ScoobyNet.com - Subaru Enthusiast Forum

ScoobyNet.com - Subaru Enthusiast Forum (https://www.scoobynet.com/)
-   Non Scooby Related (https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby-related-4/)
-   -   Robert Kilroy Silk - could you vote for him? (https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby-related-4/367523-robert-kilroy-silk-could-you-vote-for-him.html)

TelBoy 04 October 2004 01:09 PM

Robert Kilroy Silk - could you vote for him?
 
Following the political tone in NSR. :)

I actually think he'd make a decent Prime Minister, let alone leader of the UKIP, from what i've seen of him anyway.

Does anyone vote UKIP? Do they actually have any policies not related to getting out of Europe? Are they a credible alternative?

ProperCharlie 04 October 2004 01:13 PM

No!

What a tw*t!

Come back William Hague - all is forgiven!

22BUK 04 October 2004 01:15 PM

I'd vote for him - he would make a wonderful PM.

TelBoy 04 October 2004 01:15 PM

LOL, why is he a tw@t?! :D

MooseRacer 04 October 2004 01:16 PM

He's certainly slimey and 2 faced enough to be PM ;)

Karl 227 04 October 2004 01:20 PM

No! He's a television presenter, not a potential PM with power and *real* responsibilities. I am sure that the reason you think he'd make a good PM is because of the way he presents himself, that's what he's trained to do all his life, it doesn't mean that he can run a country Tel. All IMO of course you muesli eating fop;)

jasey 04 October 2004 01:21 PM

He's a LEFTIE :razz:

lightning101 04 October 2004 01:22 PM

Can imagine him asking 'Sharon' - after latest bombings


"So how does that make you feel"

ProperCharlie 04 October 2004 01:22 PM

Sorry - I did not mean to infer that Mr. Kilroy-Silk is in any way comparable to a certain part of the female anatomy. Oh no, I really did not mean that at all.

However, the fact that he is comparable, in many ways, to a smarmy, two faced, disingenuous, substandard permatanned orange skinned journalist has not escaped my attention.

TelBoy 04 October 2004 01:22 PM

True, Karl, but Tony Blair has made a career on precisely that! And i agree with RKS's central tenet of disassociating with Europe, so i'm wondering what the downsides are.

I'm a bit nervous that a lot of potential Tory voters will think the same way too, given the non-persona in charge of the Conservative Party, thus gifting Labour a third term. :o

Karl 227 04 October 2004 01:36 PM

Yes but Tel, what are the realistic options over there?
You have;
M Howard, about as dynamic as Charmin Ultra and with no alternative in his party.

R K Silk, a well presented, presenter able to air views and pose carefully scripted questions to carefully selected audiences.

T Blair, a proven failure running a party with other potential leaders ready to take up the reign and prove themselves equally useless.

If the options remain that bad, Blair will win. :)

tiggers 04 October 2004 01:43 PM

Err...do you lot have some short memories or what?

What did Robert Kilroy Silk do before he was a TV chat show host?

He was the Labour MP for Ormskirk then Knowsley North sitting in parliament from 1974 to 1986 I think. Ironically he left the party as it was becoming too militant - now there's irony for you.

Anyway I think that the above would mean he probably better qualified than some to be in parliament wouldn't you say?

tiggers.

Karl 227 04 October 2004 01:46 PM

Agree with that tiggers, sorry I didn't know about his history as I live in the Fatherland. He's still permenantly orange though:)

Iain Young 04 October 2004 01:47 PM

..and I think he also use to be a barrister before that. There's no denying that he's a clever bloke, and not just limited to being a tv presenter.

Having said that, I don't think he's any better or worse than any of the other leaders. They're all as bad as each other (just in slightly different ways) IMHO....

tiggers 04 October 2004 01:48 PM


Originally Posted by Karl 227
Agree with that tiggers, sorry I didn't know about his history as I live in the Fatherland. He's still permenantly orange though:)

No worries Karl, I was just surpised no one had mentioned it in the thread.

TelBoy 04 October 2004 01:49 PM

Why is that ironic, tiggers? :confused:

gsm1 04 October 2004 01:50 PM

If there is anything that would make me vote for Michael Howard, it's Kilroy. The guy is pure slime. He's not even a good speaker.

Iain Young 04 October 2004 01:52 PM


Originally Posted by gsm1
If there is anything that would make me vote for Michael Howard, it's Kilroy. The guy is pure slime. He's not even a good speaker.

How can you say that Kilroy is slime and Howard isn't. In my opinion, Howard is one of the slimiest ones out there, even worse than Blair and that's saying something.... !!!!

tiggers 04 October 2004 01:52 PM


Originally Posted by TelBoy
Why is that ironic, tiggers? :confused:

He left the party in 1986 as it was becoming too militant whereas now IMHO the Labour Party has shifted totally the opposite direction (in grass roots terms) to occupy the centre and even some of the centre right political spectrum, admittedly not on all issues, but on many.

Iain Young 04 October 2004 01:54 PM


Originally Posted by tiggers
He left the party in 1986 as it was becoming too militant whereas now IMHO the Labour Party has shifted totally the opposite direction (in grass roots terms) to occupy the centre and even some of the centre right political spectrum, admittedly not on all issues, but on many.


also, he's now a member of UKIP which is arguably even more militant than Labour was when he left it...

gsm1 04 October 2004 01:55 PM


Originally Posted by Iain Young
How can you say that Kilroy is slime and Howard isn't. In my opinion, Howard is one of the slimiest ones out there, even worse than Blair and that's saying something.... !!!!

I never said Howard isn't. Kilroy is slimier.

RichWalk 04 October 2004 01:55 PM

If the levels of apathy dropped a couple of % in this country, he could potentially become one of the most dangerous politicians in this land......whether you agree with him or not, he has had the b*ll*cks to say what many people think, rare commodity in todays US based *democracy*

Iain Young 04 October 2004 01:59 PM


Originally Posted by gsm1
I never said Howard isn't. Kilroy is slimier.

We'll agree to disagree. Personally I think they're just as bad as each other (although Howard is a little creepier IMO). :)

Nimbus 04 October 2004 02:02 PM

Killroy isn't the leader of UKIP anyway. Roger Knapman is and after the results of the last European elections not many think he'll give up the job.

TelBoy 04 October 2004 02:08 PM

Personally i don't associate UKIP with militancy, but their agenda does seem somewhat limited. Knapman should step aside, Hartlepool or not, and give RKS a chance to prove what he's made of.

paulr 04 October 2004 03:40 PM

Would i vote for him.......nah..

1.He's been tango'd
2.Slimy two faced g1t
3.Loves himself too much
4.Self richeous and smug
5.Has anyone noticed his column is always about immigrants and terrorists,then he says he's not a racist.....yeah,whatever
5.Oh,and as a credible policy,withdrawl from the EU is stupid.

unclebuck 04 October 2004 05:09 PM

Kilroy is crap. Did you see him on HIGNFY? They verbally destroyed him. He had visibly shrunk under the desk by the end of the programme.

UB

unclebuck 04 October 2004 05:11 PM

Having said that, as an MEP I think he'd be good.

Petem95 04 October 2004 06:19 PM


he has had the b*ll*cks to say what many people think, rare commodity in todays US based *democracy*
This is exactly why I would vote for him - apparently immigration applications would all be processed within 2weeks with the UKIP, and anyone coming from a safe country (ie most immigrants who come through Europe) would be deported.

David Lock 04 October 2004 06:23 PM

No


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 PM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands