Katie Hopkins

battleborn

Foxn86 wrote: »

I do wonder what India, poppy and Maximillion ( lovely names might I add *roll eyes*), will think of their upper class mother being caught in a field with a married man. infact she had affairs which all resulted in divorces with 3 married men.

On top of that one failed marriage and kids by different men, not that there's any issues with that. By my god think she forgets she is rather on the opposite side of classy !

And if I look like that at 38 years of age I would be more concerned with finding a plastic surgeon than worrying about childs name.

All fur coat and no knickers spring to mind !!!!!

Your rolls eyes bit, means you have the same views on names as her.

Idiophreak

battleborn wrote: »

Your rolls eyes bit, means you have the same views on names as her.

err...I don't think it does...

Foxn86

battleborn wrote: »

Your rolls eyes bit, means you have the same views on names as her.

No because if you watched the interview she made a very clear point she hates geographical names ! yet het daughter is called India. Hence roll eyes, a name is a name not a person !

battleborn

Foxn86 wrote: »

No because if you watched the interview she made a very clear point she hates geographical names ! yet het daughter is called India. Hence roll eyes, a name is a name not a person !

You rolled eyes exactly after saying the names, which looks like you are making a judgment on them.

pimento

Does she have a book coming out or something?

Funky_Bold_Ribena

battleborn wrote: »

Your rolls eyes bit, means you have the same views on names as her.

You don't quite 'get' things do you?

battleborn

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

You don't quite 'get' things do you?

I refer you to my last comment
Thank you

Idiophreak

battleborn wrote: »

I refer you to my last comment
Thank you

I think FBR was referring *you* to your last comment.

You don't seem to "get" context.

battleborn

Idiophreak wrote: »

I think FBR was referring *you* to your last comment.

You don't seem to "get" context.

Oh I do sunshine, I made my point very clear, if you dont 'GET' it then that is not my problem.

People on here hate to see an alternative argument.:D

Idiophreak

battleborn wrote: »

Oh I do sunshine, I made my point very clear, if you dont 'GET' it then that is not my problem.

People on here hate to see an alternative argument.:D

No, no....I fully "get" your point. It's just that it's a stupid point.

You've not made any "argument", alternative or otherwise. You've stated the other poster's comment suggested an attitude which it simply didn't. That's all.