Originally posted by Ushgarak
Not really a relevant comparison. He's already PM and this has no bearing at all on that position.In any case, this is all vague accusation and at most the majority of people think is that it is just some idiotic privileged student nonsense- as Cameron is already seen as part of a privileged Eton elite (and this is in fact true), this sort of thing doesn't really make a massive difference. He won the election already in spite of his student days so he's not relying on anything there.
People are FAR ore interested in whether Cameron knew about the financial irregularities of Lord Ashcroft (the pig accuser). Ashcroft is now saying Cameron is lying when he said he didn't.
Note the BBC report on this:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34312744
The pig thing is just a small detail- the focus is on the political relationship of the two and the tax status issue. In fact, I think the drug accusation is probably more interesting to people than the pig, and that'll be forgotten pretty soon as well.
Not to mention the fact that ****ing and murdering children doesn't seem to have done much damage to the tories either, politically speaking.
Cassetteboy doesn't hang about.
Originally posted by UshgarakAbsolutely, I agree totally, it's how the establishment works. Shared goals and values. The pig is a small detail but a funny one.
Not really a relevant comparison. He's already PM and this has no bearing at all on that position.In any case, this is all vague accusation and at most the majority of people think is that it is just some idiotic privileged student nonsense- as Cameron is already seen as part of a privileged Eton elite (and this is in fact true), this sort of thing doesn't really make a massive difference. He won the election already in spite of his student days so he's not relying on anything there.
People are FAR ore interested in whether Cameron knew about the financial irregularities of Lord Ashcroft (the pig accuser). Ashcroft is now saying Cameron is lying when he said he didn't.
Note the BBC report on this:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34312744
The pig thing is just a small detail- the focus is on the political relationship of the two and the tax status issue. In fact, I think the drug accusation is probably more interesting to people than the pig, and that'll be forgotten pretty soon as well.
Generally speaking 'Lord' is just an appointed position these days, and so it is here also, but Ashcroft does tick a lot of boxes there- he's a politically influential billionaire. There's even a Lord Ashcroft Building in Cambridge with a bust of him inside it.
He was also Belize's Ambassador to the UN for two years, and as a result of his international connections the PM of Belize stated:
"Ashcroft is an extremely powerful man. His net worth may well be equal to Belize's entire GDP. He is nobody to cross."
Basically, if this was an American film, he'd definitely be the bad guy.
Originally posted by Surtur
Just curious..if he banged a pig that was alive would that of made the situation better or even more disturbing?
Ask any white Southerner from the United States, they'll tell you to never stick your penis is a live/conscious pig's mouth unless you fancy becoming a eunuch.