Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Red State Attitudes

The Vulture Award

The VA (aka Vacuous Arsehole) is a new award given to politicians, or just about anyone in public office, for making mortuary mileage out of a tragic demise.

The first winner of this prestigious medal is Maria Eagle, Labour MP for Garston and Halewood, for attempting to link yeserday’s appalling attack on, and subsequent death of, Labour MP Jo Cox,  a supporter of Remain, to the Brexit campaign.  Eagle is also awarded the DSB (Distinguished Steward’s Bar) for being lower than a worm’s anus; a stone hearted bitch who puts politics before whatever shred of humanity she might possess.

Someone should take Eagle aside and explain that you never go full retard, especially before the facts are known.  Contemptible actions by individuals like Eagle, to name but one of many, are the reason the public despises and distrusts so many politicians.

Feel free to make your own nominations for the award.  The field is target rich after all.


I probably don’t need to say it but I’m going to anyway.  Our thoughts are with Jo’s family and friends.  The senseless violence that took her from this world and her loved ones cannot go unpunished.  The person responsible should be locked up for the rest of his life and the key thrown away.  No one deserves to die the way Jo Cox did.  All she was trying to do was help.  RIP Jo Cox.

Dear Troll: “America Doesn’t Have a Gun Problem, It Has a Democrat Problem”

A few weeks back, some Ignorant Person saw fit to put up on Samizdata a short comment implying, snarkily, that the U.S. is the worst of all possible worlds when it comes to the gun-murder rate.

A few of us took issue with that; I rather think the rest thought the remark not worth dignifying with a response.

However, “Sultan Knish,” a.k.a. Daniel Greenfield, who writes columns for various anti-Left online mags and has his own website at, put up a doozy on the subject today; although I wish he’d found some other adjective than “Democrat,” because not all Dems are Dim on the issue. In fact some of the “gun-rights” activist-scholars are, or were, themselves Democrats*; and the excerpt below makes the point that not all cities of Obama-voters have these appalling murder rates.

But the fact remains that the worst cities certainly are run by lefty and/or race-baiting Democrats. So here is a mere excerpt (but note: YrsTrly has not verified the stats for herself). Suggest reading the whole thing….

[SNIP ...]
Any serious conversation about gun violence and gun culture has to begin at home; in Chicago, in Baltimore, in New York City, in Los Angeles and in Washington, D.C.

Voting for Obama does not make people innately homicidal. Just look at Seattle. So what is happening in Chicago to drive it to the gates of hell?

A breakdown of the Chicago killing fields shows that 83% of those murdered in Chicago in one year had criminal records. In Philly, it’s 75%. In Milwaukee it’s 77% percent. In New Orleans, it’s 64%. In Baltimore, it’s 91%. Many were felons who had served time. And as many as 80% of the homicides were gang related.

Chicago’s problem isn’t guns; it’s gangs. Gun control efforts in Chicago or any other major city are doomed because gangs represent organized crime networks which stretch down to Mexico. And Democrats pander to those gangs because it helps them get elected. That’s why Federal gun prosecutions in Chicago dropped sharply under Obama. It’s why he has set free drug dealers and gang members to deal and kill while convening town halls on gun violence.

America’s murder rate isn’t the work of the suburban and rural homeowners who shop for guns at sporting goods stores and at gun shows, and whom the media profiles after every shooting, but by the gangs embedded in urban areas controlled by Democrats. The gangs who drive up America’s murder rate look nothing like the occasional mentally ill suburban white kid who goes off his medication and decides to shoot up a school. Lanza, like most serial killers, is a media aberration, not the norm.


*For instance, Eric Raymond has an interesting page, Eric’s Gun Nut Page, that describes criminologist Gary Kleck’s work and political stance. More good stuff for those who think guns might be part of the solution, with links, too.

For Fox Sake!

Rod Liddle, Sun columnist, goes off on one.

TALLY Ho! No sooner are the Conservatives back in office than they’ve decided to have a go at the poor foxes once again.

Actually I am of the opinion that they are trying to fix a half-arsed law that does little for either camp.  Trying to turn it into a Toffs or Us campaign because it suits your townie tunnel vision is unworthy of decent journalism.  But then, this is the Sun we are talking about.

Probably because there’s not much important going on in the world, is there?

When trying to repeal bad laws you have to begin somewhere.  The fox hunting travesty is as good a place to start as any.

Just the EU falling to bits and jihadi maniacs chopping heads off all over the place and Britain swamped by more and more immigration.

More bad laws to repeal, yes?

The Prime Minister wanted to waste some parliamentary time loosening the laws on fox hunting.

I assume this was David Cameron’s gift to his local pals — the Cotswold Posse.

All those rich monkeys in his constituency who enjoy nothing more than ripping a defenceless animal to bits.

But wait! Riding to the rescue are the Scottish nationalists!

Because Toffs on horseback are far more dangerous than the SNP interfering in English matters that should not concern them?  Your priorities are as skewed as the perceived ones you are whinging about, Ron.

They’ve said they will vote against any Tory proposals to relax the hunting ban. Despite the fact that they shouldn’t have anything to do with the matter because the rules don’t apply to Scotland.

But Ron agrees with them so it’s okay for the SNP to gang up in the House of Commons in precisely the way they promised not to.  The English faction of Parliament should interfere right back and give the SNP a bloody nose.  Oh, wait.  We don’t get to practice that privilege.  But that’s okay because foxes are cute and cuddly and never kill livestock.  Evah!

Opportunistic hypocrites, says Mr Cameron. But the foxes don’t care where salvation comes from — any port in a storm.

I despise Cameron but he has a point.  As for any port in a storm, it depends what is waiting for you on the dock.  In the foxes case it’s poison, lethal gas or a spade over the head.  At least they have a chance to escape horse and hounds.

My own guess is that the SNP are furiously against fox hunting because most members of the party have the same coloured fur as a fox.

Waaaaaycist!  That’s waaaaycist against gingers that is.  To presume they have fur and not hair.  Tut tut.

They’re worried the hunters might get confused. The toffs out on horseback spending the entire day pursuing what they think is a fox — and then they find the hounds have just eaten Nicola Sturgeon.

Ron thinks Nicola is a fox.  Does he kiss her picture every night before he goes to bed?

Still, at least the Nats are on the right side for once.

No, they’re not.  This is political interference on steroids. Will you still feel the same way if they join the Guardianista inspired witch hunt against Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid journalists?  Only stupid turkeys vote for Christmas.

The British public is hugely opposed to fox hunting, according to every opinion poll carried out on the matter.

According the opinion polls we were going to have another hung Parliament.  How is Coalition 2.0 going for you Ron?

Rightly, they consider it a horrible and barbaric business.

So was the invasion of Iraq but that didn’t stop New Labour did it?  They believed that foxes were more deserving of protection than the civilians who died during the ousting of Saddam.  They are still dying because IS filled the void.  Save your indignation for them, Ron.  Let’s have some honest perspective here.

Every bit as barbaric as all those other sports we’ve banned over the years — bear baiting, for example. Or cock fights, or dog fights.

Which take place in pits with no chance of escape.

Just because fox hunting is undertaken, in the main, by posh people, it doesn’t make it any less barbaric. A psychopath wearing a pink jacket is still a psychopath.

Where to begin?  Foxes are an apex predator and are culled because they kill livestock.  You know, all those cute and fluffy lambs, chickens and ducklings.  Dressing up in costume and riding to hounds, in Ron’s world, is psychotic because it is mostly done by toffs even though, in reality, it isn’t.  Bashing an animal’s brains out with the back of a shovel gets no mention, presumably because the deed is done by salt of the earth common man and is therefore not psychotic at all.  This is pure hypocrisy.  It is bare-faced, townie lefty, no nowt bollocks.

But there’s something about the Conservatives that revels in ripping an animal to bits.

