DAVID CAMERON has admitted that he let out a "little cry of joy" when David Bowie, through the medium of Kate Moss, called on Scots to reject independence in this September's referendum.
But the Prime Minister apparently did not have the same reaction following Kermit the Frog's endorsement of the Union last week.
Or perhaps the Conservative leader was reacting badly to Kermit's revelation that his long-time paramour, Miss Piggy, was backing Scotland leaving the UK.
For the cast of Sesame Street would have been shocked yesterday had they heard the language that Mr Cameron used to denounce his opponents, Labour leader Ed Miliband and his shadow chancellor Ed Balls at Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs).
That's right, you guessed, he called them "muppets".
And it was not meant as a compliment.
Nor was it taken as such by Labour.
While Ed and Ed valiantly pretended to shrug it all off some of their colleagues had less practised poker faces.
There were a number of shakes of the head on the Labour frontbench.
Further back on Labour benches there was a scramble among MPs to get out their smartphones, presumably to start searching for the terms "unparliamentary language" and "muppet".
In the end, as Kermit could have told them, "muppet" is allowed in the Mother of Parliaments.
Indeed Mr Cameron's outburst was far from unique in Commons history. There are more than two dozens uses of the word "muppet", presumably most of them insults, in the archives, going back decades.
Words that have been judged by the Commons officials to be unparliamentary over the years include blackguard, coward, git, guttersnipe, hooligan, rat, swine, traitor and stoolpigeon.
Even now, you have to ask, is the Prime Minister sitting in Downing Street wondering to himself: "Do we know where Big Bird stands on Scottish independence?"
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article