Government Faces Up To The Kebab Menace

As far as this goes, three things come to mind:

i/ I'll believe it when I see it

ii/Does he mean 'closed' in the traditional sense of 'not open' or in the modern sense of 'wide open providing you keep lodging super, special, emergency appeals against deportation for the next fifty years'?

iii/ Greece? Really? This is what's finally convinced him of the need for border security? There's not much to say about Athens, but it sure beats Mogadishu.

Mind you, sleazy and self-serving though the Nu Tories may be, when it comes to stupid, you can't beat the left:

Denis MacShane, the former Labour Europe minister, was among those who criticised Mrs May when the suggestion of border controls was first raised...

“And of course, if we ban every Greek from coming into Britain, the Greeks will ban every Brit from going into Greece – that's a great start to the holiday season

... although in fairness to McShameless, it's probably difficult to distinguish between welfare tourists and the real thing when you can't even tell the diffference between an office and a garage.

You Can't Fix Crazy

The real lesson of this is summed up by the commentor who says that it really should mark the end of any attempts to not offend these loons.

Me, I think of it like the old Charles Atlas adverts, where the big bully kicks sand into the face of the seven-stone weakling.... except with liberals following on behind the bully loudly claiming that the weedy guy was obviously provoking him.

Lefty Argument Clinic

It's a mystery how the Smartest People In The Room keep driving off cliffs.

Admittedly, not as much of a mystery as how many copies of alleged publishing monster hit 'Chavs' were actually sold, but it's still an interesting question anyway.

Actually, on second thoughts, no it isn't. It's just two sides of the same coin. We're assured Owen is da voice of da yoof - even though there's no evidence da yoof - or anyone else - is buying it, either literally or figuratively. Ditto, we're assured that Owen and pals are radical intellectuals, smashing the cosy concensus of us tabloid-addled drones even though... well, you know:

an argument is an intellectual process, while contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says

Nope, that pretty much is most lefty arguments. Us knuckle-draggers say something and wild'n'wacky rebel tigers like Owen No-Figures say the opposite.

Take that you Mail reading white trash!

Making sense is an optional extra - the main point is the Owen and pals really, really hate low-income whites with ideas above their station.

Outrage D'Jour: My Pension Fund Went To India And All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt

At least Brown only robbed a chunk of your pension. Now Gideon wants the rest.

Yes, indeed, it's the opportunity to invest into infrastructure projects - and you know it must be good because, by defnition, these are projects no one in the private sector will touch.

No, wait..... that can't be right.

Say, you don't think there's a potential for corruption when big companies are being invited to invest their pension funds into supporting vanity projects proposed by the self-same politicians who award large government contracts?

Animal Farm: It's Meant To Be A Warning, Not An Inspiration

I've been trying to think of something suitably snarky to say about Professional Yorkshireman William 'Squealer' Hague's warning that if we don't shape up, the government's going to fire us and elect a new public.

Actually, that might not be so far off the mark, given their support for open borders.

Still, leaving that aside, how can you mock these people when they do such a good job of it themselves?

I mean, there's this and then there's this..... oh, and this.

Mind you, at least this has a certain Pythonesque charm. They probably wanted to discuss defence policy too, but the rowing machine was broke.

All of which is by way of returning to the point I keep making: Cameron is a really huge fraud. We kept being told that, sure, he might be an ideological lightweight, but he's a political genius and a natural leader of men. Now it turns out that his Big Idea is berating the galley slaves for not rowing fast enough. Really? How long did it take him to come up with that one?

His government will suck up 50p in every pound, but the state of the country's nowt to do with him, so hand over your wallet then get back to work, you slackers.

Bad News Everybody!

We're All Crazy!!!!!

Also, if you're wondering why people are getting paid to produce this garbage, that proves you hate science. Meanwhile, still no word on the location of the original temperature readings the UEA claims to have used.

France is Frucked

Mind you, with Cast Iron Dave defending us from EU intrusions, it can only be a matter of time....

Stephen Lawrence Redux

Someone remind me: wasn't one of the main charges against the police at the Macpherson witch hunt that they intially failed to treat the murder as racially-motivated?

I only mention it because... well, you know.

On the plus side, at least the police didn't take half a decade to decide he was really dead.

Instinct tells me that the Macpherson principle, that crimes are racially-motivated if the victim or any third party thinks they are, will now be quietly dropped.

A vote of thanks too for the femiloons. They've now managed to top years of pushing absurd false rape claims by a blind refusal to acknowledge actual rapes.

Apparently, the victims should have lain back and thought of Marx.

All of which is by way of saying Ed West is wrong. It's not about victimhood, it's about promoting savagery. Liberals instinctively defend whichever side is most opposed to civilisation. That's why Saddam Hussain, Gary Glitter and Mozzam Begg have all received the liberal sob sister treatment.

It's the left's own version of the Confessional: simply recite ten 'Death to Americas' and be reborn as a Certified Liberal Icon. For proof of that, look no further than the Guardian's glowing tribute to this 'warm, funny and blunt' charmer.

You Know You're A Liberal If....

You read this as a criticism of Castro.

Education: Latest Score

Passive aggressive girly men want to control Junior's Facebook use, but if he can't read, then that's all the fault of society, Toricutz, Big Corporations and Mossad, and nowt to do with our £60K pa Net Nannies

Bold Attenpt To Improve Local Government Fails

Hey, at least we'd finally have one who didn't take more backhanders than Andy Murray.

Actually, my favourite bit is the line about the police seizing the mannequin. Yes, indeed: I think we all feel much safer knowing there's one less plastic representation of the human form out there on our streets.

Quote of the Day

Ed West sums it up brilliantly:

When wealthy, globe-trotting liberals espouse the cause of universalism they often describe it in terms of air travel and airports, a world of vibrant, diverse, cross-cultural pollination. Which is great, for the few wealthy enough to use business class. For the rest of us society has become exactly like an airport – endless security checks, CCTV, government snooping, armed police and all-powerful officials who will arrest you for an inappropriate remark.

The Supreme Leader Is Dead!

I can't be the only one whose noticed a change in tone in the communiques from the bunker these last couple of weeks. His Magnificance Sultan David I has been replaced by Downtrodden Dave, the poor guy who just can't get a break.

Here's an early example.

Yep, Dave would've gotten away it if it wasn't for those meddling conservatives.

Actually, the whole thing is virtually self-refuting. How else to describe a lecture on electability from a Cameroon? And that's without mentioning that the Tea Party folks actually won their elections.

Hipsters: Still Reliably Disgusting

Shorter O'Neill: Admire the sophistication of my refusal to condemn even outright insanity.

Like night following day, any outbreak of sadistic lunacy will be followed by the MSM's hipster contingent paying generous tribute to their own courage in refusing to condemn the killer. Free clue: it's only courageous if everyone else in the chattering class bubble isn't saying the exact same thing. For an MSM opinion writer to denounce the man on the Clapham omnibus as an unsophisticated brute is about as brave as George Galloway's warm up man denoucing Israel.

Hey, 'devil child' may lack nuance, but at least it also lacks any pretence to bogus insight. Meanwhile, O'Neall wants Dangerous Dan to get 'help and education'. Like what? 'Not Murdering People 101'? A quick course of aromatherapy? Colonic irrigation?

Hey, at least give us a hint here hipsters!

But no: their point is an essentially fradulent one. They want to contrast their own support for Therapy Nation versus the supposedly punative nature of the mob, but what's so sophiticated about their position? The science behind the rehab industry is about as reliable as a UEA climate model. O'Neall even cites the Bulger killers himself - the rehab industries' own flagship case, where despite a blank cheque and a policy of turning a blind eye to a string of offences, 50% of them still ended up back in jail anyway.

Hey, can you imagine how bad the figures are on the cases they don't want to talk about?

This is another case where conservatives have let liberals set the terms of the debate. It's not imprisonment versus rehab, it's the certainty of public protection versus pseudo-scientific garbage. Supporting the clowns and charlatans in the rehab industry is no more an intellectual position than believing your horoscope, and at least Jonathan Cainer doesn't want to set the Mad Axeman loose.

More Butt$ex May Not Be The Answer

After last week's events, I just have one question: how many £250,000 dinners did it take for Shell to persuade the Tories to start this whole panic-buying thing?

Meanwhile, Francis Maude is the latest Tory to find out that you can go to bed with the left, but they won't respect you in the morning. The MSM would pretend to respect Maude as long as he was prepared to throw real conservatives under the bus, but as soon as he was no longer of use to them, he went from a courageous moderniser to Tim Nice-But-Dim's senile uncle.

