Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Pirate Sunk

Sanity ? From a judge ? Apparently so. Nothing is more frustrating than these cases where scumbag lawyers claim that because their client was not specifically warned not to beat themselves about the head with a shovel, they should score two million. That is real contempt of court, the desire to turn justice into a word game, and - not coincidentally - open the gates to obtrusive government.

Needless to say, Radio 2 invited us to feel sympathy for the treasure-hunting slag - apparently, she may have to pay costs. Gosh - you mean you can't even try and screw money out of a company with a fatuous lawsuit without facing consequences ? What's happening to the world ?

Still, just to prove nothing has really changed:

Scottish Health Minister Andy Kerr said the ruling would have no impact on the Scottish Executive's plans to introduce a ban on smoking in public places next year.
Personal responsibility ? Here, on Fantasy Island ? C'mon.

Gallic Sofistikaytion

See ? The government gets a kicking because it's packed with out of touch elitists, so they decide to appoint as PM a career diplomat who's never been elected milk monitor. Let's see those moron Yanks do that!

Monday, May 30, 2005

French Kissing

Who'd have thunk it ? Yes, the Liberals will point out that the French Eurosceptics, have a completely different vision of Europe than the UK version. Well, like, yeah. That’s the point. Of course the Eurosceptic camp is a big tent – Europe is a big place, and we argue that it is precisely that diversity that argues against the EU’s absurd idea of remaking Europe as a monolithic entity.

The most interesting thing about the L3’s stupid GOTCHA! talking points – which argue for little more than that British and French Eurosceptics are so different, it's like they’re from two different countries – is that it kind of blows out of the water one of their previous favourite talking points. Now that the BBC, Guardian et al have been forced to admit the existence of Continental opposition to the EU, that wraps it up for the ‘Little Englander’’ myth. Apparently, opposition to signing Europe over to an oligarchy of thuggish kleptocrats and deranged collectivists is not some kind of weird British eccentricity after all. It turns out that the French do have a word for freedom after all.

So that’s the irony right there. The Left argued that democracy, freedom, justice and the like, where just some stupid anglosphere idea, that the Continentals got by just fine without them, and who were we to say our system was better ? Well, now we know – even people in France want to be free after all. Who'd have thunk that, that France would be the final proof of the Bush doctrine ?

Sunday, May 29, 2005

Liberal Jihad Against Satire Continues

Wonder if the BBC will report this ?

Good Dog!

The Liberal Establshment has a new set of heroes: Let's hear it for Ofstead.

Yes, indeed. You really need a scorecard to keep up with these people. A fortnight ago Ofstead were a collection of worthless, pen pushing bureaucrats who couldn't teach a dog to fetch sticks. Now they're a Judge Dredd for our times, boldy taking on the sleazy incompetents depriving the next generation of a decent education. What's changed ?

Ah yes.

The Left is so transparent with its Good Dog/Bad Dog rhectoric. Now Ofstead suits their purposes, they're right behind it. Give it two weeks and they'll be scum again. But, for now, the Left will sit back and enjoy the unusual sight of a failing school.

But At Least We Won't Give Them Steak Knives

The Yin to the Yang of Liberal’s teenage girly hysteria about killer chefs and the like is their insanely lacksaidaisical approach to real threats. Prospect of small town accountants going on the rampage with cutlery ? Libs need a valium enema to get off the ceiling. Insane death cult with a record of hideous violence ? Yeah, right, like that’s a threat.

That’s where I break with Mark Steyn (a fact certain to cause him no end of self-doubt). Steyn argues that while Blair is generally awful, he at least understands the threat the West faces. Myself, I think that Blair supported Bush on Iraq for his own reasons. Blair saw Iraq, correctly, as a test case for the whole World Government thing. While the French and the like see international law – whatever that may be – as merely a means for their Lilliputian selves to tie down the US, Blair really is a believer. Blair is genuinely committed to the idea of an activist UN desending upon naughty despots across the world as an end in itself, rather than as, say, Wolfowitz would see it, as a means of protecting the West from the instability arising from large parts of the world being an open sewer. Blair's support for the Iraq invasion was a case of a man choosing right for the wrong reasons. Nothing in Blair public pronouncements or policy indicates that he understands what it is that’s different about Islam or why Hindus aren’t flying airliners into office blocks.

