loan repayments will be spent elsewhere, driving growth at the bottom of the economy and increasing tax revenues.

All they had to do is not lie.

No offense to LL but I’m not sure I do.

It’s a common line of defense employed by people who wish to be offensive to others but don’t want to take responsibility for their words.

You are attributing motives without any evidence beyond your own supposition. You might want to be a little more circumspect and refer to your personal un substantiated opinions as just that. If you categorically state something to be so you need evidence that it is just so. Once again you don’t have any.

I’ve called out the ‘he was only joking Defense’. It’s you who used that defense, not me, so please let’s not get into the nonsense where I am somehow responsible to argue the pros and cons of a defense I myself didn’t use.

So let’s hear these views that confirm him to be a socialist?

The ‘he was only joking’ defense.

I didn’t ask you for a definition of a socialist, I already know the definition. What I asked you for is evidence to back up your clear statements that Lineker is a socialist. A statement from Lineker that he’s a socialist or evidence that he’s a member of a socialist political party would suffice, Ad hominem attack’s, and supposition don’t cut it

Still waiting for your evidence of Lineker being any kind of socialist. Or is this another of your ‘make it up as you go along’ things?

Hardly so given the political history of the BBC Director General and the stink of corruption sound Johnson appointing his chum as the BBC Chairman.

Defining poor at £50,000 a year and then providing the national average salary of £38,000 is a laughable way to attempt to get out of not being able to back up your claim: ”I said it is mainly the poor that pay his salary.”

Sorry Johnny, your comment was: ”I said it is mainly the poor that pay his salary.” I’ve questioned this ‘Mainly the poor’. Now you come back with the absurdity of asking me to define poor when it was you that injected ‘the poor’ into the discussion. There are a number of possibilities amongst which are these: 1. You fabricated the whole ‘mainly the poor’ argument and you don’t have any evidence to back up your assertion. 2. You are not engaging in honest good faith debate. Inserting arguments about ‘the poor’ into a discussion and then asking others to define ‘ poor’ for you is utter nonsense.

Faux outrage. And a swerve on who is responsible for this decision into the bargain.