All of which raises an obvious point: Maude and pals defended their purges as the unfortunate price the Tory Party had to pay for electoral credibility (and that was how the Tories got their 200 seat majority). Now it's Frankie who's exposed as a Toxic Toff the logic of the modernisers surely demands that he be given the 'no place in the modern conservative party' treatment. But, apparently, this is one triangulation too far. They do have to have some principles, and if the Conservative Party stands for anything at all, it stands for the right of privileged prats to behave like idiots without consequences.

Latest Scores From The Rainbow Nation Challenge Cup

Jailed.

Not jailed.

Apparently, the left's new slogan is 'Prison Works (Terms & Conditions Apply)'.

On the plus side, at least there wasn't a racial aspect to the Brixton shooting.

Supporters gathered outside the shop to jeer the emergency services. As paramedics fought to save her, one even asked a policeman why they were bothering as the victim was 'just a Paki'.

Dang! Guess we'll have to push back completion date for the Rainbow Utopia again. Doubtless, our Nation's Witch Finder General Trevor Philips will be along to speak out about this any time now....

Reality Is Reactionary

We haven't had some Steyn for a while, so here he is getting to the heart of the matter:

Let's take it as read that Rick Santorum is weird. After all, he believes in the sanctity of life, the primacy of the family, the traditional socio-religious understanding of a transcendent purpose to human existence. Once upon a time, back in the mists of, ooh, the mid–20th century, all these things were, if not entirely universal, sufficiently mainstream as to be barely worthy of discussion. Now they're not. Isn't the fact that conventional morality is now "weird" itself deeply weird? The instant weirdification of ideas taken for granted for millennia is surely mega-weird — unless you think that our generation is possessed of wisdom unique to human history. In which case, why are we broke?

Or, indeed, why is the education system collapsing, the crime rate skyrocketing or the myriad other things going south at a rate of knots?

In many ways liberal social policy is like a real life version of one of the UEAs dodgy climate models, where whatever you plug into it, the Earth turns into ball of fire. We're not supposed to notice that the Earth remains stubbornly inhabitable, just like we're not supposed to notice that increasingly large parts of our cities aren't. If there was as much evidence of carbon emissions damaging the global environment as there is of liberalism damaging the social environment, conservatives would be riding to work on Raleighs. Meanwhile, liberals climb atop the rubble and insist that they're the Smartest People In The Room, and anyone who disagrees is some kind of creepy wierdo.

If They Really Wanted To Offend People, They Should Have Dressed As Real Scientists

It's outrageously outrageous!

No wonder they got in trouble. They clearly don't know what's expected of them at the UEA. They should have waited until they won one match then called themselves league champions, since if you extrapolate from that result across the whole season, they were clearly unbeatable.

Equally, if they did lose any games, they could just replace their results with those of the football team to hide the decline in performance. Then they could conspire with other teams to get anyone who beat them thrown out of the league, all that while claiming that league games are the only true test of skill.

If anyone questioned their claims, they could just say the sheet with the results had been accidentally thrown away, then delete any remaining copies.

Meanwhile, some of us are asking why we should trust folks at the UEA to predict the weather a hundred years from now when they can't even predict that a fancy dress party for student rugby players would turn out to a huge drunken blow-out?

Rainbow Nation Postponed Again

Like I keep saying, you can cut a deal with the Left, but they won't respect you in the morning. Now here's the ultimate proof.

The old line says that the most commonly heard phrase at Labour conferences is 'And what do you teach?', but now even the German Department is unter dem bus.

My favourite bit was the complaint that too many teachers were monolingual. Hey, the authors could be Welsh Nationalists, but I'm guessing it's the fact English people keep speaking English in England that offends them. Apparently, expecting pupils to learn our official language as part of their education is raycist. Think of it as the Dr Strangelove Rule: gentlemen, gentlemen, you can't learn stuff here, this a school.

Mind you, the use of the phrase 'little discussion of issues surrounding ethnicity' deserves some kind of award for chutzpah above and beyond the call of duty. That's the only thing half these losers will discuss.

On the plus side, at least the following quote kills the myth that professional leftists are a bunch of creepy, fascist weirdos:

Give the remaining white middle class teachers a very large dose of equality training and make it regular and continuous in case they lapse into their old blinkered ways.

Hmmm.... anyone know if a senior academic fantasising about forcing women to take part in humiliating rituals in an attempt to produce brain-washed drones is better or worse than calling a slut a 'slut'?

Really, we need to know, but until then enjoy the spectacle of another part of the Left's Grand Coalition falling apart. The white men have already been driven out of teaching, but Utopia still haven't arrived. Clearly the answer is even more quotas and victimhood.

This Is Why Your Taxes Are Going Up

Yes, it's true: Austerity Britain is paying people to count the stick figures in exam questions.

On the plus side, there may yet come a day when it's quite normal for patients to be seen by an Indian doctor.

Actually, this is a rare PC double: while they're dealing with the non-existent problem of Sikh under-achievement, they're also deflecting pressure to deal with the - actual, real - problem of male under-achievement. Boys aren't failing in schools becuase of lack of representation in exam questions any more than Tehran is Judenfrei becuase of a shortage of kosher delis.

Question D'Jour

Deliberate or not? An almost textbook example of the Men of No Appearance school of reporting is unfortunatly marred by the revelation that these mysterious 'youths' were shouting 'get the whities'.

Dang! Don't you just hate it when that happens?

Confirmed: Supporting The Dave Causes Insanity

Really: the cognitive dissonance on show here is a sight to behold.

To be fair though, full credit to QL for grasping something that passes most Professional Conservatives by: the left uses these quangos to push through stuff they would never dare bring up where the public would have a chance to vote against it. The only problem is that saying all that just rams home the contrast between a bunch of liberal wackadoodles using taxpayers' money to help wreck the country, and a supposed Conservative Party that's looking very strongly at moving towards putting in place mechanisms to consider the possible implementation of policies to potentially restrict the ability of said wackadoodles to give a shedload of cash to the Mohammed Siddiq Khan Memorial Scholarship Fund.

New Cameron Statement: 'I Did Not Have Sex With That Horse, Miss Raisa'

Hey, why not? After a week of ever-changing stories plus his desperate desire to be seen taking on mostly mythical right-wing extremists, who'd bet against him announcing he was involved in a stable relationship?

There's the obvious point that this last week of farce proves yet again that, no, The Dave is not a political genius, but it also exposes another myth. The Dave isn't a victim of inverted snobbery any more than Diane Abbot is a victim of racism. Forget the specifics, consider the general point: The Dave arranged for a public body to supply some pals of his with public resources, then made use of them himself. That'd still be corrupt even if he was scoring free tickets for the dog track or cans of Special Brew.

Apparently, we misheard: he actually said he was the heir to Cherie Blair.

His problem isn't that he looks like a toff, it's that he looks like what he is: an entitled brat who treats the nation's resources like his own toy box. Compared to giving foreign aid to Argentina or destroying the Libyan government with no idea what to replace it with, using the Met as his own personal stable probably counts as letting Britain off lightly.

What Was It About The Hoplophobic, Race Hustling Fantasist That First Attracted Labour?

Like I keep saying, if liberals are the smartest people in the room, how come they keep falling for obvious hoaxes?

Didn't the idea of a British city with a death toll of Saving Private Ryan proportions strike anyone as a little odd?

Apparently not, in fact, rumour has it they only started to get suspicious when she claimed a ninth family member had been gunned down by Elvis with David Beckham driving the getaway car.

Other than that, there was no reason to suspect anything:

However, documentary makers have discovered that most of the people she had said were dead are still alive.

Gordon has even been seen chatting to some of them on Facebook.

Maybe they got better?

Actually, I think we dodged a bullet there: at least she didn't blame it all on our Eurocentric concepts of 'life' and 'death' and demand a huge grant to serve the needs of the Undead Community.

Mind you, in other respects she's perfectly well qualified to be a member of the Labour party:

However she later emailed the corporations to say: 'I have lost three family members and five very close friends who I consider as family. I realise I may have used words which could be seen as misleading and I do regret this.'

Misleading?

She'll go far.

But What If MI-5 Robbed Grandma...

Liberals write girly plays about crusading liberal journalists fighting for the public's 'right to know' but it turns out that 'Freedom of Information' is only a good thing where it involves counter-terrorism or commerce. Once the topic is something that could embarass liberals, all bets are off. Consider this latest example.

The left will have to find a new argument after decades spent maintaining that robbery with violence is just something invented by the Tory Press to shift papers. And then there's the chance to check if the cops shows on TV are right, and most gang members are middle-class white kids...

Like I keep saying, liberalism can only win by fraud or force. Ordinary citizens reporting stuff that actually happened is their worst nightmare.

Quote of the Day

It may that those who see them on the news will find something distasteful in a minister trying to go about his business being booed, shoved and barracked by a collection of angry demonstrators, many of whom seemed to be untroubled by the pressures of full time employment.

Indeed.

That's the fault line in modern politcs: between squidy left of right of centre Tories on the one hand and faeces-flinging howler monkeys on the other. Liberals think the NHS is a winning issue for them, but with patients starving to death in hospitals, they may want to rethink their strategy of jamming their fingers in their ears and singing 'The Red Flag' every time someone critcises the system.

All the ideas for fixing the NHS are coming from the right. Then again, all the ideas for anything much are coming from the right. Progressives don't actually seem to want to progress anywhere, and instead the Labour Party has turned into the political equivalent of a Seventies bar.

All of which, as ever, proves Cameronism is garbage. There's the obvious point that the sleazy, split the difference, somewhere in the middle wheeling and dealing doesn't really work when your opponents are crazier than an LSD abusing hatter with post-traumatic stress disorder, but there's something deeper going on.

The Tories have, no matter how haltingly, pushed forward with a conservative policy, and the left has exposed itself as a bunch of screeching maniacs. Forget Special Ed's constant attempts to launch Even Newer Labour, these lunatics are the authentic face of the modern left and someone as smart as Cameron keeps telling us he is would be making sure the Labour Party own them.

To the point: liberals aren't having a meltdown because they can win in the marketplace of ideas. Conservatism wins every time it's advanced with conviction and vigour and to the extent that the left is now starting to lose ground on one of their core issues, it's a perfect rebuttal to the apologetic cringe conservatism of the 'respectable right'.

Confirmed: Hoplophobia *Is* A Form Of Insanity

Police take on the menace of fifty-something World War II re-enactors....

Hey, why does that sound familiar?

Mayor: Drebin, I don't want any more trouble like you had last year on the southside. Understand? That's my policy.
Frank: Yes. Well, when I see 5 weirdos dressed in togas stabbing a guy in the middle of the park in full view of 100 people, I shoot the bastards. That's my policy.
Mayor: That was a Shakespeare in the Park production of Julius Caesar, you moron! You killed 5 actors! Good ones!

Still, it strikes me that it's a lot of messing around about supposed weapons that are as expensive as hell, but also completely useless and can't even be fired.... kind of like the average cop.

One key difference between World War II re-enactors and cops: the re-enactors are only pretending to be jackbooted thugs.

Re-enactors Vs Cops, sort of like National Socialists Vs Nationalised Socialists.

The jokes write themselves, but the key points are this: a car as a public place? Does that mean the council will someone round to clean it for you then?

Plus, what's with the police's position? The gun that's no longer actually a gun was so dangerous it had to be destroyed, but only after this guy refused to be bullied into accepting a caution on a bogus charge. In other words, the gun TNLAAG was never a threat in the first place, the filth wanted to destroy historical artifacts purely as an act of petty spite and vengance. Like Julie says, at this point what exactly is the difference between these guys and private-sector gangs?

Cutting their budget isn't enough: they deserve an ASBO.

The Left Own It

Now that Fabio Capello has reacted to the FA trying to dictate management decisions to him by resigning, I'm beginning to think that maybe the critics were right and he never really understood our crazy Inglish ways. Surely every one knows that the tradition is to suck it up and keep collecting the cheques right until the inevitable implosion, then wait 12 months and write a book explaining how everything would have gone great if it wasn't for those meddling kids?

Capello was placed in an untenable situation where he was given a big job to do then hobbled by backseat drivers determined to score an admiring profile in the Guardian, so he bailed out and told the PC clowns the equivalent of 'you broke it, you bought it'.

Why don't more people do this? He was smart enough to realise a bunch of scum weasels wanted to exploit our national team to score PC points then try and offload the inevitable consequences on him as the guy at the sharp end.

Hey, no wonder The Dave has come out against him: that's practically the perfect summation of his MO. Check what happens to welfare reform. Or education. Or health. Or.....

Of course, this is further proof of what I keep saying: no, The Dave is not a political genius. If Harry R wins the Euros then nobody will remember The Dave's role, but if it ditching the manager and the captain four months before a major tournament doesn't work out so well, Dave's new friends on the left may just mention it once or twice...

Outrage D'Jour (Now With Spiffy Working Link)

There always room for ice cream, and there's always money for a
PC Witch hunt.

Victimhood Thunderdome

Two victim groups enter, one group leaves.

Personally, I'm thinking of starting a sweepstake on what happens first: dawn raids in Brighton or the BBC admitting that incidents like this may shed some light on why Christians might just be a little hostile to handing over their Churches to you-know-who for their little ceremonies.

Reminder: The Dave Can Screw Up Anything

This India thing: how incompetent do you have to be not to be able to give money away?

And that's not the best of it.

Sources in Delhi suggested British officials begged India to accept the aid. One commented: 'They said British ministers had spent political capital justifying the aid to their electorate.

Yes, indeed: we're all in this together and got to tighten our belts, but we need to fight hard to give away £280 million to people who don't want it otherwise The Dave will look more of a fool than usual.

It's like they read about Marie Antoinette and thought 'You ain't seen nothing yet'!

The Tories' Joe Kennedy Moment

Joe Kennedy always claimed he'd avoided the crash of 1929 by getting out of the market as soon as he noticed that even shoe shine boys were talking about hot shares. His logic was that as soon as everyone started piling into the market, shares prices would cease to reflect real underlying values and instead they'd bubble up right until the inevitable correction.

In the same spirit, I think I see the beginning of the end for the Dave Bubble, right here.

The BBC's Baby Seals

What are the odds, huh? In all the diverse workforce employed by the World's Greatest Broadcaster, there apparently wasn't a single person to point out that these guys may not the best choice as victims of the dreaded Toricutz.

Empty Suit Makes Empty Gesture

Inspired by The Dave's trip into the belly of the beast to ask all forty-something nations involved in the European Court of Human Rights racket to agree with his plan to make it less awful, I'm going on a trip to Scunthorpe to demand someone gives me a solid gold Ferrari full of diamonds.

Some might say my plan is a barely coherent fanatsy, but if it doesn't work I'll quit and go home, which at least makes more sense than The Dave's threat that if he doesn't get his way, he will ask them again.

About That Political Genius Thing...

IDS launches the long-overdue drive for a benefit cap and the Maximum Leader is nowhere to be seen. What are the odds, huh?

Call me cynical, but I can't help thinking that this policy was meant as a piece of red meat to be thrown to the idiots (i.e. actual conservatives) before being reluctantly abandoned after 48 hours but, shockingly, it turns out that there really is a huge chunk of the public who object to paying taxes to give people more in welfare than they earn themselves.

They'll be saying the Mail outsells the Guardian next.

See, that's the penalty of basing your policy platform on appealing to a tiny slither of North London. You really do start to think that an income equivalent to £34K gross is the equivalent of Dickensian poverty.

Meanwhile, that creaking sound is one of the central pillars of the left's platform collapsing into dust. They've spent years telling everyone that the Tories are heartless. Now they've got to explain that by 'heartless' they mean 'opposed to taxing people with jobs so they can give some other people more for watching TV than most of the country earns working full time'. Virtually single-handedly IDS has exposed the bogus nature of the poverty industry.

Mind you, Daveism isn't looking much better. The whole essence of Cameroonacy was the idea of going along to get along. Nasty old ideology was thrown overboard, in favour of squelchy, right of left of right of centre consensus. Now IDS have gone ahead with some red meat conservatism and the left has had to hide behind a bunch of unelected men in frocks (who incidentally pay some of their employees far less than £34K).

On the plus side, I guess the left will have to put a hold on its ranting about faith schools for a month or so.

As ever though, when the subject of the Greatest Political Genius In History is raised, you have to ask: what definition of 'genius' are we using here?

Fort Apache: Salford

Now is this not the perfect metaphor for modern liberalism ? Britain's state broadcaster shifts some facilities from one part of Britain to another part of Britain, but let's not go crazy and expect them to start rubbing shoulders with the locals.

Hey, some of these people have never even heard of hummus.

Personally, I could almost live with the BBC making like Stanley Baker in Zulu, if only we didn't have to listen to their endless jibber jabber about diversity. Their staff roster looks like the United Colours of Liberalism, but they'd rather drink the local water than risk hiring someone who may once have gone to see a non-Premiership football match.

The Rich Aren't Enriched

Who'd have thunk it? The Celebutrash have abandoned our nation's vibrant capital for the boringly monochorme countryside. What can it all mean?

If Ed Miliband Was Smart....

... he wouldn't be a liberal, would he?