I seem to recall a few Conservatives voting for the ban.  Must have slipped Ron’s mind.

If they’re not trying to bring back fox hunting they’re gassing badgers — for no sane reason whatsoever.

Because TB infected badgers don’t exist and neither does Bovine TB.

Mr Cameron and his well-bred cronies have no time for our wildlife, as they show time and time again.

There’s an awful lot of Labour voting farmers and country folk in my part of the world who regularly shoot rabbits and crows.  Aren’t they wildlife too?

If it’s furry and it’s got a pulse, kill it. If it’s a bird of prey, let the gamekeepers shoot it or poison it.

Your PETA-coat is showing, Ron.

And yet I thought the Conservatives were sick of being portrayed as the “nasty party”?

It’s all Fatcha’s fault.

Here’s the deal, Dave. Sort out the economy. Try to raise the wages of our poorest people a little bit, huh?

Nine quid an hour isn’t enough then?   What do you suppose this piece of Tory socialist insanity is going to do for the economy?

Decide what we’re going to do about IS and all those refugees trying to get into the country.

With all those bleeding hearts and EUphiles voting against him?  Not a chance.

And leave the foxes alone.

If you saw what a fox does to livestock it would make you puke, Ron.  But since you are a townie you keep yourself insulated against red blooded reality and arrogantly insist that you know what the scamelling hell you are talking about.

F**K You Obama…

…and the wilfully blind donkey you boomeranged back in on.

That goes double for our Westminster village idiots who for years have been turning sinister somersaults [see what I did there?], while waving the flag of anti-terrorism, to grab a piece of this fascist action.

Oh, a final word for our unelected EU puppet-masters just in case you’re listening – f**k you too!

The Department of Shoddy Journalism

The circulation figure for the lefty rag, New Statesman, fell over the edge of a cliff some time ago and is still plummeting.  Hardly surprising, if this is the standard of journalism.

Martha Gill writes an online column she calls Irrational Animals.  Her latest outpouring is entitled, Why “family men” make terrible bosses.  It’s possible Ms Gill has a reason for the scare quotes.  It’s also possible that it is nothing more than an annoying and pointless affectation.

There is a photo of iDave, his wife and youngest child with a caption reading, Do we like David Cameron more because he has children? Obviously the link here is that Cameron is a family man who also happens to be Tory Prime Minister.  Ed Miliband is also a parent but obviously he’s not the type of parent Ms Gill wants to smear write about.

If you’re trying to become the leader of a political party or a chief executive, it might be a good idea to have some kids – especially if you’re a man. For some reason, we like having family men at the top: perhaps because we think they’re more relatable; perhaps because we think they’re kinder or more empathetic.

Who is this “we” she’s talking about?  Is it the apocryphal “we” shonky journos use to prove yet another interminable non-point?  The crude and ramshackle device that masquerades as consensus but is nothing more than wishful thinking tarted up like a dog’s dinner?   Yes it is!

Political leaders, in particular, often introduce policy measures that affect children with a brief mention of their own kids (just to show parents that they’re on the same page) – or simply mention them apropos of nothing.

Gosh, political leaders with a family behave just like ordinary parents do.  Who knew?

“My children have onesies and I often say I’m very jealous,” Cameron announced last week, just to make sure, one last time, that we all know he’s a dad.

Yes, God forefend that Cameron should talk fondly about his brood.  It’s unnatural!  It shouldn’t be allowed!  Send for the Daddy Police!

The implication is that because a leader has children, he’ll care more about children in general. Anecdotally, at least, this seems not to be true. Before having children, people tend to have a benign (if not particularly invested) attitude towards other people’s kids. Have children of your own and these other kids become tiny competitors: less good at gym than your child but somehow in the gym team; inexplicably cast as Mary in the nativity play; undeservedly in a higher maths class; irritatingly better at the clarinet.

The implication is that Ms Gill could quite possibly be completely barking if she believes even half that guff.  Cameron is a crap leader because he is incompetent, not because he is a doting dad.  That goes double for Miliband and Clegg.

