Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35005878)

Chris Huhne may regret making this statement

The Times CV (from two years ago) for Nick Clegg states

What that misses out is that Mr Clegg worked in 1991 as a Trainee at the European Commission, Brussels. DGI, G-24 Co-ordination Unit, and for GPlus (another lobbying firm) 2004-05, where he described his work as

Besides a trainee journalist post for six months, and some part-time lecturing for under a year, what is this "career doing real work outside the political system" that Nick Huhne refers to?:confused:

(strangely enough, if it's "no secret", why is neither lobbying job mentioned on Nick's CV on the Lib Dem website....;) ).

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35005785)

If anyone wants to read the article the Mail referenced in context it is here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/19/eu.germany

Or, as I suspect many will, you can ignore it and focus on the Mail's interpretation.

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35005821)

Not a problem i am happy to correct the quote

So how does he intend to do that ?????

Is that a better quote for you, btw the corrections are in red.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35005903)

Daily Mail Lib Dem headline generator: http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

I think this is going to back fire on the Tories anyway, People aren't stupid and they will probably end up being turned off from the negative headlines. Even the valid ones (i.e Telegraph) will be lost/dismissed amongst the slime.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005956)

It worked for the Tories in ninteen ninety-two.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35005961)

Just as well it's 2010 really. I seriously doubt we want to start looking back to the past.

Things can only get better!

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35006004)

does anyone know where i can watch tonights debate live stream on my laptop .I watched it last week on itv player (on lappy)and the stream was absolute rubbish constant out of sync sound and buffering

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35006006)

Here perhaps.......

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 35005845)

I agree.
Germany now is NOT the same country it was then. We bang on about what a great country we are, and how bad the Germans are, but who is better off? We have mass unemployment and a debt that is greater than the GDP of a lot of countries. The Germans were similarly affected by the world wide recession, but were able to turn their economy around far quicker than we have been. We also have failing public transport systems, and while they are certainly not underfunded, thanks to privatisation, a lot of the money we give to the companies running them isn't actually being spent on improving or maintaining the networks. From what I have seen, German public transport is an order of magnitude better.

As Nick Clegg notes, the average German is also 6% better off than the average Brit. Why? Could it be that they actually worked to improve their lot rather than just bitch about how everyone else made it worse for them?

The war was 60 years ago. We do need to get over it, and work to improve things.[COLOR="Silver"]

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35005747)

There's that roll over and give in attitude i expected from the tree huggers and to think that came from the mouth of a man who wants to lead this country. Sorry i dont want someone that thinks we need to be put in our place.

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35005771)

thing is Maggy i have always said they would role over and give in even before this campaign against clegg and this just confirms it.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35005833)

I heard the Mail is considering adding Nick Clegg to its list of things that Could Cause Cancer ...

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35005903)

Daily Mail Lib Dem headline generator: http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35005961)

Just as well it's 2010 really. I seriously doubt we want to start looking back to the past.

Things can only get better!

Originally Posted by The Grauniad's Richard Norton-Taylor

While party leaders argue about where and how to save money, they have so far avoided one area where all agree huge cuts are inevitable.

They have an opportunity to make up for it during tomorrow's television debate devoted to defence and foreign affairs. With the single, albeit important, exception of Trident – and that's because the Liberal Democrats are opposed to an identical Conservative/Labour position – they have up to now shunned the issue.

(snip)

Yet as their potential political masters fill the public stage in their fight for power, behind the scenes senior military figures are already anxiously drawing up their own battle lines. In a series of remarkably frank briefings, they have been shamelessly promoting their branch of the armed forces at the expense of their two rivals. It is a critical time for all of them.

"From the defence point of view, we are at a crossroads," said one senior army source. He added: "We are structured and equipped for the 20th century. Going on as we are is simply not an option."

Many of Britain's military capabilities simply "lack relevance", he said, referring in particular to Trident, RAF bombers and plans to build carriers and buy US jets to fly from them.

They were "organised", as he put it, "for the least likely" occurrence.

(snip)

Three former generals today criticised the decision by Labour and the Conservatives to exclude the £80bn-plus Trident project from the forthcoming defence review. If the review determined there was still a need for a nuclear deterrent, a cheaper alternative should be considered, they said.

General Sir Richard Dannatt, former head of the army and now adviser to David Cameron, shared the other generals' view that Trident should not be replaced by a like-for-like system.

Hostility to Trident is not limited to former generals. Serving senior army officers are also deeply sceptical about its relevance today.

"How do you deter a non-state actor?" asked a senior army officer, referring to Trident nuclear ballistic missiles and the most likely foreseeable conflicts, namely those against insurgents or terrorists.

(snip)

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35005903)

Daily Mail Lib Dem headline generator: http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

I think this is going to back fire on the Tories anyway, People aren't stupid and they will probably end up being turned off from the negative headlines. Even the valid ones (i.e Telegraph) will be lost/dismissed amongst the slime.