Question Time Watch

Question Time watch (because I’m not going to)

Frankly, I can’t be bothered to stay up for it, but the comments of those who do will be appreciated. Things to look out for will obviously include how well they labour the fact that one of the two Republicans they’ve allowed on is the grandson of Nixon (after all, why else was he invited) and how the audience is made up. Since they’re only doing this one episode in the US, I know they’ll want to have made sure there’s a balance of Republican and Democrat supporters…

Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Question Time Watch

  1. Adam says:

    This is lively.


  2. Adam says:

    Loving that camp twat schama struggling


  3. Martin says:

    Simon Schama. What an utter mincer!


  4. Martin says:

    Adam: You just beat me to it.


  5. Adam says:

    Seems to have been no audience fixing


  6. Mikewineliberal says:

    They’re avoiding the big issue. First question avoids Ross/Brand. BBC totalitarian agenda control.

    Do Americans wear Poppies? All the panel have them. Few in the audience. Have the Marxist BBC given them to the panelists? That doesn’t make sense.

    Louder applause for the fellow saying McCain should be POTUS. Audience is balanced horror. And has decent teeth.

    Some septic with a high voice having a go at Schama. Ann Coulter’s wife i think. Schama calls him a blowhard. And goes onto to administer a bitch slap. Respect due. He is a class act.

    What’s with the whooping?

    I’m off to bed. Good night everyone. And God bless America.


  7. Adam says:

    Deserves repeating martin.


  8. Snooze 24 says:

    OMG, usual imbalance of 3 from left and 2 from right; but the audience seem to be mostly republican? Guess that’s what happens when you don’t have the usual socialist workers and students to call upon.


  9. Ralph says:

    If Schama wants to come across as a pompous squirming prat he’s done it.


  10. Grant says:

    Is Simon Schama gay ?

    Also loved his green tie !


  11. Grant says:

    Poor Mikewine

    I feel so sorry for that boy


  12. Neomancunion says:

    Schama – gay and pissed


  13. TaffDragon says:

    Schama what an embarresment to uk historians


  14. Grant says:

    Neo 12:37

    Like Brer Rabbit , I just laugh and laugh …


  15. George says:

    Charming – the usual m-oronic gay bashing in full cry, the insufferable in pursuit of the inedible.


  16. Grant says:

    Schama’s green tie ? Get the Irish vote , eh ?


  17. Grant says:

    George 12:42

    It is not about “gay bashing”. It is about a lack of trust of gays who don’t “come out “. I would say the same about anyone who hides their true identity.


  18. another anonymous says:

    Schama is so bloody nervous! He’s completly lost it.


  19. Grant says:

    Schama is fine on scripted BBC Docs, but crap when he has to stand on his own two feet .


  20. Adam says:

    He has aged badly.


  21. George R says:

    BBC’s SCHAMA – behaving like a Democrat Party Obama political agent on BBC 1 ‘Question Time’ tonight; and tomorrow night, on BBC 2 , in Part 4 of his ‘American Future’, SCHAMA propagandises for an open-door immigration policy. No doubt such a policy will be pursued by an Obama presidency.

    A counterview to that of Schama is presented here by American, Lawrence AUSTER, about his society:


    “This brings us to yet another kind of reductionism we ought to
    beware of: the tendency to see our society as a mere abstraction
    of freedom and human rights. Yes, America stands for, and is
    based on, certain universal principles; but we must insist that
    America also happens to be a country. Surely the Founding Fathers saw no contradiction between
    being devoted as philosophers to
    universal principles of republicanism and the rights of man, and
    as patriots to a particular nation, a particular people. To ignore
    our national individuality—in an effort to make America seem
    instantly accessible to every person and culture on the planet—is
    to turn our country into the blank slate of which we spoke earlier,
    on which the social engineers and all the migrating masses of the
    world can write whatever they please. In other words, America
    needs to revive the original name and meaning of the Statue of
    Liberty (now quite forgotten): ‘Liberty Enlightening the World’—
    a shining example for other nations to achieve in their own lands
    and in their own ways what we have achieved here, not simply a
    mindless invitation for the whole world to move here.” (page 52) of :

    “The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immigration and Multiculturalism” by Lawrence Auster.