Nevertheless, ignoring that fundamental rule of the universe, if Miliband was smart, then he'd realise he has a tailor-made opportunity to 'detoxify his brand' - as Satan's Representative in No 10 would no doubt put it - simply by throwing scum like this under the bus.

Nothing sums up the demented nature of the modern left better than a soi-dissant socialist party that supports taxing janitors in Leeds to give money to millionaire luvvies in London, so they can make films about how folk in Yorkshire are ignorant bigots.

Mixed Messages?

...Or just proof the rules are different for the High Priests of the Media.

The Mail supports restrictions on free speech when it comes to you-know-what, but issues pious proclamations about the vital importance of the press being free to slime a dead guy.

Elves!

Because it's still funny.

Liberals: Still Scum

I'm thinking this case is the perfect microcosm of the difference between left and right.

Yes, indeed, HSBC were their usual sleazy selves, and it's disgraceful that their senior management have managed to avoid disbarment for conduct that would have got a small town IFA strung up, but at least they've faced some consequences.

Meanwhile, the supposed charidees wot exist to help the helpless? Ah yes: they traded on their (undeservedly) good reputations to lead the marks into the lion's den, and they've got away with the cash, their reputations intact and in all probability a press release ready to go asking for the government to give them a grant to help protect their clients from predatory capitalist pig dogs.

Victim of No Appearance

Further proof for my theory that, just like the Ultimate Question & Answer in the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, you can either know the felon's background or the victim's, but never the two at once.

Yep, two Afghanis - probably Mormons - stalk the streets and rape a 'woman'.

Really? Any particular type of woman? Anything in particular driving this choice of victim? Considering she was pulled off the street, there can only be a limited number of things that could have driven them to target this particular victim. It's not like they were driven by an irrational hatred of left-handed dental technicians.

Hey, in so far as this was a premeditated rape of an Infidel woman by Islamosavages, exactly as demanded by the Koran, this is a textbook case of a hate crime. This is what 'hate crime' means: the use of violence to intimidate members of the target demographic.

Needless to say, m'learned friends huffed and they puffed, but then they carefully steered round the elephant in the room on their way to Jokesentanceville:

Jailat Khan, of Beeston, Leeds, was ordered to be detained for five years and Shahzada Khan, of Leeds, was ordered to be detained for four years after both admitted kidnap and rape.

Sentencing the pair on Tuesday, Judge Christopher Batty said they had targeted a vulnerable woman alone in the city centre and the effect on her was 'immeasurable'.

Phew! Just think if it hadn't affected her so badly, he might have let them off with a light sentence. As it is, it now appears you can take part in a brutal rape and get exactly the same sentence Jeffrey Archer got for perjury.

Meanwhile, the femiloons have all gone quiet. Well, duh! They can sneer all they want at the Fifties, but compared to their craven toeing of the leftist line, the Stepford Wives look like Madonna.

Quote of the Day

Hey, some of us have been saying this for years:

Dave Cameron always knew he was born to rule. What he never stopped to analyse, unfortunately, is the more important question of why – ie to what useful purpose – he might have been born to rule.

Actually, I think the truth is even worse. It's increasingly obvious that The Dave doesn't even think the 'why' comes in to it. He simply rules by divine right. Hence the tantrums and the thuggery when any of the lower orders question God's representative on Earth. Hence the contempt for public opinion except in the most cynical posing for contrived photo-ops way. Hence the refusal to engage with even the most basic demands of the job - like turning up (five holidays already this year).

I give it two years before he starts selling indulgences.

'Loser' Is The Word

I'm in two minds about the MSM's born-again Davosceptics. It's great that they're finally managing to remove the kool aid IV from their rectum, but some of us ignorant chav scum got there years ago.

Equally, it's all second order stuff. Back in the day Cast Iron Dave's arrogance, paper thin skin and snobbery were all useful clues to how he would ultimately govern, but now he is PM, we don't need clues any more, we know exactly how he governs: badly.

Like I keep saying, The Dave's success was based on two myths: firstly, that he was an political genius and secondly, that he was a brilliant manager. Blowing a General Election in the middle of a recession scuppered the first one, and now his total incompetence is managing to kill off the second.

The Dave's whole appeal as a touchy-feely moderate was based on the idea that he could run a Labour government better than the Labour Party, and anyone who suggested that liberalism just doesn't work was clearly some kind of right-wing extremist who had no place in the modern conservative party.

Apparently, no one pointed out to The Dave that running as a technocrat sneering at the stoopid ideologues only works if you're more competent than a drunk five year with ADHD who hasn't slept for three days. As it is, Call Me Dave's whole reign has been like a giant experiment to disprove the old line about even blind pigs finding the odd truffle. At this point, talking about his control freakery, dubious land deals and five holidays a year counts as letting him off the hook. It's utter failure that's the outstanding feature of his time in office.

I think we can take a lesson from Ace of Spades blog, and it's running gag of referring to the Obamamessiah as SCoaMF - as in Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure. The Dave don't stutter, but he's more than made up for it with the rest of it, so why pretend he's anything other than a loser?

What James Murdoch Should Tell The Select Committee

I knew exactly as much about phone hacking as Theresa May knew about abandoning border controls, or John Prescott knew about blowing half a billion on a failed reorganisation of the Fire Service.

Theresa May, Or Possibly May Not

Who can tell, huh? It's always the little things that trip you up, like the defence of the realm.

Now Theresa is busy deploying the Reverse Nuremberg defence: whatever happened, they weren't following orders, plus the dog ate her briefing documents and she didn't know nuffink, guv.

It does raise an interesting philosophical question: which possibility is worse? Theresa May is too thick to work out that border security is important, or she just decided that there were higher priorities than stopping the Mad Bomber coming in?

Whatever the specifics though, this case has exposed the fault line in Cameronism. The Dave's whole selling point was that he wasn't some nasty old right-wing extremist, he was a cool, middle of the road unifier - once he'd finished purging all the conservatives out of his party anyway. In reality, Cameron's supposed reasonableness boiled down to the Tories taking all the face card jobs in Whitehall (oops - guess the coalition thing scuppered that) but leaving Labour appointees in place to get on with the job.

Whatever May did or did not do, in so far as it was a central part of Cameron's strategy not to clear out activist civil servants, he bears ultimate responsibility for the fact that liberals are free to continue to push liberal policies, even after Cameron's Cronies all got their keys to the Executive Washroom.

This Is Why We Can't Have A Referendum On The EU

The Government doesn't want the distraction when it's dealing with the really important stuff....

Vince Avoiding Tax

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that the only time politicians aren't telling the rest of us how to run our lives is when they're busy denying all responsibility for anything in their own lives?

Ann Got There First

This isn't much of a mystery. To paraphrase Ann Coulter, the only difference between people like Cameron and actual liberals is that The Dave wants the right to beat his servants.

As much as current employment laws offers opportunities for shakedowns'n'slacking, they're nothing compared to the discrimination industry, but don't hold your breath for Dave to take on Victims R Us.

Ditto, with sword, oak leaves and gold cluster, the public sector unions.

It's not about improving competitiveness, it's about screwing down the working man some more. As usual with the Nu Tory Revolution, the ordinary Joe will get the shaft, while the race hustlers, femiloons and other associated bums will keep coining it in.

Wizard of Oz Calls for Three-Line Whip On Motion To Look Behind Curtain

Include me out of all that deep thinking about why Cameron called a three-line whip over the referendum vote. I can't help thinking there's less to it than meets the eye.

Cast Iron Dave rose with the help of two myths, one that he was a brilliant political operator, and two that he was the Smartest Guy in the Room. In reality, he blew an election against a gibbering loon in the depths of recession, while his term in office has been such a chaotic train wreck of U-turns, bungling and sleazy compromises that he makes John Major look like Churchill.

All that Cameron has left is an essentially tautological argument: he's the leader becuase he's the leader. He has no choice but to devote all his time to bullying everyone outside the bunker - with his record, it's all he has left.

Liberalism: Multiple Fraud Disorder

Don't be shocked, but one of the most famous cases in psychology turns out to be a really huge fraud.

It's all very disappointing though. Alex Haley had just claimed to have tracked down one of the personalities to her home village.

Meanwhile, some of us are still wondering about people who claim to be Certified Super Genii, but keep falling for obvious frauds. Still, claiming a young girl has sixteen people living in her head is still less goofy than claiming dangerous felons can be rehabilitated by six months of group therapy twice a week, and at least 'Sybil' didn't take an axe to anyone's head.

Special Ed: Conservative Hero

Wait..... did I sleep through Conference Season?

No, it just seemed that way. It says something about the pointless of the modern party conference that the closest we got to an actual conservative point during the whole nightmare came from Ed Milliband.

