Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
In defense of Clang , et al
#4
(05-28-2013, 12:10 PM)username Wrote: Everybody panders to some special interest though.

I think that's increasingly true the world over on all sides of the political spectrum. All political parties seem to have special interest groups they have to keep sweet and placated at all times.

David Cameron is in trouble right now because he hasn't been keeping the tory bankbenchers sweet on issues like gay marriage and Europe and he's being urged to steer the goverment more to the right.

Ed Milliband is increasingly under pressure from the unions to move Labour more to the left.

And Nick Clegg is struggling to keep the lib dems happy while they are in bed with the tories in the coalition.
We need to punish the French, ignore the Germans and forgive the Russians - Condoleezza Rice.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
In defense of Clang , et al - by Donovan - 05-28-2013, 11:16 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by username - 05-28-2013, 12:10 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Cynical Ninja - 05-28-2013, 12:22 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 12:26 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Mohammed - 05-28-2013, 03:55 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 04:09 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by crash - 05-29-2013, 01:22 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-28-2013, 12:31 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-28-2013, 12:43 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 02:05 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-28-2013, 02:58 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by FAHQTOO - 05-28-2013, 03:41 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 01:46 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by username - 05-28-2013, 01:56 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Donovan - 05-28-2013, 02:08 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 02:43 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by username - 05-28-2013, 02:13 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 03:33 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Midwest Spy - 05-28-2013, 03:40 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by FAHQTOO - 05-28-2013, 03:51 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Maggot - 05-28-2013, 05:59 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-28-2013, 10:22 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-28-2013, 10:23 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-28-2013, 10:58 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-29-2013, 01:04 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-29-2013, 06:57 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-29-2013, 11:13 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-29-2013, 04:07 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Donovan - 05-29-2013, 12:09 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Donovan - 05-29-2013, 12:10 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-29-2013, 04:08 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by sally - 05-29-2013, 04:58 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-29-2013, 06:17 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-29-2013, 01:28 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Clang McFly - 05-29-2013, 04:09 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Donovan - 05-29-2013, 02:11 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-29-2013, 04:11 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by Duchess - 05-29-2013, 04:56 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by ZEROSPHERES - 05-29-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by HairOfTheDog - 05-29-2013, 10:11 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by aussiefriend - 05-30-2013, 03:04 AM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by ZEROSPHERES - 05-30-2013, 01:52 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by ZEROSPHERES - 05-30-2013, 04:31 PM
RE: In defense of Clang , et al - by ZEROSPHERES - 05-30-2013, 06:24 PM