Consider, for example, a recent exercise in dhimmitude. Head of the Armed Forces, General Walker was sent to prostate himself before the Muslim Council of Britain. Needless to say, not only did Walker do all but promise to personally fellate any Islamoids who joined up, he also contributed such pears of wisdow as ‘The MCB has made a real and lasting contribution to the creation of a just and tolerant society.’ Equally inevitably, those of us who criticised this AT THE TIME were subject to the usual Liberal squawking: the MCB was a fabulous organisation, Islam was a ducky ideology, the real threat was pharmacists with kitchen knives….

Well now, it turns out the MCB have been in the news again:

Muslim protesters today called for the bombing of New York in a demonstration outside the US embassy in London.
There were threats of "another 9/11" from militants angry at reports of the desecration of the Koran by US troops in Iraq.
Some among the crowd burned an effigy of Tony Blair on a crucifix and then set fire to a Union flag and a Stars and Stripes. Led by a man on a megaphone, they chanted, "USA watch your back, Osama is coming back" and "Kill, kill USA, kill, kill George Bush". A small detail of police watched as they shouted: "Bomb, bomb New York" and "George Bush, you will pay, with your blood, with your head."
Demonstrators in Grosvenor Square, some with their faces covered with scarves, waved placards which included the message: "Desecrate today and see another 9/11 tomorrow."
The protest was organised by groups including the Muslim Council for Britain and the Muslim Parliamentary Association of the UK. Their protest follows fury in the Islamic world over the claims in a Newsweek magazine that US soldiers at Guantanamo Bay had abused the Koran.

Quick, someone get White Flag Walker on the phone and ask him how the creation of a just and tolerant society is going. It might just be me, but I can’t see that these are necessarily the best people to be giving arms and training to. Call it a wild shot in the dark.

Saturday, May 28, 2005

National Federation Of Satirists Surrenders.

The theory that modern Liberalism has now become unsatirisable has now been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Report Claims Banks Chase Profitable Business, Liberals Shocked!

Here's a question - how do you get to be a 'consumer champion' ? Take Dame Deirdre Hutton, for example, former Chairman of the National Consumer Council. She's stepping down to take a doubtlessly well compensated role as head of the Food Standards Agency. I think we're not supposed to see any irony in a supposed consumer champion being an enthusiastic rider on the quangocrats merry-go-round. Anyway, she took the opportunity for one last chance to try and foist crypto-socialist nonsense on the Great British Public.

Dame Deidre is shocked - shocked I tell you - that financial institutions focus their efforts on people rich enough to buy their rubbish services. Actually, m'lady has only found the tip of the iceberg. As a former insider in the hospitality industry, I can exlusively reveal that bar staff and waiters focus their efforts on potential big tippers. It's discrimination, that's what it is. Who will speak up for the lemon-sucking Liberal academics cruely deprived of good service ?

What it's all about - apart from the knee-jerk ranting about eeeeeeevvvvillll banks, without which no Liberals day is complete - is providing covering fire for Charles Clark. We're supposed to see that HSBC has our financial data on file - a bank with financial details ? - so, hey, who cares if Nu Lab wants to set up its own database - it's just one more, right ? This argument is insane at so many levels, but for now, I'll just point out that Dame D complains that the unchecked power of capitalist pig banks allows them to give better service to Moira Moneydancents than to Joe Tyrekicker, meanwhile the unchecked power of government - enthusiatsically supported by Dame D - allows little faux pas, like the Holocaust and the Gulag. But at least the KGB never kept people waiting....

Monday, May 23, 2005

The Art Of Politics

Personally, I quite like George Galloway – he strikes me as an honest Liberal, and you don’t see many of them, but witnessing the Left’s reaction to George Galloway’s performance in Washington just made me wish I had shares in Kleenex or Vision Express. So this is what the Left considers to be success ? Honestly – if Galloway had keyed Senator Levin’s car on the way out, it would have been no less coherent and no more obnoxious, than the rest of his performance.

Galloway is a true hero for the modern Left: morally compromised, self-obsessed and obnoxious, but most of all vacuous. What, after all, is the point of all that ranting ? Yes, Galloway hates the US, Britain, Western Civilisation, Conservatives, Jews et al but listen to him for any length of time and it becomes obvious that he doesn’t have an actual point.

Modern Liberalism is much like modern art with Liberal debate as the intellectual equivalent of making a crucifix out of human faeces. Sure, there are still some folks, like the saintly Frank Field, still resolutely painting pictures of horses and the like, but it is maroons like Galloway who are the authentic voice of the modern Left.

The real take-home message from Galloway’s Senate holiday is a reassuring one for Conservatives. The thing about modern art is that every time the public has the chance to pay good money for a portrait of the Queen made from semen, they buy another horse picture. Doubtless, the Metropolitan trendies are shocked – shocked! – at the ignorance of Joe Public, still relentlessly buying horse pictures - and after all these years of fashionistas screeching at them for being so philistine. So it is with politics, which is why even today the Labour Party has to outsource its policies to bureaucrats (see here for an example).

Let the Left’s media boosters slobber over Galloway’s courage and indefatigability The Left is spinning down into the kind of incestuous self-coddling elite that regards jetting off to the US to be rude to people as a useful substitute for policy. Shock value and offensiveness are taking the place of coherency. History shows the media couldn’t sell the public on the artistic merits of sliced up cows, and they won’t be able to sell them on the benefits of free holidays for child molesters.

No, this isn’t support for the stupid ‘one more push’ idea. There is plenty wrong with the Conservative Party, but the basic principles are sound. Yes, they’re plenty of idiots who’ll slobber over a portrait of the Pope made out of pubic hair, but the Great British Public just wants a nice picture of a horse.

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Summer Sale: Liberal Credibility Now Lower Than Ever

Hey Liberals – how’s that boycott of Bluewater going ? Here’s a free clue – have you seen it being mentioned once on the BBC ? Say no more. But don’t call the boycott ineffectual – it has had an effect, just not the one L3 intended – it actually increased visitor numbers by almost a quarter. In a development that has stunned the Guardian, it turns out that the public has little sympathy with demands that private businesses allow their property to be invaded by knuckle-dragging yobbos.

As ever, there’s a wider point here. Liberals went to Code Red when the Great Hoodie Scandal Of 2005 broke, as summarised by LT. Bluewater was hit with the Liberals’ trademark Full-Spectrum BS, everything from agonised essays about alienated yoofs to Lefty sneerathons involving hypothetical cases of monks popping into JJB Sports for some trainers. End result ? Total humiliation.

Is it just me or are other people starting to see a pattern here ? Some organisation reveals a new policy, the Liberal Establishment spends two days interviewing each other about what a disaster it’ll be, then it turns out that the public love it after all. It almost as if Liberals are starting to sink into total irrelevance, but at least they can reassure themselves with one thought: no matter how much of a national joke they become, they’ll always be one group of people who’ll respect their opinions.

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

We Have Our Goldberg

The Brit Blogosphere has been buzzing about a forthcoming book by whistleblower Robin Aitkin, who reveals bigotry and prejudice at the heart of one of Britain’s most powerful institutions. Doubtless he’ll be given the full hit: Newsnight specials, Panorama investigations and James Nesbitt playing him in the inevitable two-part dramatisation.

Oops, no. Just checked and it turns out he’s blowing the whistle on the BBC. Guess he won’t be getting a date with Kirsty the Kommie Klown after all. There’s a serious point here – nothing shows the BBC’s bias like the topic of BBC bias. It’s not just the contrast between the lauding of heroic truthtellers who reveal malfeasance in other industries compared to the treatment that will be handed out to that nut Aitkin. Consider, for example, the different standards for detecting bias in recruitment. The Beeb is first to claim that an underrepresentation of blacks in the Police proves that the dress code for interview board members is a white sheet with optional hood, but try finding out how many Conservatives work for the BBC. After all, the justification for the whole diversity boondoggle is the requirement for ‘different perspectives’ – Conservatives at the Beeb wouldn’t offer a new perspective so much as a whole new worldview, but no – that’s a little too diverse.

Some might say that there’s a degree of humbuggery in the BBC criticising the Police for 'institutional racism' when any Conservative journalist aspiring to work at the BBC needs to change either his views or his career ASAP. Myself, I just think we’re missing the nuance in the Beeb’s position – actually, Auntie doesn’t mind a bit of prejudice, it just has to be done the right way. Provided the Police are prepared to take a few tips from Auntie, there’s no need for any radical changes.

  • The Police could cite critical statements from organisations like the Aryan People’s Sturm Abteilung as proof that both blacks and whites feel the Police discriminate against them.

  • It’s also important that the Police publicly obsess over alleged discrimination based on everything except race. They could arrange huge studies to investigate whether gays, women or redheads are being discriminated against, after all, the BBC won’t hire Conservatives but the top brass professes to agonise over the fact their staff roster is ‘hideously white’.

  • The Police could deflect further criticism by occasionally bringing in ethnic minority consultants on short-term contracts, but only allowing them to deal with specific ethnic issues rather than general matters, making sure they’re only allowed to work on projects where they’re safely outnumbered by white officers and carefully marking all their reports so everyone knows they’re ETHNIC.

  • Police Officers could hijack a mechanism meant to protect ordinary members of the public from abuse and use it to wage legal terrorism against their critics.

  • When finally pinned down by critics the Police could claim that they are racists but that’s what the nation is, and besides do you want to see child molesters going free ? (actual quote from John Humphries: Do we want to return to capital punishment or to see homosexuals persecuted? No. That is a broadly liberal position. And that's what the nation is. I bloody well hope the BBC is broadly liberal.)

With techniques such as this, the Police should be able to stride forward into the Twenty-First Century and become every bit as professional, representative and well-respected as the BBC.

Filthy Traitor Defeats Filthy Traitor, Liberals Shocked!

What did I tell you ? You need to hire your own personal staff of Kremlinologists to keep track of what’s happening these days. Take events in Reading. The Pub Philosopher was the first to point out the rather large hole in the media reporting. Note that the reports don’t say anything to the effect ‘Police have refused to release any details of the people they’re looking for’. Nope – our devil-may-care media just doesn’t mention it.

Gosh – what can it mean ?

You have to climb into the animal house to work out what’s really going on. As if we couldn’t guess.

This is the problem Liberals have – they genuinely believe everyone else is too stupid to work out what their game is. They think we’ve got a serious case of goldfish memory. Well, not quite. We can remember all that Liberal posturing about zero tolerance for violence against women. We can recall those cases of men arrested for alleged violence even without an actual accuser. We can remember the bogus statistics proving that being a housewife in Leamington Spa was more dangerous than being a Second Lieutenant on the Somme. Well, here it is: here’s a case where a woman has been subjected to truly horrific violence. Even those of us who think violence against feminists shouldn’t just be legalised, it should be made compulsory, can nevertheless recognise these individuals as truly evil. And the feminazis ? The folks who claim a woman who gets called fat by a colleague truly deserves £1.5 million compensation ? Where are they ? Answer: nowhere.

A large section of the Left is still all a-twitter about Galloway defeating King. These are strange times when Oona King is being put forward as a model of political probity. The Left’s real problem with Galloway isn’t that he’s betrayed the ideals of Liberalism, it’s that he’s followed them through to their logical conclusion. Liberals were getting along fine boiling the frog when Gorgeous George turned up with his blowtorch and a nasty case of Liberal Tourette's syndrome.

Think of a current political issue. Consider what a superpatriot would think. Consider what a Brit-hating loon would think. Work your way inwards from both positions and see which reaches the Liberals first. You could be talking about anything from aviation to zoology and the Liberals will find an anti-British position. Feminazis signing a non-aggression pact with murderous gang rapists is the true measure of how much Liberals hate Britain.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Quote Of The Day

A commentator over at the Fever Swamp sums it up perfectly:

As far as I can see it, there are approximately 3 classes, and no longer lower, middle, upper. Namely:
(1) the working class,
(2) the not-working class,
(3) the social-working class.

Monday, May 16, 2005

Really, Really Doomed

Laban points out the obvious: most of the people the government is relying on to defeat yob culture are conscientious objectors in the war on crime. All too true, but possibly a little optimistic. Large parts of the Liberal Establishment aren’t just apathetic about yobbish behaviour – they are the yobs.