Personally, I liked Special Ed's idea to divide businesses into 'good' and 'bad' categories with different laws and tax rates for each. It's like a liberal version of the Flat Tax, a way to sweep away bureaucratic complexity in favour of a more streamlined system. True, you could say it's a little arbitrary and open to corruption, but not noticeably more so than what we have now, and at least we won't have the pretence that it's anything other than the raw exercise of government power.

All that's without considering the other upside. In so far as the leader of Britain's main party of the left has called for the state to abandon the whole 'equal under law' thing in favour of the legal equivalent of a blank cheque, with nary a dissenting voice on the left, Special Ed has exposed the true nature of the left's civil liberties frauds. What could be more injurious to liberty than the state claiming an open-ended right to arbitrarily victimise any business it pleases? Don't ask Shami and pals though - they're too busy investigating allegations that a terrorist was given lukewarm milk on his coco-pops.

Trembling in the Shadow of Latte (And Other Stupid Ideas)

In so far as Certified Liberal Deep Thinker Vince Cables' latest line of attack is to accusse the right of wanting to send kids up chimineys, it does ram home an important point: there are no good arguments left for liberalism.

People on the right are arguing that a recession is no time to be treating our last surviving private businesses as pinata donkeys full of employee freebies, meanwhile the left is relying on girly hysteria....

Actually, that same dynamic applies to just about any issue. That's the dark secret of liberalism: they don't want to keep university campuses free of conservatives because they think we're morons, they want it because they know we're not. Ditto, in any nation without a bloated state broadcaster with its hand on the scales, Vince Cable would be a national joke.

We should be mocking these people like the loons they are, but instead, the conservative establishment not only treats them like political heavyweights, it allows them to set the terms of the debate, as though there were any kind of meaningful middle-ground to be reached with people who compare opposing compulsory employer-paid aromatherapy with support for child labour.

Enough already, there's no reason to pander to the deranged. On the contrary, the more they have to come out and argue for liberlalism, the more obvious it becomes that 'liberal intellectual' is more a diagnosis than a description. Hence the liberal obsession with hate speech: they need to shut down the debate because every time they have to compete in the marketplace of ideas, they go bankrupt.

The BBC: Fellating Felons On The Licence Fee

Anyone listening to the Jeremy Vine Show yesterday would have got the treat of alleged comedian Johnny Marbles stopping by to talk about his charity swim down the Thames.

No, wait - it was a real comedian what did that. Meanwhile, Johnny is known for one thing: assaulting an elderly man, but apparently that's all you need in Beebland to justify being treated like Tom Cruise opening a new movie.

No, my mistake again - Tom might have to face the odd critical comment, instead of yukking it up with the presenter about how he nailed an old guy. On the plus side, we've surely killed any suggestion that it's the Right which encourages extremism?

Actually - and typical for the BBC - even without the bias the interview failed as journalism. Far from being spontaneous, Thugboy admitted unprompted that he had been stalking Murdoch beforehand, but Vine completely missed it.

Then again, the whole 'educate and inform' thing was conspicuous by its absence. Instead, we had Thugboy's unchallenged ranting about how the Murdochs 'lied' - but without ever explaining what they were lying about or why we should believe him.

Instead of asking his guest to justify his slanders, Vine concentrated on the important stuff: feeding his new pal sob sister lines about how Mrs Murdoch attacked him, and how hard his jailing was on his son, and did he think he was oversentanced?

Surprisingly enough, he did. Plus Jeremy helpfully pointed out that someone who did the same to Fiona Bruce only got a fixed penalty. Yes, indeed: our nuanced friends at the BBC are now claiming to be baffled why assaulting a witness giving evidence to Parliament is treated more harshly than the same offence in the High Street.

Needless to say, no one was there to point out that here was an individual who carried out a violent assault in a self-confessed attempt to 'humiliate' his victim and demonstrate contempt for Parliament, and our State broadcaster was doing all but driving the getaway car.

More to the point, the BBC spent the recent riots on Defcon One Vigilante Alert. Now we have a supposed anarchist who claims the right to assault anyone who, in his opinion, is obviously guilty, even if they've never been charged with a crime and the BBC treats him like an honoured guest. Hello?

Let's check the scorecard here:

Shopkeepers defending their businesses against arsonist and looters: vigilantes.

Leftist thugs attacking people they despise, but who haven't been convicted of anything: Tom Cruise.

BBC moral authority: screwed.

That Depends What The Meaning of 'Elite' is....

I certainly agree with the wider point Ed West is making here, but seriously... David Cameron as the poster boy for the benefits of elitism? It was guys like Cast Iron Dave who sunk that boat in the first place.

No doubt about it, Cameron is a member is good standing of the elite, but much good that's done any of us. The more we're reminded of his credentials, the more we notice how little he's actually achieved. And no, he's not just a victim of bad luck. Never mine the implementation, he's barely capable of putting together a coherent policy in the first place. Consider this: no matter how often we're reminded that The Dave is the World's Smartest Man and the Greatest Orator Evah! I defy anyone to quote a single memorable line from him.

Well, OK, there was that whole 'Hug A Hoodie' thing, but the Cameroonatics don't like to talk about that.

That's the point right there: Dave's elite, but there are guys driving taxis who could mount a more coherent defence of conservative values than Prince Dave.

Those Tory Cuts....

Looks like things have got so bad they're having to focus on the bare essentials.

And, no, it isn't just a bit of fun:

Under the £75,000 initiative, 3,600 Sure Start children’s centres will be sent LazyTown-branded activity packs including recipe ideas and a sticker chart

It's like all the worst ideas from Nu Labour are converging into one big ball of stupid.

The BBC: Focusing on the Key Issues

As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9-11, the BBC asks why aren't you peasants queueing up to watch a soft-focus portrayal of the lighter side of totalitarian lunacy?

Yes, indeed: Muslims killed thousands of Infidels on September 11 but now pesky Islamophobes refuse to watch emetic depictions of jovial jihadists, so there's fault on both sides.

Needless to say, you have to look elsewhere for the real story, including a truly Pythonesque twist:

The Muslim members of ACTRA decided to sit this thing out, and so every warm fluffy moderate Muslim on the show is played by a Protestant or Catholic, Italian or Indian. As comedy of bicultural manners goes, it's like a surreal latter-day PC version of the old vaudeville act "The Hebrew and the Coon," where the Hebrew was the genuine article and the Coon was played by Al Jolson.

Yep - the only way the left could get its Allahawful paean to moderate Muslims off the ground was by hiring fellow liberals to dress up as moderate Muslims.

No wonder the BBC likes the show - that's pretty much been its approach to covering Islam for years. They could combine the two approaches and have a BBC version where the Muslim characters don't speak, and instead the lefty university professors from next door keep stopping by to tell the audience what the Muslims would have said.

Another Reason Why Cameronism Is A Really Huge Fraud

Ace makes an interesting point over here. Basically, he's saying that ideology will only ever win over 35% of the electorate. Getting a workable majority requires a candidate who can project a personality voters feel comfortable with.

Superficially, this sounds like the Cameron doctrine. After all, these guys have never been reluctant to sneer at those nasty old 'right-wing ideologues' what keep scaring the horses, but hang on a minute.... Sure, Cameron doesn't dig the ideology - and let's assume that his obvious contempt for them doesn't cost him any votes amongst the 35% - but where's the evidence that he is able to appeal to the electorate? Where's the proof that the snooty, stand-offish, sleazy suckweasel appeals to anyone much at anything more than a relieved 'at least he's saner than Gordon' level?

Astonishingly Enough, Cameronism Still Not Working

One term Tories? Why not? It's not like The Dave can run on his record is it?

Of course, arguably, the whole point of Cameronism was to achieve nothing. Nasty old right-wing ideologues were thrown under the bus, and instead Cast Iron Dave's Nu Tory Party promised to take over and change things very, very slightly.

And that was how the Tories achieved a 100 seat majority.

But never mind the wider issues, Cameronism doesn't even make sense on its own terms. Cameronism relied on a tacit quid pro quo with the labour placemen in the bureaucracy. Cameron and pals would move into the big offices and the leftists would be left in place and in peace to keep pushing their own agenda. Hence why under a nominally-conservative government we had cops standing around watching rioters go on the rampage - it was Labour appointee police managers following liberal doctrines, but the Tories still got the blame anyway.

This is brilliant politics.

Robert Peel: Vigilante!

Focusing like a laser on the key issue, as ever, liberals have decided that the real problem with law and order breaking down is that it encourages ordinary people to defend their communities.

Oh sure, they're all for it when the defenders are exotically ethnic, but when the white trash get involved, why, that could ruin the riot for everybody.