    Click to access PNS.pdf


  22. Grant says:

    Adam ,

    Maybe the BBC are cutting down on the quality of their film. Or maybe Lefties age quicker. Or maybe Lefties age themselves to make them look sage . Who knows ?


  23. Martin says:

    I see Diane Abbot is yet another left wing moron who won’t wear a poppy. Why do these stupid Socialists (like the COWARD Skinner) think it’s cool? Perhaps they’d rather donate money to terrorists instead?


  24. Grant says:

    George R 12:57

    Just read it . You say the quote is from Schama. Are you sure it is not from Obama ?

    Funny how their names rhyme.


  25. Grant says:

    Martin 1:00

    I distincty rememember Abbot wearing a poppy last year. But, maybe in my dreams. Very funny when I think of how many “black” people fought and died in WW2


  26. Martin says:

    Grant: She’s got one on now. It just appeared I think when the Kate Garroway film was on.

    I reckon the beeboids read this blog and ran in and stuck one on her.


  27. George R says:

    BBC ‘Newsnight’ tonight had plenty on BBC Ross-Brand issue.

    I thought Emily Maitlis did a good job, interviewing BBC critic Stephen Glover (‘Daily Mail’), and BBC sympathiser (ex-BBC man), Matthew Bannister; even better was her interview with BBC DG, Mark Thompson.

    This interview did not come over as one part of the cosy liberal elite talking to another part of it. It is so rare to see on the BBC. It should be a commonplace tone, not an exception reserved for a bit of a crisis.(For those with access, the programme will be on i-Player within hours.)

    In contrast, there was the lesser KIRSTY WARK, on ‘Newsnight Review’ attempting to justify her own addition to the BBC hordes in New York for the BBC Election night Obama party; she visited a couple of museums,a Broadway show, and no doubt, the odd shoe-shop (as on her recent European shopping tour for herself, filmed by the BBC).

    She cannily avoided covering the dour Scottish Glenrothes by-election in her home country. Does the BBC see her, at last, as being too close to the Labour Party in Scotland?


  28. Grant says:

    Martin 1:19

    Sadly, I suspect you overestimate the power of this blog ! If only…

    But , it is a fantastic website and, on the face of it, uncensored. Long may it continue !!!


  29. Grant says:

    GeorgeR 1:25

    As a dour Scot posting from Edinburgh and , by co-incidence, was in Glenrothes yesterday, I doubt whether the Labour Party give a damn whether a numptie like Wark is close to the party.

    For all sorts of strange Scottish reasons, Labour is going to get trashed.

    And , even in the Kingdom of Fife , they hate Brown !


  30. Jeff says:

    I think it’s only right that Diane “Lets let all the immigrants in apart from those blonde/blue-eyed Finnish nurses because they have no experience of treating black people” Abbot, doesn’t wear a poppy – I mean, the Beeb has got to be “edgy” and “challenge the social mores.”


  31. Cameron says:

    Back to QT!
    Just watched it on sky+ and was astonished -it’s more than obvious the BBC once again completley the wrong picture about the political makeup of the USA – just look at that audience!

    They were cheering mcaine and praising palin and obama -real democracy.

    Schama was revolting in a slightly strange and nervous way which is strange for a proff. He certainly wasnt at home when that guy in the grey suit ripped his head off -schama retorted with “but youre a blowhard”

    Unique turn of phrase.

    What was all the handwringing about also -the guy was out of his league with people he perhaps secretley hates – americans.

    If anyone watches closley you will see dimblebeys bias in his unease of the LOUD cheering for the reublicans.

    Brilliant episode lol

    sorry about spelling done from iphone again and tired..


