h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Is it just me, or does Michael Howard's wife (worth a look, I'll admit) seem to drift into shot whenever he's being interviewed or speaking?

Anyone noticed any other little contrivances like that?

*trots off to dictionary to see if 'contrivances' is a word*

I've sent a question into Newsnight for when he's being interviewed by Paxo this Friday.

"Did you threaten to overrule him?"

Howard Flight or the other fella?

(they'll be fighting like stoats in a sack before the half hours done I'd put money on it. )

I thought it was funny when labour bussed in the same bunch of photogenic people to stand around in the background at several of their launches.

It's worrying the little things that can make a difference to the general public's perception of a candidate. In Major's first election campaign (can't remember year) I heard that his popularity didn't rise until he was pelted with eggs. Then he shot up in the polls.

Does that mean John Prescott is going to win the nations hearts ~ the Countryside Alliance do so love to chuck stuff at him

Just imagine how popular Robert Kilroy-Silk must have gotten after the slurry incident.

Hang on Kilroy Silk popular ~ thats not funny its down right scary.

he's My euro MP.. sooo embarassing!!

Dunno where that leaves us now though, rudderless in Europe, I'm a bit annoyed as it goes, if he didn't want to keep the job he should have resigned and had a by election, not just wander off to erewash like that!

In fairness, the bussing of people to Labour events is a bit of a misnomer.

The family in question where floating voters who wrote to thank their local MP for something she (I *believe* it was Oona King) had done for them. They were invited to one event, and then found themselves with the opportunity to meet the PM at a second. They were 'rewarded' with croissants and coffee and were much delighted when GB stopped to talk to smallest child about Thomas the Tank Engine when said child stated that he (GB) had the same name as one of her favourite characters. (Gordon, as any fule know, was the biggest and most important engine in the yard...)

For this they were castigated by the press (as the father put it, there was a great need to make them out 'not to be normal' - they don't for example own a tv set, which the Mail obviously found to be proof of some form of mental abberation) and held up to ridicule.

The whole sorry thing was outlined in the Guardian last week sometime.

"they don't for example own a tv set, which the Mail obviously found to be proof of some form of mental abberation"

muchly!

Much as though I love TV and films ect I rather think if/when I have children I might get rid of it. Or at least severly curtail its usage. I dont think loads of TV is particularly good for young children.

>>Is it just me, or does Michael Howard's wife (worth a look, I'll admit) seem to drift into shot whenever he's being interviewed or speaking? <<

They were talking about that on Sky News last night with two womens magazine editors, and apparently they do it because the public find her atractive.

This is completely off-topic but it fits the thread title and I didn't want to start a new thread in case someone had posted it before and then I'd look really stupid . Anyway...

Found this in TB's introduction in the Labour Party manifesto:

"In 1997 we promised a start, not a revolution. We made five specific five-year pledges. Three have been completed early; all will be completed within five years, as we promised."

Anyone else see the problem with this?

Did he ever say when he'd start trying to complete the pledges.
If it was election night he's in trouble but if it was last week he's got plenty of time.

Actually no, but the context implies 1997. It doesn't say that the 5 years have to be contiguous though