Liberals claim to be terrified by the prospect of people taking the law into their own hands, even when there's no law to be had in the district anyway. There's plenty of humbuggery on show here, not least in hearing deranged cop-haters explaining why only fascist pigs are competent to protect the public, but the central issue is this: the argument against vigilantism is a constitutional as well as a moral absurdity.

Consider Sir Robert Peel's own principles of law enforcement, specifically number 7:

Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

Or, to put it another way, the police are just citizens in uniform, which means the idea that one group of citizens are required to curl up in a ball and await rescue from another bunch of citizens makes not a lick of sense. If it's illegal for one group of citizens to patrol their own neighbourhood, then that would surely apply to hirelings of the state drafted in from out of town.

Then there's principle number 1:

The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.

My unnuanced take on that is 'prevent' means in the sense of 'stopping it happening' not 'standing around filming it, then arresting the perp two weeks later'.

Letting scumbags run rampage and catching them later might be safer for the police, but the citizen is under no moral or legal duty to let himself be victimised merely for the convenience of the police.

Quote of the Day

From a predictable source:

London, the progressive dream: shopkeepers of every race and creed, looted by thieves of every race and creed.

Ann Got There First

Ann Coulter covers our recent festivities. I'm not sure she's right about the racial breakdown - you'd think she'd know better than to trust the BBC - but she does revisit some of the old classics, like the Shannon Matthews non-kidnapping - remember that?

All of which is by way of making an important point: no, this didn't come of the blue. All that's happened is that a whole year's worth of Saturday nights have come at once. No one can say they weren't warned.

I'd say Ann would be able to get a whole book out of this stuff, but she already has.

You should read the whole book, but for now, a short summary: nothing is accidental. Liberals have been relying on mob violence since at least the French Revolution. Liberals stoke mobs, protect them, then create absurd heroic narratives about it all afterwards. They can't win in the marketplace of ideas, so they try and persuade chavs to burn the it down.

You May Not Be Interested In War, But War Is Interested In You

It's a sad sign of the times when Trotsky makes more sense than a soi-dissant conservative home secretary, but here we are with our cities burning and Theresa May is still jabbering about policing by consent.

That will be some negotiation, all right: maybe she's hoping she can get them to agree to only loot one in every two shops?

Of course, this is par for the course for the Nu Tories. The essence of Cameronism is the belief that everything is negotiable and the shortest distance between two points is always straight down the middle.

The worst of it is that this isn't mere spinelessness. On the contrary, in the demented world of the Nu Dave Order, moral equivalence is not only a sign of sophistication, it's their sole raison d'etre. They might be awful at running the country, but look how nuanced and sophisticated are their positions!

The country's burning and silver-spoon degenerate fops are penning oestrogen-laden articles lamenting the incivility of those awful right-wing Mobophobes. Exhibit A here.

Hey, shoot looters, don't shoot looters. There's arguments either way, but nothing sums up the sheer fecklessness of Cameronism like a member of the demographic that's been busy complimenting each other on their fiddling while London burns suddenly start demanding the purging of anyone who says they can smell smoke.

'Modern Conservatism' is a sick, disgusting fraud. A incestuous dogpile of smug, elitist, no-marks looking down their noses at anyone with a proper job, even while they can't even pass the basic test of maintaining law and order.

PC Update

Old Meme: Raycist police officers refuse to clamp down on evil drug-dealing filth becuase they hate black people

New Meme: Raycist police officers execute drug-dealers because they hate black people

A 'Peaceful Protest'

Looks like the enemy within have chosen their line on the Tottenham riots: a peaceful protest about the shooting of 'a man' was hijacked by mysterious extremists.

Hello?

In the real world, people who protest in support of a would-be cop killer with multiple convictions are themselves generally considered pretty extreme. What's the line here? That the peaceful protesters are opposed to the use of violence, except for the whole 'shooting cops' thing?

Again, the contrast is obvious between the BBC's pious denunciations of extremist rhetoric when Oslo comes up, and the self-same organisation pushing a moral equivalence between the forces of law and order and a bunch of lunatics who belive they should be above the law. Just in the past 24 hours, the BBC has given more house room to conspiracy nuts and racist buffoons than five years of the Daily Mail.

Bottom line: does the BBC think there is likely to be more or less violence when a state broadcaster is prepared to propagate myths about executions and police brutality?

Riot In Tottenham, No Blondes Involved

Yes, apparently, it's a Mob of No Appearance, with absolutely no defining characteristics whatsoever, although it's certain they were provoked into by da cutz.

Hey, I'm not an economist, but I'm pretty sure shooting gunmen is pretty much fiscally neutral.

Still, let's check the scorecard here: two references to her work in 1500 pages prove Melanie Phillips caused the Oslo massacre, but there's no connection between outbreaks of mass lawlessness and a wider environment where a Labour MP coming out in defence of the vital human right to shoot at police officers without consequence is treated as a perfectly reasonable position.

Quote of the Day

Via Ace of Spades blog, some badly-needed perspective on America's decision to drop the bomb on Japan, and evidence of a more general problem:

Arthur T. Hadley said recently that those for whom the use of the A-bomb was "wrong" seem to be implying "that it would have been better to allow thousands on thousands of American and Japanese infantrymen to die in honest hand-to-hand combat on the beaches than to drop those two bombs." People holding such views, he notes, "do not come from the ranks of society that produce infantrymen or pilots." ... That is, few of those destined to be blown to pieces if the main Japanese islands had been invaded went on to become our most effective men of letters or impressive ethical theorists or professors of contemporary history or of international law.

Shorter d'Ancona: The Dave Just Needs New Ways To Bamboozle You Idiots

Pal, it ain't a perception problem when the guy really does suck. Besides, on most issues Cameron's not the fireman, he's the arsonist.

How Government Budgets Work

You can't tell me it's any different in Britain. Well.... except that it always turns out that the taxpayer is funding astroturf campaign groups to run studies proving that lack of dairy products in space causes 20,000 deaths per year.

The Amy Thing

Given that this is a blog dedicated to the idea that smart is the new stupid, I guess it makes perfect sense that this guy has produced the sanest thing I've read this week about the death of Amy Winehouse.

Forget the MSM's attempts to turn her into a martyr or a monster. The truth is she was neither a hero nor a villain, she was simply a young girl crushed under the weight of her own talent and now she's dead and it sucks.

Hollywood Still Awful

Interesting theory over at Big Hollywood on just why modern movies are terrible.

I'd actually say he's underestimated the awfulness of liberalism. These guys not only have a downer on individual responsibility for bad behaviour, they don't believe in moral judgements in the first place - not unless the villain has blond hair anyway.

Consider the difference between 1971's The Omega Man and 2007's I Am Legend. In 26 years we've gone from Colonel Neville under siege by Matthias's crazed cult to Will Smith fighting CGI monsters. Of course, one problem may be that by 2007 standards, Matthias's cult were probably saner than half of California but at least they had a coherent motivation. Absent that, what are you left with? Two hours of Will Smith shooting at computer graphics.

In fact, it's a double whammy. Hollywood not only won't produce villains with any more coherent motivation than an urge to drown puppies, they simply assign any vaguely right-wing characters to the same puppy-drowning demographic.

Consider Michael Douglas in Wall Street, Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men or Alec Baldwin in Glengarry Glen Ross. Chances are you can quote at least one line from each. They were meant to be villains, but they had rational motivations and the ability to explain why they believed what they did. In short, they were believable. Now? It's all drowned puppies and mutants.

Say, Does Anyone Know What Colour Hair The Oslo Attacker Had?

I don't know, but I kind of get the feeling the media is trying to make some kind of point when they keep telling us the attacker was a blonde. Are they trying to tell us that there's some kind of non-blonde terrorists out there?

Hey, and after all those years of liberals telling us there was no point profiling airline passengers...

It's All Fun And Games Until Someone Loses A Pie

... As Ann Coulter once said.

Yep, liberals tried to throw stuff at her too. Ditto, Jeremy Clarkson, Bjorn Lomberg and seemingly everyone who's ever spoken out against the left in any way. That's in addition to the whole 'riots' thing, of course.

Meanwhile, Sharon Shoesmith, Abu Hamza and Gary Glitter all remain not only resolutely unpied, but also the subject of approximately 1 billion editorials equating even the mildest criticism of them with coded support for lynch mobs - and if there's one thing the liberal media can't stand, it's people encouraging violent thugs....

Then again, the left's decision to give up actual arguments, and make juvenile acts of intimidation the central plank of their platform is probably a case of making the best of a bad job. Consider allegedly serious politician Tom Watson's line of attack on Murdoch: apparently he's a doddering, incompetent old fool who spends all day drooling on his paperwork, and also a sinister puppet master single-handedly responsible for making British liberals look like a bunch of whining no-marks.

