Members only wrote:
> On Aug 23, 7:37 am, "Mary Fisher Is Never Wrong"
> <astoun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> kim wrote:
>>> Since we've already had a very long discussion on what Prince
>>> Harry's possible future bride should or should not be called, how
>>> about we now begin naming his children?
>>
>>> (kim)
>>
>> 'Schwamm' - seems approriate (German for 'sponge')
>>
>> "Happy birthday little Schwamm, you're on the civil list...."
>
> Yes the RF's time is up, actually it was a long time ago. They serve
> no purpose at all, the resentment in the country is palabable.
There was a TV programme earlier this evening, in which former
conservative
MP, Anne Widdicombe, confronted 'benefit scroungers'
One of her interviewees was 'Britain's laziest man - a singularly jolly
individual with two wives and 18 lids, who nets £38,000 a year for doing
nothing more than impregnating his wimmin on a bi-annual basis.
Ms Widdicombe (whom, actually, I rather like) huffed and puffed about the
shocking benefit system that allows this idle lothario to breed at public
expense - but I couldn't help thinking of HRH Andrew, Prince Of Snot, who
routinely spends £15,000 - £20,000 of taxpayer's money by using RAF
helicopters to convey his idle royal arse up to Scotland for a round of
golf.
*they* (the RF) are spongers extranordinaire! - unrivaled master's of
sucking the taxpayer dryer than a Saudi sandpit..
why isn't Ms Widdicombe featuring them in her quest to expose waste and
feckless behaviour?, I wonder.......
|