Although your image becomes fuzzier and warmer, your behaviour seems to go in the opposite direction. I have seen the genuinely empathetic suddenly start filling up their friends’ Facebook newsfeeds with 12 daily pictures of their newborns (all, surely, the same picture). I have seen the genuinely interesting and funny suddenly unable to talk about anything but nappy rash.

But has she seen or heard iDave do it when he’s Prime Ministering or whatever it is he thinks that entails?  If the answer is no then what point is being made here?  Anyone?  Oh, wait.  I forgot.  This is a lefty rag so what I’m reading is anti-Tory spin, not informed opinion.

The problem is that having children completely shifts your priorities. It makes you more grasping (on their behalf) – which makes the warm and fuzzy image rather odd.

Call me blind but I don’t recall seeing any shift, significant or otherwise, in iDave’s political viewpoint when his daughter was born.  Not even from the sad death of his son. If Ms Gill requires an example of how a politician shifts priorities for an offspring then she should look a little closer to home, to Diane Abbott.  A more appropriate example to illustrate this lefty wibble I can’t think of.

A recent study by the Aalborg University economics professor Michael Dahl showed that the first thing male CEOs do when they have their first child is to give themselves a raise at the expense of everyone else in the company. The research was carried out on a large group of Danish chief executives and found that when they had a child, their pay went up by an average of 4.9 per cent. The rest of the company were paid about 0.2 per cent less.

Michael who?

So what’s he said that has got Ms Gill’s thong in a twist about political leaders and parenthood?

Motivated by a growing literature in the social sciences suggesting that the transition to fatherhood has a profound effect on men’s values, we study how the wages of employees change after a male chief executive officer (CEO) has children, using comprehensive panel data on the employees, CEOs, and families of CEOs in all but the smallest Danish firms between 1996 and 2006. We find that (a) a male CEO generally pays his employees less generously after fathering a child, (b) the birth of a daughter has a less negative influence on wages than does the birth of a son and has a positive influence if the daughter is the CEO’s first, and (c) the wages of female employees are less adversely affected than are those of male employees and positively affected by the CEO’s first child of either gender. We also find that male CEOs pay themselves more after fathering a child, especially after fathering a son. These results are consistent with a desire by the CEO to husband more resources for his family after fathering a child and the psychological priming of the CEO’s generosity after the birth of his first daughter and specifically toward women after the birth of his first child of either gender.

Errr…That’ll be sweet FA then.  Dahl is writing about the behaviour of newly parented leaders of Danish industry and business.  I don’t see anything about politicians there at all.  So, WTF is Ms Gill banging on about?

If it’s a boy and a firstborn, male employees suffer particularly –wages going down by about 0.5 per cent. Interestingly, though, the effect is muted when the baby is a girl. Fathers of girls take a smaller pay rise (3 per cent) and give their female employees a tiny average raise.

Spontaneous physog/palm interface.

According to the researchers, the odd gender differences here are probably a mixture of straightforward competitiveness (with the men) and a raised awareness of the pay gap (which, though small, still exists in Denmark) that could now affect their daughters. They speculated that the results would be more exaggerated in the US but privacy laws made it too hard to get the right information.

Talk about losing the plot…

It’s an interesting study as it broaches the idea that caring about your children doesn’t necessarily translate into caring about anyone else. It might be time to give the childless a chance at promotion.

I don’t think so, Ms Gill.  Who the Scammel wants another Edward Heath in Number Ten?

It is clear that Professor Dahl’s latest book bears absolutely no relevance to British politicians who are fathers.  However, that hasn’t prevented Ms Gill from weilding it like a piece of Fabian two-by-four.  I know that progressives believe that the State is both mother and father but attacking Cameron for being a parent is both snide and pathetic.

Clearly Ms Gill is an expert an irrational animals.  She puts lipstick on one every morning.

Diane Abbott partly to blame for breakdown in joined-up thinking.