Mind you, you can kind of see why they're worried - the last time they got so worked up about a supposedly senile evil genius, he won the Cold War. Ralph Miliband was never the same again.

Still, all that's way better than the latest conspiracy theory. Apparently, Murdoch pledged his support for Cameron so in return The Dave will push policies supported by Murdoch.

Really?

It never worked that way for the Tory base. On past form, Murdoch's lucky Cameron didn't announce a £1 billion bailout for the Guardian.

High Priest Loses Faith

Guido is uncharacteristically gentle with the now-ex Cameron groupie Peter Oborne when he deserves much worse, and not just because Oborne's rose-tinted specs only seem to come out with MPs from a certain demographic.

Oborne is shocked - shocked - to find sleaze going on here, but who was hiding that from Petey in the first place? On the contrary, Oborne spent years writing about the question marks over Cameron's integrity. Which is to say he spent years sliming anyone who raised questions about Cameron's integrity. Now he's finally where the bumpkins and bigots got to years ago, he wants us to admire his integrity.

Oborne wasn't just wrong about Cameron, he was the opposite of right. You'd have been better off listening to just about anyone in the conservative base instead of Certified Deep Conservative Thinker Peter Oborne.

Even now Oborne doesn't get it. The Coulson thing doesn't just undermine Cameron's moral posturing, it also undercuts the main excuse for Cameronism in the first place. We were assured that whatever Cameron's ideological shortcomings, he was a political genius. Now he's landed himself in a completely unnecessary scandal, where's all that genius gone?

Planet of the Conspiracy Nuts

Say what you like about Russell T Davis, but at least his latest effusions are thought-provoking, even if the thought is 'hey, I never knew his stuff was ghost-written by a drunk, homeless guy'.

Second thought: how come whenever ones of the staff at the ever-unbiased BBC goes feral, they all go feral in the self-same way? They never suddenly announce that Cast Iron Dave should slash housing benefit and use the savings to bolster the RAF, or that we should have our own Second Amendment. No, it's always some guy who think the right is, like, totally evil.

Where's the diversity?

On the plus side, at least he is unusually candid about how he reached his diagnosis: he thinks the right is too harsh on media luvvies. Yep, these people are all about the hospitals & schools & long lunches at chintzy restaurants. He probably thinks the right are selfish too, all poncing round Barnsley with their coal-mining friends.

But that's not it. Liberals have always been leeches. No, the real question is this: in so far as the head honcho has now outed himself as an off-the-scale loon, are you still a tin-foil hatted kook if you complain about liberal bias in his shows?

PC And The Shrunken Mandate

NNW isn't too impressed by the left's response - or lack thereof - to Weinergate.

Indeed, it's not just Weiner that's been left exposed. It's hard not to notice that the left's conception of freedom looks a little... shrunken? Flaccid? Inadequate?

Libs think anyone who has issues with the Honourable Member's Honourable Member appearing in in-boxes across America is, like, a total square but if he had used a felt tip to write 'Islam Sucks' on his junk beforehand, they'd have demanded the death sentence.

Of course, we've been here before. Hell, after years spent defending Clinton, Weiner flashing his majority to all and sundry probably seems refreshingly normal to them.

Liberals are proverbial for turning into Bernard Manning once one of their guys falls foul of PC, but the corollary is often missed. Professional conservatives endlessly jibber-jabber about the need to ditch the embarrassing bumpkins in the base, get with the PC program and reach out to all those groovy youngsters who were just waiting to vote conservative, but were put off by the lack of tackle twittering. But how does that work exactly?

In so far as leftists in both the US and Britain ditch their PC principles faster than a speeding e-mail once one of their guys is in the frame, why even pretend it's anything other than a stick to beat conservatives with? Criticising Cherie Blair's sleazy dealing is The Sexism, but John Prescott can use his private office like a harem, and that's 'just John' as Tony helpfully explained. Why even bother to play in a rigged game?

Professor Dawkins Was Not Available For Comment

Uber geek Paul Nurse has decided that the real problem with British science is that the public won't just shut up and take it all on faith.

Curiously enough, FoI requests and all, they still manage to bang in plenty of requests for taxpayers' money and press releases announcing that school vouchers cause cancer.

On the plus side, at least his complaints about 'FoI Aggression' have neatly laid to rest the myth that scientists are a bunch of whiny wimps. Maybe we need some research into why people don't trust geeks? After all, what could possibly be wrong with this:

Nurse said that scientists were not blameless. At the University of East Anglia, they were too defensive in their responses to freedom of information requests over climate change, but their experience was one among many that highlighted a need for better training for scientists in the most appropriate way to respond to information requests.

Curiously though, it takes a commenter called randstead to point out the problem with that little theory:

One small but not important point , Phil Jones planned to avoid FOI requests , BEFORE he got a single one...

Now lets talk numbers UEA received just six FOI requests between January 2005 when the act was introduced, and January 2009, while in 2009 it received 97 FOI requests 59 from people asking or information on contracts between the UEA and the foreign met offices they said were preventing publication of the data, remember CRU's claims on this front mostly fall apart once investigated.
These number are tiny in real terms , while its only from FOI requests that we learned that the research papers reviewed in the investigation of CRU where not selected by the RS as claimed but by UEA , that the head of the one review never actual did any interviews , that for one review there is no accurate record of what question where asked nor what the answers are...

Another commenter, conflation, includes the full text of one e-mail:

Phil Jones wrote: Mike, I presume congratulations are in order - so congrats etc ! Just sent loads of station data to Scott. Make sure he documents everything better this time ! And don’t leave stuff lying around on ftp sites - you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone. Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? - our does ! The UK works on precedents, so the first request will test it.We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. Tom Wigley has sent me a worried email when he heard about it - thought people could ask him for his model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that. IPR should be relevant here, but I can see me getting into an argument with someone at UEA who’ll say we must adhere to it !

In other words, geek face card Paul Nurse writes an article calling for people to take scientist's public pronouncements on faith, while utterly misrepresenting his opponents in the self-same article.

That's Clue Number Two right there. For all the talk of diversity, there's apparently no one around to tell Nurse that his point is absurd. Scientists are disinterested seekers after truth, but it just so happens that their personnel rosters are exactly the same as you get if they were enforcing an ideological blacklist.

All of which is the real message of Climategate. What's wrong with British science isn't just that there's a lot of corruption, it's that corruption has become the new normal, with supposed thought leaders like Nurse on hand to denounce anyone who doesn't accept senior scientists threatening to delete inconvenient data as a perfectly normal practice.

Up, Down... Who Cares? Just Give Us Your Money!

Yes, indeed: the new Big Bad is Global Cooling which, being the opposite of Global Warming, obviously means that we need the opposite policies, so say hello to tax cuts, rolling back red tape and all pigs to the trough capitalism....right?

Richard Dawkins' New Book: 'Hey, This God Thing Is Pretty Neat, After All'

In so far as the Archbishop of Canterbury's attack on the Ayatollah Khameron has succeeded in making The Dave look good, it counts as a miracle all on its own.

Not everyone can make Lord Snooty look statesmanlike, but having a too crazy for the Guardian leftist whose organisation is Britain's largest landowner wax lyrical about poverty and democratic mandates certainly qualifies.

On the plus side, we now know what the Pope was doing over here last year: sneaking into Lambeth Palace with a false moustache on to convince Archbishop Weirdo that the way back for the Anglican Church was to go over das edgen like a fruitenloopengaggle.

It's that German humour again.

Either that, or the Archbishop really thinks people turn to religion to answer the central mysteries of human existence, like whether or not giving greater autonomy to low-level business units will lead to a more responsive health service.

Apparently, when Jesus said blessed are the peacemakers, he was actually referring to fully paid-up members of the National Union of Pacifistic Trades. On the other hand, at least the Archbishop accepts that the Ten Commandments are still valid, even if he thinks they're not exactly set in stone.

Still, there's a certain irony here. The Archbishop is trying to curry favour with the left by adopting their idiotic worldview wholesale, and never mind that the people he's trying to pander to just plain don't like Christianity in the first place. He ought not to be criticising Cameron, he ought to be learning from his example. The Dave was a heroic reformer just as long as he was sliming the right, but as soon as circumstances forced him to threaten the supply of £40K pa non-jobs, that Strange New Respect disappeared faster than you can say 'worse than Fatcha'!

So it always is: you can get into bed with liberals, but they won't respect you in the morning.

On the Other Hand...

On the plus side, in so far as the Sharon Shoesmith case featured the Supreme Court attacking Ed Balls from the left, I think that pretty much closes out the debate on our independent judiciary.