An education minister has been booed and hissed by head teachers as he tried to defend school league tables.
Delegates at the National Association of Head Teachers conference also talked across Derek Twigg as he said tables gave parents like himself information.
You will note that what provoked these people into a Linda Blair impersonation was… league tables ? Things didn’t get any better either:

A head teachers' leader has warned of the danger of giving "irresponsible parents" power in schools.
David Hart, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, was referring to the government's strategy of reinforcing parents' roles.
That could send the wrong message to irresponsible parents, he said.
And, lest you’re not already fancying a bit of yobbery yourself, they’d also like to impose compulsory indoctrination sessions on us:

Head teachers are calling for new mothers to attend weekly sessions to learn how to bring up their children.
Mr Gray, a member of the association's national council, told the conference parents got ante-natal training on the immediate practicalities of caring for their new babies, but were then "left very much to their own devices". ..
"How much better then it would be if the local education authority provided weekly sessions which mothers and babies from all social levels would be expected to attend."
So, in summary then, if the public agrees to fork over huge wodges of cash with no objective means of measuring the results or exercising real influence over how it’s spent, and turn up for compulsory reeducation, then these people will consider acting like civilised human beings.

Gosh, I don’t know where the kids get it from.

There’s a wider point here, a clue as to how we got where we are. But first, in order to comply with fire safety regulations, I will now dispose of a straw man: at this point the L3 usually blame it all on Lady T. Britain apparently was a Shangri-La prior to 1979 (and never mind events as diverse as the Grosvenor Square riot of 68 and the rise of the footy hooligan). As ever, the Left is a little shaky about the details, but apparently Lady T was too obsessed about economics thereby creating social havoc. Those of an awkward turn of mind may ask why, if Lady T’s policies were so disastrous socially, it wasn’t best to have her safely occupied dealing with economic issues ? More substantially, there is the question of which precise policies caused these problems. But no, this is where the signal starts to fade into static about selfishness and the like. These are the people who think Wall Street is a devastating critique of 1980s Conservatism, perhaps unaware that stupid Ollie’s whining about the evils of money had been perfectly debunked three decades previously.

Now, there are two caveats here. Yes, the economic earthquakes of the Thatcher years did contribute to our social problems, but that reflects the nature of the reforms rather than who forced them through. All Liberals are really saying when they mention these upheavals is that they desire the benefits of the Thatcherite reforms without paying the price. Plus ca change.

Similarly, it should be noted that many Conservatives would have liked Lady T to engage more with social issues, albeit almost all recognise that criticising her for being preoccupied with economic reform is like complaining that Churchill spent his first term obsessing about foreign policy: it was what the situation required. Anyway, Conservatives hardly wanted Lady T to engage because the culture was too right-wing – on the contrary, for all that Thaterism dominated the national scene in the 1980s, large parts of the culture remained resolutely Liberal. This was the era of loony left councils, anti-racist maths and Liberation Theology, to name but three cultural atrocities.

Liberal attempts to blame Her Greatness for the collapse of society always end up quoting a single fragment of a speech she made. Yep – “There's no such thing as society” I mean, I don’t expect coherence from the L3, but you expect them to be able to manage at least a whole sentence. But no.

For the benefit of those who can read actual English, here is the quote in its proper context:

We've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant'. 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problems on society. And you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours. People have got their entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations.
Now is that not the perfect description of the mentality on show at the head teachers conference ? The belief that they have the right to a continuous supply of public money without the dreadful strain of dealing with the actual public ? All this, combined with the belief that should things not turn as they desire, well, they’re quite justified behaving like brainless yobbos. Here is one of the key planks of yob culture: the belief in an ever-expanding series of entitlements in parallel with the right to go on the rampage should your perceived need not be met.

This is the double whammy of our therapeutic culture – the belief that some abstract concept called society is not only responsible for picking up the litter chavs drop on the streets, but that it’s actually the fault of society that they dropped it in the first place.

There are other toxic elements to this mix. Infantilisation is the end-result of a belief in the power of society to control our every move. Since we’re all just hopeless corks bobbing around in the social sea, what’s the point of resisting the urge to indulge our every whim ? Society made us do it, and besides, we’ve got a right to be happy, 'stead of letting an unacted upon desire burn its way through us and give some kind of brain ulcer.