She’s at it again!  Diane Abbott flaps her gums and spews weapons grade bollocks.  According to the headline she reckons that broken families, obesity and alcoholism are partly down to people like…erm…herself.

Scratches head.  That can’t be right, can it?

Oh, wait, this is what she said…

Ms Abbott, the shadow public health minister, urged the left to recognise that problems such as obesity and alcoholism, often stem from such breakdown.

Or can be the cause of them perhaps?  But let’s not let that little worm of a fact get in the way of HMS Titanic Diane as her hulk chugs magisterially into yet another iceberg of leftist folly.  Let’s not forget stuff like this.  The State runs its own lucarative sideline in busting up families because Nanny knows best and not always for the better.

Feminists should be able to talk about these issues and they should not be confined to the pages of women’s magazines, she argued.

That’s all we need, more vapid pedlars of leftist, man-hating, groupthink twaddle in the mainstream.  Thanks, Diane.

She told The Guardian newspaper: “As a feminist, perhaps we have been ambivalent about families.

Actually, your party has done it’s level best to make sure that the State interferes in family life at the most basic level, usurping the authority of parents.  What are you, Hatty and your legion of feministas going to say about that?

“In the 1980s, we used to say: ‘A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.’

That’s because you were, and still are, deeply stupid.

“The more academic version was: ‘The family is the site of women’s oppression.’ So those of us who came of age at the height of feminism had very mixed views about the family, since it seemed to be defined as a heterosexual thing with a certificate, children and mum at home.”

I come from a long line of working class women.  They didn’t have the luxury of staying home and playing at happy families.  They had to get off their arses and work hard as well as bring up the kids and run the home.  They didn’t moan about oppression, they just got on with it.  As a result they worked themselves out of poverty to the point where their descendants enjoy all the trappings of a middle class existence.  But it didn’t stop there, Diane.  We descendents still work  hard because we want to keep what we’ve worked so hard for.  We work to counter the tax everything and then tax it again spite your Labour rabble heaped upon us in the name of “fairness”.  We don’t down tools and fuck off to some arty farty, women’s supplement to produce reams of snide shite about the sisters who refused to abandon their responsibilities.

But “some kind of stable family structure” was vital and was what most people want around them, she said, adding: “I do not think we should abandon that terrain to the right.”

But isn’t that exactly what you did?  For bloody generations?  Now all of a sudden the Right, when it comes to preserving the structure of the family, is no longer wrong because it suits your nu-puritan authoritarian agenda?  You double-dyed, hypocritical sack of offal!

Ms Abbott also called for local authorities to be given greater powers to stop fried chicken shops and other fast food outlets from proliferating, and to stop alcohol from being sold cheaply, especially near schools.

Yes, because high street names like KFC and Micky D’s are destroyers of families everywhere.  All you have to do is look through their propaganda covered windows and see families enjoying ripping themselves apart eating poison that the staff are forcing down their throats because no one in their right minds would do it by choice.  After all, the kids should be eating healthy food so that they can remain thin and whip-like just like you, Diane.

As an aside, anyone advocating more power to government, local or otherwise, should be stewed for eternity in a vat of their own statist venom.

She claimed young people were not only eating fast food on a regular basis but that their lives were also being “saturated with porn and sex” to a much greater degree than children’s lives were two decades ago.

Wow, Diane’s on a roll!  But where is the evidence for this porn “saturation”?  We only get her big, fat lefty opinion.  However, she has an answer to the problem.  Oh, yes indeedy.

She called for tighter controls on children’s access to the internet to help tackle this.

Which, reading between the lines, means tighter access to the internet for everyone because…think of the cheeeeeldren!  I think that sorely abused guilt horse is ready for the knackers yard because it’s plumb worn out.

Parents also had their own part to play, she argued, accusing some of being guilty of “McParenting,” compensating for a lack of parental responsibility by buying consumer goods for their children.

Because let’s NOT support the industries and workers who make such trinkets that people actually want?  Because buying presents for our kids is evil and the worst kind of parental abuse and must be stamped out?  What a load of McBollocks.