Not that there isn't a certain rough justice in seeing Balls get the shaft. After all, not only does his government introduce all this nonsense, they also presided over the infiltration of the public services by freaks like Shoesmith in the first place. On the other, other hand, the Nu Tories have predictably jumped on this case like a vampire jumping on a sun bed. As ever, there's no one there who can see that this is an example of Labour's stealthiest, and most destructive, tax.

All across the country, there are Sharon Shoesmiths: lazy, arrogant, entitled idiots, free to cause organisational chaos in the sure and certain knowledge that the worst they'll face is double secret probation.

Never mind cutting taxes, or streamlining government departments. Being able to fire deadbeats again would revive the economy overnight.

She's Not Erin Brockovch, She's The Plant Owner

There is no better barometer of how utterly liberalism has hollowed out the British left than that so many soi-dissant socialists have chosen to elect Sharon Shoesmith as Baby Seal D'Jour.

These people claim to be the modern avatars of the poor but proud union members who took on and beat ruthless pit owners. Now they're rallying around someone who got paid more than a cabinet minister but still presided over a department in such a state of chaos that a young child could be tortured to death with no one noticing.

Add in Shoesmith's sneering one-liners like 'I don't do blame', and what we have here is the perfect pin-up girl for the unaccountable elitists who dominate the modern left. If the EdMilliband Unit wants to work out why the Earthlings don't trust Labour, he may want to think about not allowing his party to offer aid and sanctuary to smug, overpaid trash like this.

Red On Red

Now do you believe me?

Like I keep saying, Ken Clarke is the John Prescot of the Tory Party. Just like the other fat fraud, we keep getting told that Clarke is in touch with the man in the street, but the only evidence for this is endless columns by media luvvies claiming that Clarke's boorishness is proof of authenticity. Appointing this tool as the voice of the conservative base is just a roundabout way of stereotyping grass roots conservatives, just as Lord Two Jags was a Northern Uncle Tom.

Of course, that's not to say the left aren't full of it too. They're enraged becuase someone tried to excuse evil by coming out with a load of blabber about nuance? And? Did he infringe on their patents or something?

Liberals have spent years finger-wagging about the crudity of the common herd, and their goofy ideas about good and evil. Now they're trying to convince us that they just can't bear to see a felon go free?

Hell, liberals even have a long history of taking out onions for sex offenders, providing the victims are under the age of majority. For proof of this, consider how none of them have found anything exceptional in Clarke's claim that statutory rape is no big thing, if the victim consents.

So the guy running the justice system doesn't understand the concept of 'age of consent' and no one on the left thinks that's a problem? Of course.

For that matter, what's with the femiloons complaining about trivialising rape? These people claim that everything in the whole world is just like being raped. What is the whole date rape thing if not an attempt to expand the definition of rape to the point of absurdity? Meanwhile, the central feature of Clark's plan is to give actual, genuine rapists a cut in their sentences, and feminists have nothing to say about it.

And then there's this....

On Wednesday, Browne, a 45-year-old mother of two who was attacked in 2003 by a serial sex offender freed from prison early, broke down in tears as she confronted Kenneth Clarke....

She's a liberal heroine!

It is significant that her voice cracked with emotion on BBC Five Live, not when she recounted the assault she endured, but when she described her fight to bring her attacker to justice, which, she says, won't be over until Sierra Leone-born Mohammed Kendeh, currently in prison for yet another crime, is finally deported. Kendeh, who attacked her in a park as she trained for the London Marathon, has thus far avoided deportation by claiming a right to a family life under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act – a defence that Browne says is an insult to his many victims, who may never recover.

She's a raycist!

Plus, you'll never guess what....

"My attacker had previously sexually assaulted six other women in the same park, and escaped a custodial sentence. He was in prison for burglary but because he was released after four months of his 13-month sentence, he was free to attack me."

Liberals complaining about the justice system being soft on predators is like Ken Clarke calling people fat.

Reminder: Feminism Is A Parasitic Ideology

As analogies go, I'm thinking waving £50 notes in front of a homeless guy's face is more like it, still it is interesting to see even a social conservative like Laban taking a hard line on this.

Behold the power of the Dark Side!

Heh. But there's a serious point here: in so far as mainstream social conservatism turns a blind eye to the rise of feminism, it has condemned itself to ever-increasing irrelevance. Indeed, in so far as socio-cons' white knighting instincts lead them to defend even the most deranged behaviour by the New Grrrl Order, there is often little to choose between them and feminists when push comes to shove.

All of this matters because for all the blather about empowerment, the defining feature of feminism is its parasitic nature. Even these stupid marches are proof of that:

The SlutWalk London website states more should be done to protect victims.

Never mind the logic fail - surely the point of protection is that they won't be victimised in the first place - who's going to provide this protection? Since the marchers claim to be marching on behalf of the whole female species, it mus be some other sex they're expecting to sort all this out.

In other words, these misandric loonies claim that the very people they denounce should do everything possible to protect them, even as they themselves disavow any responsibility for their own survival. Or to put it another way, they want men to continue to act on their traditional feelings of chivalry, while they demonstrate their contempt for the same traditions.

Hey, the KKK might have had some wacky ideas, but even they didn't expect their victims to string themselves up.

Authorities Do Not Yet Have A Motive Clue

Interesting Philosophical Question: do these people come out with this brand of garbage because they're stupid enough to believe it, or just because they think we are?

'Shut Up!' He Explained, 'Up Yours!' They Replied

Talking of the evil Daily Mail reading masses, how about that referendum, huh? Who knew that arranging for a column of Metropolitan luvvies to demand the public vote their way wouldn't work?

That was the honking great crack that ran through the whole 'Yes' campaign. They talked about fairer votes and fixing democracy even as they ran one of the most avowedly elitist campaigns in history. The more they claimed that voting 'Yes' was the choice of the A-listers, the more they reminded people just how detached these people were from their own lives.

Libertarianism: Supporting The Human Right To Leave Horses' Heads In People's Beds

I find that blogs with 'Liberty' in the title are generally awful - so NNW had the field to himself after all.

Still, NNW scores a bulls eye on the essential humbuggery of libertarianism: for folks who profess to be all about the freedom, they aren't half certain about what views will and won't be permitted in the New Libertarian Order.

Ditto, with the other elephant in the room. Consider what we're talking about: the supposed right of a small group of fanatics to issue threats to wreck an event supported by millions of their fellow citizens. Where's the liberty in allowing lunatics to impose themselves on other people?

Knee-jerk scepticism of authority is just gullibility standing on it's head. Instead of blindly accepting violence from the state, it's blindly accepting it becuase it's not from the state. Ditto, there's no point libertarians trotting out that dreadful old cliché 'pre-crime' then seamlessly shifting into talk of 'slippery slopes'. Perhaps we ought to start calling 'slippery slope' arguments 'pre-tyranny'?

But there's something more to it than all that. Consider this charming comment:

I hold that liberty has a higher purpose and is an awful lot messier than simply making the world safe, fluffy and Disneyfied for readers of the Daily Mail.

It is double minded to claim decency when dissenters are rounded up and locked away, although it is easier to rationalise when they are demonised as loons or closet Marxists.

Uh huh. Looks like it won't just be certain opinions that aren't allowed in the New Libertarian Order. Mind you, considering the Daily Mail is Britain's best selling newspaper, I'm guessing there's going to have to be a whole lot of liberating going on before Utopia arrives.

Alarmist? Consider the implications of that comment: violent lunatics are merely 'dissenters' meanwhile opponents of extremist thuggery want a world that's fluffy and Disneyfied. In other words, not only is violence a valid means of political action, but those who oppose violence are, by definition, contemptible and weak.

This belief in violence not only as a means to an end but as purifying force, sweeping away the bourgeois conventions of a society that is both corrupt and corrupting is an avowedly fascist idea, all the more so when combined with contempt for the Daily Mail reading masses. At least Marxists put it more poetically when they talk of a 'Democracy of the Committed' but the end result is the same: a totalitarian vision of a world reborn in violence and blood-shed.

All of which leads to the dirty little secret that really gets under libertarian skins. These loons wanted a revolution, instead they got briefly detained by the police. This isn't a story about heroism and repression, it's a story about a bunch of juvenile prats being prevented from acting out by agents of the state using a minimum of force and with the support of the vast majority of the Great British Public. And libertarians think this is a winning issue for them? Some day soon we're going to find out that the libertarian movement is being secretly run out of the Home Office.

Best Comment So Far On Bin Laden's Death Scene

Over at NRO:

Wow, Obama really does hate rich people! Bin Laden moves up from a cave to a mansion and Barack wacks him.

Hey, we're just lucky the Yanks found him before we did, otherwise there's no telling how much money Dave would have given him.