Then there’s the zero sum nature of it all. Lady T might have beaten the Left hollow over its asinine economic views, but the pizza is alive and well and living in our culture. This is the belief that life is a big pizza and if I have too many slices, you’re left with an empty box. Add in the Left’s constant attempts to stoke paranoia that someone, somewhere (White males ? Jews ? Big Business ?.....) is plotting to deprive you of your rights – hey, if only there was some kind of all-powerful body that could protect you from these people – and you end up with the balkanisation of society and the breakdown of communities. Not only do I have the right to play my stereo at 3 AM, but you’re a Nazi for trying to stop me.

Liberals have created a culture where entitlements exist without corresponding responsibilities. There are plenty of things wrong with such a culture, but it has one great advantage for a Liberal: it mandates a truly elephantine government to try and manage the inevitable contradictions and mitigate the consequences. Social worker, politicians, educrats….the salaried unemployed have never had it so good. Meanwhile, under cover of bogus new entitlements, government has managed to chip away at our real freedoms, like free speech, self-defence and the like.

But that’s not thee worst of it. It’s not that Liberals are merely amoral scum pursuing their own self-interest. The truth is far worse – some of them actually think they’re doing the right thing. Liberalism is their religion, with themselves as priests, self-indulgence as worship and society as their God. Just like their new friends with the semtex underwear, what Liberalism is really about is submission. It offers unconsciousness, the chance put aside all personal responsibility and subsume yourself into society.

That’s what’s really wrong with Liberals – they’re such a bunch of losers.

Sunday, May 15, 2005

In Praise Of Incoherence

Personally, I don’t think the Conservatives did badly for a party with only one policy. Conservative immigration policy got a lot of flak, but it was the one policy everyone knew in at least broad outline, while the Uberwets criticism of it is based mainly around the idea that the Party should have, y’know, done some stuff about hospitals, or maybe schools, or something like that. If the weasels didn’t like the emphasis on immigration, what policy do they think the Party should have pushed ?

The immigration debate reveals the real reason for the Conservative Party’s failure only in so far as it proves that the Left of the Party has decided to eschew actual policy in favour of spin. Contrary to what the BBC would have you believe, Conservative immigration policy was a vote winner – it just wasn’t enough of one to do the heavy lifting on its own. The one simple way for the Party to avoid accusations of being obsessed with immigration next time is to develop a whole bunch of other policies.

Nevertheless, there is a elephant trap here. While the Party needs to develop a coherent set of policies, the Party should avoid, at all costs, trying to develop an underlying philosophy. Modern Conservatism is the bastard child of a raging affair between Dagny Taggart and Juan Rico. That’s a strength not a weakness.

The Left seeks to persuade people to fork over their money, rights and even their lives against the prospect of a future utopia – not for nothing is Liberalism often compared to a religion. Indeed, the Left’s internecine wars are a perfect parallel with the Church obsession with heretics.

The Right doesn’t have this problem – there’s no great vision of how the world could be. Conservatism is about freeing people to follow their own dreams. If Conservatives themselves can’t agree about how the world should be, that simply underlines the central absurdity of the Liberal position – the idea that there exists a formula, the implementation of which will make this world a paradise. At least, the state of armed neutrality between social conservatives and libertarians keeps the Right honest.

Monday, May 09, 2005

Historians in Shock Claim: Lady Thatcher Not Universally Popular In 80s

With the Tories embarking on another knife fight, time to revisit Ann Coulter on electability:

Like Thomas Sowell's definition of a "racist" ("a conservative winning an argument with a liberal"), the definition of an "unpopular Republican" is "a Republican the Democrats would like to be rid of." Whenever liberals are being hysterical about a Republican, it's because that Republican is not good for the Democrats.

I promise you, if McCain, Powell or even Rudy Giuliani were put on the ticket, the liberal lovefest would come to a screeching halt. We'd finally get a little investigative reporting on liberals' favorite Republicans -- and who knows what's in those closets. (Let's just hope McCain and Giuliani don't have any messy divorces in their past!) Heaven help us if any of them have ever worked for a successful corporation.