Instead of reading to their children or taking them to a library, such parents might be dressing their children in branded clothing and mistakenly believing they were fulfilling their parental duties in so, she said.

You could begin with removing the VAT from books and stop closing libraries. You could also stop encouraging the never have nor never will have a job underclass to produce kids they have no intention of working to keep.

At what point of buying children clothes they like does parental abuse/neglect begin?  Or should everyone refrain from buying nice stuff for their kids because they don’t vote Labour Diane abused her own brat with buying him nice stuff and sending him to a private school and is now laying a lefty guilt trip on us by way of redemption?  What frigging planet does this moron inhabit?

She starts off blaming the family busting femininist agenda yet somehow ends up blaming breakups on parents being nice to their kids.  As a bonus she gets in wedges of the lefty ban everything we disapprove of agenda between the cracks.  This shambolic piece of tosh is something we should pay attention to?

Oh Diane, you vacuous polisher of HoC bench leather, your nauseating stupidity that passes for righteous campaigning pollutes the air we all have to breathe.  Can you please just stop?

Obama – a Labour saving device?

According to the BBC:

The UK should emulate the US idea of having a day dedicated to encouraging people to shop at small, local shops, Labour’s Chuka Umunna has said.

Well why not?  We are doing our best to emulate the US’s trillions in debt after all.  What could go wrong?

The shadow business secretary has asked American Express – which sponsors the US initiative – to see if they could bring the idea to the UK this year.

Errrr, but isn’t American Express part of the evil capitalist system Labour keeps warning us about?

He has suggested 7 December as the first “Small Business Saturday”.

The anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbour?  I can see how that will go down well.

The Department for Communities and Local Government said it was an idea which would be considered.

But clearly not acted upon hence a tip of the wink to AmEx in the hope they’ll be willing to stump up help out.

In the US the idea of a day to promote local traders began in 2010 and traditionally follows Thanksgiving.

And in case we haven’t got the message…

President Barack Obama and his daughters visited an independent book shop on Small Business Saturday.

Complete with a pic of the Obama girls going shopping with their old man.  No photo opportunity will be overlooked.

US figures suggest US consumers aware of the promotion, which is heavily plugged in social media and enjoys celebrity support, spent £3.4bn in small shops on the day this year.

But doesn’t actually mention how much would normally have been spent in local shops on the previous Saturday or on the same day the year before.  So there goes any idea of context.  Oops!

As for celebrity support?  He’s kidding isn’t he?  Isn’t he…?

In the UK a similar idea, on a smaller scale, has seen a day dedicated to encouraging people to use their local record store.

That statement is almost beyond fisking but I’ll try.  Why on earth would music lovers want to do that in the age of the much cheaper interwebby download thingy and Amazon?

Mr Umunna said: “We must do more to celebrate the contribution local, small independent businesses make to our economy and encourage people to buy from them.

As long as they are record shops?  Surely Chuka should be doing more to prevent shop owners losing money through criminal activities like burglary, robbery and shoplifting.  Crime is as much a threat to the livelihood of local shop owners, especially in cities and towns, as supermarkets and retail parks.  Not to mention being the victim of crime is traumatic in the extreme.

For some reason Chuka doesn’t mention the problem of loss of revenue due to the underclass robbing honest people blind.  It’s clearly not an issue.

Establishing a Small Business Saturday in the UK, a concept which has enjoyed considerable success in the US, would provide a small but simple and effective way to celebrate local small businesses and encourage more people to buy from them on one of the busiest shopping days of the year.

Clearly Chuka has never been shopping with keeping the cost as low as possible in mind.  And what bleeding business is it of his where people chose to spend their money?  How come he’s so concerned all of a sudden?  Did he get a retail Damascene conversion while perambulating along Streatham High Street yesterday?  Or does he have an agenda?  Something to do with union donations to Labour maybe?

