The Ranting Room

Incidentally - it may be an idea to change the subject - back in the early days of this thread, one of my posts regarding a certain "singer" who shall remain nameless (Pete Docherty) was edited from afar, as I got a little carried away, & included speculation and hearsay. I can see this subject going much further, as I suspect we both have the same opinions of Mr Brand.

Jim Garten wrote: Geck0 wrote: They're doing a Comic Relief Archers special, so if you listen to Radio 4, you suffer also.Russell Brand is an incredibly annoying and unfunny comedian with stupid hair who seems to be taking over the television and radio (like Jimmy Carr did last year).Here he is: Hmm, enough pledges and we might get our Kerplunky wish! Hmmm - this Russell Brand chap appears to be all over the media at the moment, but with Jimmy carr, at least I'd heard of him previously as a pretty ascerbic stand up comedian... but I ask myself: Why is this t**t famous?

Because there are multitudes of t**ts out there who respond to his humour. He seems to have been made famous by Big Brother (specifically Big Brothers Big Mouth - the BB related chat show) I think that speaks volumes. He &rse licks celebs while putting on this 'I'm such a tortured, soul who masks his pain behind humour' persona.

Tiresome..

Geck0 wrote: I don't know this Kate Silverton lass, but she sounds interesting.  I'll have to watch the News in the mornings now.How about Sophie Raworth?But seriously, they'd be a huge stink about it.A bunch of fat and ugly male chefs can do the Full Monty, but if a group of female newsreaders did the same, you'd get complaints from femanists all over the country!

Oh yeah, it's fine to humiliate a load of ugly men, but dont upset the ladies. You'd think in this time of not being allowed to offend anyone for any reason someone would take issue with this..not that I really care, as I dont watch this load of old cak anyway!

Sophie Raworth. Yes, I'd have no problem with her de-robing in the name of charity.

DONT GET ME STARTED ON RUSSEL BRAND....

...but yes, I too would pay to see Kerplunky do a strip tease

I don't know this Kate Silverton lass, but she sounds interesting.  I'll have to watch the News in the mornings now.

How about Sophie Raworth?

But seriously, they'd be a huge stink about it.

A bunch of fat and ugly male chefs can do the Full Monty, but if a group of female newsreaders did the same, you'd get complaints from femanists all over the country!

Ah, I'm glad it's not just me then.

It's all phone-in-athons that annoy me.

They could just hire a huge studio somewhere, have a big romp and stuff and not bother to film it.  Then we wouldn't be any of the wiser and they'd have raised lots of money for charity and my brain wouldn't be frazzled because of it.

Maybe if I 'phone in to see Kerplunky do a strip tease, she'd do it?  I mean, it's for charity, she cannot refuse!  Oh and that lass from Watchdog too!


Edited by Geck0 - March 05 2007 at 18:28

My rant for the day (and the rest of this week) is concerning...

COMIC RELIEF (aka RED NOSE DAY)



Our televisiions get taken over by unfunny comedians, making unfunny jokes, all for charity.  Then there's the "special" series of all ready appalling programs, such as Fame Academy.  Why!

It was fine before when it was just one day a year, but it seems it's entrails are lasting for a whole 2 weeks!

I have the same issues with Children in Need also.

Of course, I realise it's all for charity and for good causes, but is it completely necessary for everyone to make a complete t**t of themselves?  You can raise money for such charities and keep everything in check.  It should require one day in a year for people to give money to charity, they should do it all the time.

Am I being too harsh?

If I see Russell Brand on the television over this period, I may have to throw a brick at the television.

That stupid Little Britian advert is not funny, neither is the Vicar of Dibley one, argh!

*and breathe out and relax*

Phew, I feel better now.

Heavyfreight wrote: sleeper wrote: I've got a major axe to grind today.Why is it that people feel the need to move next to an active race track then go through the courts to get noise restrictions put on this tracks ending any major international, or even national, championships the come to visit and making it even harder for these places to make even a small profit, and in some cases break even. A couple years ago some local morons complained about the noise of British GT/F3 races at the Castle Comb circuit in Wiltshire (I think) ending one of the best attended events of the calander for both track and championships. Then, last year locals at Monza in Italy started complaining about the racing at a track that has been in continual use since it opened in the mid 1920's, resulting in the Monza 1000km sportscar race being canceled and the F1 race coming under serious threat. Now, when I picked up this mornings issue of Autosport, I found that the locals that moved next to the Zandvoort track in Holland have got noise restrictions placed ending the historic F3 Masters event, a major event that brings the best up-and-comers from around the world and pits them against each other. This event has been going on since the 60's. If these people are goingt o  bloody move next to a race track they should fuing well expect some damn noise, its a race track! What  makes it worse is the bloody courts pandering to these mindless morons.Glad to get that off my chest.   Hear hear!  It's only a matter of time now before I stock up with explosives and automatic weapons and disappear underground.  The revolution  is coming

We're all with you Neil!

How about the pseudo posh who like to move to isolated villages in their droves (thereby raising the local house prices so high that children of people born & bred in such villages cannot afford to live there - but that's another rant for another day...), then actually complain about the noise of church bells! Or neighbours' hens! Or aircraft noise from the nearby airport which had been there for decades anyway!

sleeper wrote: I've got a major axe to grind today. Why is it that people feel the need to move next to an active race track then go through the courts to get noise restrictions put on this tracks ending any major international, or even national, championships the come to visit and making it even harder for these places to make even a small profit, and in some cases break even. A couple years ago some local morons complained about the noise of British GT/F3 races at the Castle Comb circuit in Wiltshire (I think) ending one of the best attended events of the calander for both track and championships. Then, last year locals at Monza in Italy started complaining about the racing at a track that has been in continual use since it opened in the mid 1920's, resulting in the Monza 1000km sportscar race being canceled and the F1 race coming under serious threat. Now, when I picked up this mornings issue of Autosport, I found that the locals that moved next to the Zandvoort track in Holland have got noise restrictions placed ending the historic F3 Masters event, a major event that brings the best up-and-comers from around the world and pits them against each other. This event has been going on since the 60's. If these people are goingt o  bloody move next to a race track they should fuing well expect some damn noise, its a race track! What  makes it worse is the bloody courts pandering to these mindless morons. Glad to get that off my chest.

Jim Garten wrote: A ginger king? Unthinkable!