Saturday, May 07, 2005

Reasons To Be Cheerful

Back again. Did I miss anything ?

Ah yes – another four years hard Labour. Still, it’s not all bad news:

  • The media is still stuck in its Iraq quagmire.

  • Labour has postured as Lady Bountiful, granting workers all these new rights. Well, all these extra costs on business mean that as soon as the weather changes disaster will strike. The next few years will debunk the myth that government can loot private business with no consequences.

  • Labour in, but Blair damaged is probably the best combination possible for defeating the EU Constitution.

  • Labour is slowly going from boiling the civil liberties frog to roasting him on a spit. Even Daily Mail readers will get with the program the third time they’re asked for their papers on the way to the park.

  • Immigration and crime are both in play – and no, the genie ain’t going back in the bottle.

  • Prezza’s back. Say what you like about Prescott, but he’s proof of British democracy. If he’s Deputy PM then anyone can succeed in this country.

  • Best of all, as long as Blair’s in office, the Wicked Witch can’t get on the bench.

Monday, May 02, 2005

Give The Money To The Monkeys

Animals as diverse as pigs, chimps and elephants have been observed binging on rotten fruits - showing a far greater appetite for the rotten food than for the corresponding fresh stuff. What it's all about ? Just this - they're getting blasted: the fruit ferments, the elephant gobbles it up and now you've got a pissed pachyderm.

Needless to say, the Neo-Prohibitionists wouldn't approve. Even now, they're probably a few of them out there trying to shakedown a quango for the dosh to run seminars on the dangers of booze at Chester Zoo. Here's hoping the chimps throw faeces at them - it is no more than they deserve. It turns out that, for all the Neo-Prohibs fairy tales about hooch horrors, booze is brain food. While Cheetah is revving up his synapses, the Neo-Prohibs are thrashing about trying to pull a rescue hypothesis out of their tragically stunted brains - 'ooh, ooh, I know lets say "these new cells could contribute to the development of alcohol dependence." - that'll hold them.' Alcohol dependance ? How about dependance on promoting a perverted life deathstyle long after evidence has started piling up about the negative effects of sobriety ? Consider, for example, the correlation between sobriety and poverty. Yet, still these people try to infect others with their sickness.

How's this for a double whammy: the Neo-Prohibs pay far less tax than drunks, both directly and as a result of the type of poorly-paid careers they end up in, and now we find that they're prey to health problems which makes them more likely to soak the NHS. Yet what does the government do ? It allows itself to be mau-maued into giving these Nazi vampire freaks even more of our cash so that they can try and indoctrinate vulnerable young children into their twisted, Satanic cult. The hell with that. Let these fascist zombies starve in the gutter. If we're going to throw money away, at least give it to our little forest mates. What'd you rather have your taxes spent on ? Some lemon-sucking repressed paedophiles or drunk chimps ?


Whispers In The Grass

Anyone remember Annie Jacobson ? She was the crazed, hysteric who worte an article about a perfectly respectable group of ROPers who were in no way a threat to anybody. Except it now turns out.....

Doubtless, even now Jacobson's critics are busily composing notes of apology. Or maybe they'll just dump this story down the memory hole like so many others. Yes, I can see why governments may want to soft-peddle the threat from terrorists - I think it's a stupid idea, but yes, I can see why they might not think so. But what of the media ? Our devil-may-care free press ? How come the only way to find out how the war is really going is to rely on samizdat media like the 'Net ?

Simply put, journalists have asssimilated the PC agenda to such a degree that the notion of journalists as actual 'reporters' has gone the way of the dodo. Journalists are now 'opinion formers', helping the benighted masses come to the correct conclusions: there is no war, no threat, everything's wonderful. And so it will continue until Birmingham gets nuked, at which point the media will ask 'why weren't we warned ?'.

Pair Of Shorts

BigTommy passes on a report from another and better universe. Mind you, I quite like Becks - I think the Country is lucky to have a whole back-up Royal family ready to roll if it all goes wrong with the Windsors.