A Small Business Saturday in the UK is something all local authorities, whatever their political persuasion, could support and promote.

Yes they could.  And I could tell them to mind their own scammelling business.  I shop where I like.  I could also demand they stop wasting our bloody money on stupid, doomed to failure initiatives!

The Department for Communities and Local Government said it would consider the idea, but stressed the action already being taken to support independent traders in England.

Supporting them by strangling them in red tape, by ensuring that prices and overheads skyrocket, by taxing them out of business?  I reckon that’s precisely the sort of help local traders can do without.

Local Growth Minister Mark Prisk said: “We’re determined to offer practical support to our High Streets, which is why we’ve doubled the amount of small business rate relief to new and smaller shops.

If it’s such a huge relief why are small shops going out of business at an increasing rate?  Or am I imagining the proliferation of empty shop premises that used to be independent businesses blighting our high streets?

This is one part of a multimillion-pound package of support to Town Teams and Portas Pilots up and down the country, including mentoring from retail experts and workshops to address the challenges they face.

Chucking millions at more frigging quangos?  Is that the sum of Labour’s solution?  Oh please, just do one will you…

And for budding entrepreneurs, we’re providing over £80m of start-up loans for young people starting their own businesses.

What’s wrong with them pushing a fruit and veg barrow?  Or cleaning cars?  You know, like old fashioned budding entrepreneurs did?  Why should unproven little buds get an advantage that established but ailing businesses can’t? Who foots the bill when those same little buds fall flat on their faces?  Or are we to assume that every one of them is going to be a fabulous success?  Where is this money going to come from and at what rate of borrowing?

Oh, wait.  It’s going to come from us poor buggering taxpayers isn’t it.  Therefore it doesn’t matter that Sound-bite Chuka is advocating the highly potential waste of £80 million to salve his and Labour’s conscience.

It’s not his money, is it…

Diplomatic Impugnity

According to the Daily Telegraph, Madonna’s ex squeeze Sean Penn, has been boxing in matters well above his intellectual microbe-weight.  When I say well above I’m not talking stratospheric, I’m talking  lunar orbit.  Hollywoodland has rich deposits of stupid which are exploited on a daily basis and exported to the world’s political stages and media by the megaton.  Lucky Penn has discovered a seam of pure moronite and is currently fracking for all he’s worth. The dense mineral is extremely toxic which might explain why he is totally nucking and  completely futz:

Sean Penn has accused Britain of colonialism and urged the government to open negotiations with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.

Penn is Tinsel Town’s self appointed ambassador to Argentina.  Ah, bless.  And he’s discovered a big word too: colonialism.  Gosh.  And now he’s stamping his feet in anger and pointing his self-important and pig ignorant world renowned US diplomat digit of dumb doom at li’l old Britain.  Oh, my.

At a meeting with Argentine president Cristina Kirchner, the Left-wing Hollywood actor referred to the islands “the Malvinas Islands of Argentina” and said Britain should entered into a UN-sponsored dialogue over their sovereignty.

No, we shouldn’t.  The UN supported Britain following the Argentinian aggression thirty years ago.  As did NATO and the Commonwealth,  Even the Organisation of American States refused to come out in favour of Argentina.

“The world today is not going to tolerate any ludicrous and archaic commitment to colonialist ideology,” he said during the meeting in Buenos Aires.

I’m so glad to hear that.  I mean, no tolerant nation would consider launching a ludicrous, pre-emptive strike against a foreign state in order to consolidate an archaic commitment to colonialist ideology would they.  Oh, wait…

“I know I came in a very sensitive moment in terms of diplomacy between Argentina and the UK over the Malvinas islands.

That explains the dignified, statesmanlike air wanking at the beginning of the DT video.  No getting off to Page Three or Playmate of the Month for Mr. Penn.  I guess that Cristina must be a real hottie, eh?

“And I hope that diplomats can establish true dialogue in order to solve the conflict as the world today cannot tolerate ridiculous demonstrations of colonialism.

