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.