Meanwhile, Timmyhawk has a good post about Iraq. I'm not so sure about the emphasis on planning failures - with an operation this big and this compex something was bound to go wrong, so the test was surely the ability of the Coalition to react to disasters, rather than try (vainly)to predict them in advance. But, anyway, Timmyhawk rightly points out that it is bizarre to witness all the angst about intelligence failures in Iraq, while ignoring the failure of intel to detect so much as a whisper about Libya's program.

Who'd Have Thunk It ?

Wouldcha'believe it ? Turns out Sue Blackwell, key player behind the AUT's 'not anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist' boycott of Israeli Universities, has some interesting friends. Doubtless, the academic community will be right on it, just as soon as they've finished investigating some cleaner charged with telling the one about Sir Elton and the hamster.

Sunday, May 01, 2005

The Only Conservatives The BBC Likes Are The Neutered Ones

Honestly, you really need a scorecard to keep up with these Liberals. Last week, all we heard from the Liberal media was talk that the Conservatives were obsessed with immigration, and besides, you know the type of people who’re going to be attracted by plans to restrict immigration. Oops.

Apparently, Conservatives mentioning immigration is proof of ideological exhaustion, but the Left calling Conservatives Nazis is as fresh now as it ever was. Then again, we don’t need lessons on the dangers of obsession from folks who are still yapping about a war that was fought two years ago.

Here’s the shocking truth: not a single person will vote differently because of Iraq. Outside media La-La Land, there are only three types of people still yammering on about it anyway. There are the New Age peace creeps – these people believe we could have avoided war if Blair had negotiated in good faith, but then they say that about Chamberlain. All we need to do is focus our karmic resonances on our crystal vibrancies and there’ll never be another war. These loonies always vote Lib Dem.

Next up, there are people who believe that Western Civilisation is the not only the worst on the planet, but the worst there could ever be on any planet anywhere. Their main problem with Al-Quaida is that they’re not anti-Western enough. They always vote Lib Dem or Labour.

Finally, there are the Paleocons - the people who never got over Suez. They’ll admit that militant Islam may be a problem but not as big a problem as those filthy Americans with their loud voices, stupid music and horrible food and...The only good thing that can be said for these 50s throwbacks is that they always vote Conservative anyway.

Iraq is the perfect barometer for the media/human divide. Are we really supposed to believe that there are people out there who didn’t know Blair was a lying scumbag ? Really, how can the media deny that they have utter contempt for the public ? Do they think we’re all morons ? Apparently so, since they hope we won’t miss they sudden switch round. Last week, when the Conservatives were talking about immigration, the Liberal media – the Beeb above all else – was bombarding us with stories about potential refugees who could theoretically fall foul of the Conservative proposals if they had flee a hypothetical regime in an as-yet-unknown country some time in the future. Now, the Conservatives find themselves pushing the same line as the L3 and no one at the BBC will point out that Howard’s proposals are insane.

The Conservative Party’s line of attack on Iraq is to claim that the war was illegal because there was no resolution from the UN. Or to put it another way, Michael Howard has announced that should his government receive information of an imminent threat to this country then he will not hesitate to crawl on his knees before Kofi’s Klowns and ask for permission to defend these islands. You can’t trust these people with kids, but Howard wants us to trust them with national security ?

This is – to say the least – a major change in policy for the Conservative Party, yet you need to put the pieces together yourself – the BBC won’t point it out. Here was a Conservative policy that really is debatable, but there’s been a media blackout.

This is the essence of media bias: a feeding frenzy when a Party comes out against the Liberal consensus, a cease-fire when it signs up to it. Tough line on immigration ? Bad dog! Outsource national security to the UN ? Good dog!

There’s an important lesson here. Following the impending disaster on May 5, the Tory modernisers will be at it again. We’ll be told that certain lightweight imbeciles are potential PMs for no better reason that their supposed electability – which, in practice means nothing more than their ability to garner fawning profiles for their courage in parroting the media line on the issue d’jour. Well, here it is: even Michael Howard can score no end of ‘good dog’ coverage – providing he’s prepared to let the whole country get neutered. Meanwhile, in the real world not a single person is changing their vote because of the media obsession d’jour. Immigration ? Crime ? Despite the best efforts of the media, these are issues that really have brought people over to the Conservatives. That’s the real lesson when it comes to electability - just look for the Conservative that the media hates.