Post by: Forth Bridges on August 31, 2006, 01:08:30 am
Post by: goldencup on August 31, 2006, 01:09:12 am
Post by: Forth Bridges on August 31, 2006, 01:12:04 am
Post by: smurfboy on August 31, 2006, 01:12:08 am
Post by: Forth Bridges on August 31, 2006, 01:13:53 am
Post by: goldencup on August 31, 2006, 01:16:21 am
Post by: smurfboy on August 31, 2006, 01:16:52 am
Someone gave Thatcher five points too many I see!
Post by: oldspice on August 31, 2006, 08:22:59 am
Churchill may have been good in his day, but how would he cope in today's society without the hanging and flogging to fall back on? In that sense it's very hard to judge wh ois best. It's all relative.
Post by: on August 31, 2006, 09:23:03 am
Post by: EasterBunny on August 31, 2006, 12:25:47 pm
What defines best? If we are going on how good the country was to live in under them that is fine, but surely other factors control this. Maybe you should think about it like Pokemon or Top Trumps, points for hair, name, ability to kiss babies, amusing hobbies or quirks etc, and then total up the points It's the only fair way. I am not suggesting you do it on here that would be dull.
John Major gets my vote for managing to have an affair while PM without the tabloids finding out plus he lives in Norfolk now and my mother inlaws often sees him and his wife in the butchers.
Post by: smurfboy on August 31, 2006, 01:59:36 pm
John Major's only talent was making the evil Thatcher look good by comparison - which took some bloody doing!
Post by: loulou on August 31, 2006, 03:52:27 pm