  32. Adam says:

    Thanks for the thoughts, Grant.

    Does Andrew Neil have a contract with Blue Nun?


  33. Intense says:

    Heres a brand new ANTI BBC VID just posted on you tube for you all to feast your eyes on…..


  34. Hugh says:

    Grant – the site is uncensored and the comments are the best thing about it, but please, and Martin too, stop the stuff about gays.


  35. whitewineliberal says:

    hear hear hugh. utterly pathetic.


  36. Cassandra says:


    Just who do two think you are? the B-BBC on site PC censors?
    Now dont get me wrong, you two make some good contributions whether or not I agree with you and I admire the intelligent and considered posts you both put forward BUT please stop the ‘we are the consensus’ type censorship.
    This site is a free forum, free from the choking grasp of PC limitations and free from the two faced holier than thou crap we see so much of these days!
    Just because your PC morals have been bruised dont think for a second that you two can bring on your ‘PC rule book’ to tell us what we can or cannot say.
    Speaking for myself, I decide what constitutes civilised limits and I dont force them on others just as I dont expect others to force their moral code on me, if my post is deleted by the on site PTB then fair enough but to be told what I can or cannot say by other posters sticks in my throat.


  37. rl54 says:

    Schama – obviously very clever but what a prat last night. Loves BHO
    Journalist who waffled and said nothing but loves BHO not matter what
    Strident Republican woman who screeched & put everyone on edge.
    Relative of disgraced Repuiblican US president so must be a failure
    Soft and cuddly Democrat female.
    I wonder what balance there was on the panel?
    Then the audience. Well, perhaps it’s their first so we can allow them some leeway. But the worst UK QT would have better debate than this.
    DD must be looking forward to coming back to U.K.
    Perhaps we can have a QT in Russia next time…


  38. Hugh says:

    Cassandra: asking someone to lay off making certain comments isn’t really censorship is it? Nor is it really forcing my standards on others. I ask mainly because I’d like the likes of Iain Dale and others to link here as I think it would do the blog good and further it’s aims. I think some of the comments make them unlikely to do so at the moment.
    I also find it a bit perverse that you’d be happy for me to delete posts but asking people to refrain from making certain comments is beyond the pale.


  39. RR says:

    Schama’a married with kids.

    He once wrote a book about the Dutch Republic called “An Embarrassment of Bitches”. Or something like that.


  40. Andy says:

    I found this episode much less of an endurance test than usual. Certainly the liberals did not get their own way.

    Simon Schama came across as a typically precious academic. Did you hear the bit where the American audience member accused the mincing, gesticulating Schama of being a “typical professor”? Rattled his cage.

    I was fairly astounded by the number of audience members expressing support for Palin and comments about the raw deal she gets from the media. Certainly our media, ITV being as guilty as anybody, would have you believe otherwise.

    Such a difference when the audience is not preselected using the some wretched PC screening process, and everybody of all political persuasions gets a piece of the action.


  41. henryflower says:

    Cassandra: I loathe political correctness as much as anyone here, but it really is rather facile of you to use that accusation against anyone who objects to the crassness and stupidity that certain contributors here frequently display.

    Schama may or may not be gay: what precisely does that have to do with the subject under discussion? You’re playing the same type of game that the media is currently playing: ‘a vote against Obama is part of the legacy of American racism etc’. It’s not. And neither is it ‘choking political correctness’ to request certain basic standards of human courtesy in a public forum. You’re taking a big, blunt, political bogeyword, and using it as sledgehammer in the wrong argument.

    Dismissing Schama as a “mincer” or a “camp twat” because we disagree with his politics in this election is simply boorish, mindless stupidity. Political correctness has nothing to do with it. And Grant – with people so free and easy in their use of such brave words, is it any wonder that some gay men choose not to come out? And incidentally, who are you to demand that gay men must come out? That’s inverted political correctness itself: what anyone does in bed, and who they do it with, it’s their business. Who do you think you are to demand that homosexuals identify themselves as such publicly? I’m not aware that anyone owes you any such disclosure in a free society. Rest assured, I have no interest in your sexual tastes, Grant – and not knowing who or what you sleep with has no effect on whether or not I trust you or address you with basic courtesy.

