It’s like every time he opens his mouth nowadays he somehow comes off as even more of an imbecile.
Nowadays?!
I just mean that he’s had an amusing number of these headdesk moments in the very recent past
Oh yeah agree, he has the reverse Midas touch at the mo. Might add it coincided with the media flipping sides when they saw it was a foregone conclusion.
His parents were a GP and owned a pharmacy. They just didn't get it for him/them for whatever reason.
They certainly could have afforded it if they wanted to.
There's a massive difference between just not having something as a child and not even being able to afford it at all.
I love these Tory twat stories where they try to relate to normal people. They're so far off the mark it highlights just how clueless they are about real life.
Sky wasn't even launched until he was 9. So a big chunk of his childhood it wouldn't have even been possible to get sky.
Loads of people - probably most people - didn't have Sky. When did shoveling cash at Murdoch become some sort of minimum entry level for society? Not having a TV would be vaguely interesting, but not having Sky means nothing
How much could a banana cost? 10 dollars?
One of the admittedly minor things I dislike about his tetchy interview answers is when he starts going "blah blah blah...that's why we've done things such as..." and then proceeds to list the one and only example of said thing.
I spent a few years in England as a kid (I'm from the U.S.) when they only had 4 channels, two of which were boring (to a kid) BBC shit. That was a hardship. Having nothing at all would have been preferable because I wouldn't have wasted so many hours flipping between 4 fucking channels hoping for something, anything interesting to watch. I usually found it more fun to play with the teletext thing they had, but there wasn't anything interesting on that either.
It’s like every time he opens his mouth nowadays he somehow comes off as even more of an imbecile.
Nowadays?!
I just mean that he’s had an amusing number of these headdesk moments in the very recent past
Oh yeah agree, he has the reverse Midas touch at the mo. Might add it coincided with the media flipping sides when they saw it was a foregone conclusion.
His parents were a GP and owned a pharmacy. They just didn't get it for him/them for whatever reason.
They certainly could have afforded it if they wanted to.
There's a massive difference between just not having something as a child and not even being able to afford it at all.
I love these Tory twat stories where they try to relate to normal people. They're so far off the mark it highlights just how clueless they are about real life.
Sky wasn't even launched until he was 9. So a big chunk of his childhood it wouldn't have even been possible to get sky.
Loads of people - probably most people - didn't have Sky. When did shoveling cash at Murdoch become some sort of minimum entry level for society? Not having a TV would be vaguely interesting, but not having Sky means nothing
How much could a banana cost? 10 dollars?
One of the admittedly minor things I dislike about his tetchy interview answers is when he starts going "blah blah blah...that's why we've done things such as..." and then proceeds to list the one and only example of said thing.
I spent a few years in England as a kid (I'm from the U.S.) when they only had 4 channels, two of which were boring (to a kid) BBC shit. That was a hardship. Having nothing at all would have been preferable because I wouldn't have wasted so many hours flipping between 4 fucking channels hoping for something, anything interesting to watch. I usually found it more fun to play with the teletext thing they had, but there wasn't anything interesting on that either.