BTW That funny was a proper funny as I thought it was funny  I don't deal out funny when I don't think it is funny. Funny that isn't it? 
Nice one 
Exclusive: Labour councillor brands Pride marchers ‘paedophiles’
Tory MP Margot James told PinkNews: “These are outrageous remarks, so ignorant and prejudiced."
MP Margot James then went on to qualify her comments "It's quite clear to me that claiming this councilor represents the Labour party is outrageous, ignorant and prejudiced"
"Homophobic christian evangelicals are clearly 'our thing' and Labour has no right to poach our thunder, my team are seeking legal advice on copyright infringement as we speak".
She's been suspended, first stage in the process. I've not read a recent version of the rule book, but I don't expect her to be a member of the Labour Party for much longer. If she's not booted out, she'll likely get deselected as a candidate if the local party is sufficiently angered.
???? Is that your attempt of humour? At least try and put a smiley in there or highlight that you aren't actually quoting the article.
Most peculiar.
Come on, it really doesn't need a smilie to see that it's satirical humour, it's incredibly blatant.
I know this can be a humourless place, and it's no fat joke, but still.
Perhaps if you paid attention then you can see it was already done, and in not in a style to pretend it was actually in the article.
Sometimes it's better to just not say anything if you don't have anything to contribute.
Huh? What am I supposed to have paid attention to? And what was already done? That literally makes no sense to me.
I read a joke, you said it needs signposting, I don't see why an obvious joke needs to be pointed out. No need for the last comment at all, it was never a reply to get on your high horse about.
Are you sure it's not more the case you don't like it because it's a stab at the right wing rather than a case that you can't tell it's satire ?
The Christian Evangelical movement is predominantly right wing, especially in the US were it is a far more significant demographic (about 25%-30% of US citizens are Evangelical Christians).
Out of all demographics, Christian Evangelicals are the MOST likely to vote Republican and hold right wing views.
The fact that this fruit bat is an Evangelical minister as well as a councilor for Labour is ironic enough, but the fact that she also was attacking liberals in her tweets as supporters of 'paedophiles' made it all the more bizarre.
If no one mentioned what party she belong to or here ethnic origin and a councilor tweeted about the design of a planned new shopping centre was misogynistic and racist, because if you squeezed your eyes together, looked sideways at it after drinking 1/2Litre of gin and falling over, it looked like dragon ... and we all know what that means - dragon is a prejorative word for a powerul and assertive woman and the leader of the KKK is the grand dragon ... it's so OBVIOUS.
............. most people would tend to guess it was a Labour councilor.
From the attacking liberals and the other Christian evangelical homophobic drivel of those tweets,I would bet money on the majority of people guessing she was either a member of UKIP or a Conservative.
Hence my satirical fake news that I would consider most users of these forums able to differentiate from the actual article ... especially since you can read the article and no where does it say anything like it.
Except that Margot James is herself gay, and about as far removed from a "homophobic christian evangelical" as you can get, so the "joke" fell flat on it's a*** i'm afraid.
I know you often refer to this group when you are supporting the opposite view.
But if it's widely supported (25%-30%), it cannot be considered a fringe group, and should be given the same kind of respect that we give to, say, the Muslim faith?
Just a point.