    I have no time whatsoever for political correctness, Cassandra, but I do have time for the much, much older notion that it’s better to treat other human beings with that minimum of respect that we might ourselves like to be accorded – unless that person has done something to earn our disrespect. In my book, merely being a homosexual does not render a human undeserving of respect.

    More to the point: do you want this site to be taken seriously or not? What would you prefer – that this site achieved nothing, but provided yet another space on the web for people to freely speak every dumb thought that enters their heads, or that it actually did help to achieve something?

    Because if it becomes a forum for merely trashing anyone who is not right-of-centre, it will deservedly achieve nothing.


  42. Frankos says:

    trouble with Schama is he is biased to the Left –good historians should either be politically neutral or at least be aware of their bias and make an effort to neutralise it –Everyone these days seems to think we care about their politics –whatever happened to getting on with your job without the baggage?


  43. Grant says:

    Cameron 2:24

    Schama “strange for a proff”. I first read that as strange for a “poof”.

    The funniest thing for me was the look on Dimblebore’s face when part of the audience clapped in support of a pro-Republican comment. I guess it is just inconceivable to him that there are people in the world who don’t support the Democrats.


  44. Grant says:

    intense 3:09

    Nice clip. I love the shot of the vulture at the end. Wouldn’t it be lovely to watch them circling over Broadcasting House, although I guess they would choke on Jonathan Ross.


  45. Grant says:

    Hugh 7:46

    As I say, a great site and I especially value your comments. But, I would defend Martin. Are we to have a list of topics that we are not allowed to comment on ? That would make this site no different from the BBC. God forbid !


  46. Ralph says:


    Schama is a target rich environment, so calling him gay just makes you look petty.


    Schama did come across as camp on last night’s Question Time, but more importantly he was rude, kept talking over people, and seemed to believe his opinion was more important that anyone else’s.

    I wanted to listen to what the likes of Clarence Page had to say, not that pompous ass.


  47. emil says:

    Nixon’s grandson makes Geoff Hoon look extremely charasmatic I thought, apart from that Dimbleby’s obvious flirting with the Republican blonde lady, and the complete nutter in the green tie doing windmill impressions whilst talking complete bollox, were the only memorable items of a total waste of time show.


  48. Adam says:

    Just to be clear, i am having a go a Simon Schama not at gay people.

    Schama is as camp as they come. If he turns out to be gay that would explain it.

    Schama is happy to say bad things about Sarah Palin and the beeb happy to broadcast it.



  49. Anonymous says:

    henryflower | 31.10.08 – 10:44 am

    Schama may or may not be gay

    He isn’t.

    Far from it.


  50. Cassandra says:


    Did I pass a comment about anyone being Gay or not? You seem to make quite free with accusations and finger pointing for someone who professes a dislike the subject of PC.

    You must have misunderstood the nature of my post, so let me repeat my position, the participants of this blog have no right to set the moral boundaries here, that job is for the people who run the site!
    My moral boundearies are my own just as yours are your own, yes? We may disagree with each other but without a free interchange of ideas and beliefs set within our individual moral structures this site would as soul crushlingly boring as labourhome etc.
    You will please note and acknowledge that I have never engaged in deriding a person on their supposed sexual nature, that would be because my moral boundaries would not permit such a reponse BUT if people wish to use those terms then that is their choice isnt it?

    IMHO political correctness is a deadly cancer on the body of free dabate, I hate,fear and despise it because it has been used to bully and stiffle true debate.

    May I suggest that if you are so ultra sensitive to the rough and tumble of this blog you may wish to visit sites that more suit your sensitive nature.