Here’s some dialogue for you, Mr. Penn.  Sod off and mind your own bleeding business and pass the message along to Hillary Rodham Clinton and that muppet you call a President while you’re at it.  I’m sorry I can’t be more diplomatic but you see I find it hard to tolerate being lectured to by a mental pygmy ridiculous demonstrations of hand-wringing, no-nowt, lefty bollocks.

“The way of dialogue is the only way to achieve a better solution for both nations,” he said, according to the Buenos Aires Herald.

We’ve already tried that.  It didn’t work.  It was Kirchner herself who told Gordon Brown back in 2009 that there would be no further dialogue regarding the sovereignty of the Falklands because, as far as she was concerned, the mineral deposits islands were the property of Argentina, so there. The 1995 agreement between the UK and Argentina regarding joint oil exploration was ripped up by Argentina’s then president, Kirchner’s husband, almost five years ago.  It was undiluted hubris; an infantile dummy throwing exercise.  The only acceptable solution, according to Kirchner, is the complete surrender of UK sovereignty over the Falklands, or else.  Oh, and to stop exploiting the mineral wealth that belongs to Argentina forthwith.  I guess Penn was too busy rewriting history stretching the boundaries of improbable and clichéd scenarios to breaking point starring in movies to notice.  We should be grateful that Mr. Penn has taken time out of his busy schedule to act on his lady friend’s behalf.

The Oscar-nominated Penn has long been a friend of South American nationalism, visiting both Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez and Cuba’s [Fidel Castro]

And with the addition of Cristina Mr. Penn is well on the way to collecting a comprehensive set of Latin American Loonies.   Will a feature film be far behind?

The [British] government has consistently refused to take part in any negotiations over the status of the islands, saying that they will remain a British territory as long a majority of the 3,000 islanders wish them to.

That’s because Argentina isn’t interested in negotiating, Kirchner herself having made that perfectly clear in 2009, so what’s the point in opening a unilateral negotiation?

Last week, Argentina submitted a formal complaint to the UN, accusing Britain of “militarising” the South Atlantic by sending HMS Dauntless, the Royal Navy’s most advanced ship, to the region.

Yeah, it’s one thing for Argentinian ships to stop and search merchant vessels heading for the Falklands.  Having the cojones to stop and search HMS Dauntless is something else.  Let’s not mention Argentina’s sabre rattling which has a history of turning into pre-emptive armed conflict. Let’s also not mention its own “militarising” of the South Atlantic, policing and delaying merchant vessels carrying vital supplies of fresh fruit and vegetables to the Falklands.  Many captains, frustrated by the delays, turn back, their cargoes undelivered.   Falkland islanders are being deprived of vital nutrition.  What’s the UN going to do about that?

Tensions between the two nations are running high as the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War approaches.

And if the Argies decide to kick off a second time we’ll be waiting for them.

It’s interesting that Penn has taken a stand against colonialism.  When  you look at Argentina’s ethnicity it is (quoting Wiki): 86.4% European (mostly Spanish and Italian), 8.5% Mestizo (mixed native and European), 3.3% Arab, 1.6% Amerindian and 0.4% Asian and others.  Indigenous people make up less than 2% of the population thanks to mass European colonialism?  Shome mishtake, shurely?

Argentina declared Independence from Spain in 1816 and claims it “inherited” the Falklands from Spain at this time.  That’s right, the same Spain responsible for colonising South America and subjugating the indigenous peoples.  Perhaps Mr Penn should insist that Cristina hand back the land stolen from the original inhabitants in order to make amends?  No?  I mean. this anti-colonialism works both ways, yes?  And while he’s at it he can make an appointment with Hillary and demand that the US is returned to its original owners.  And that includes Tinsel Town.

Parting Shot

Ah, hell! How can I slip quietly away when there’s one more load of weapons grade bollocks like this to fisk?

Lisa Hymas (for Grist, part of the Grauniad Environment Network) spouts forth testacularly:

The climate sceptics can finally get excited about the 2012 election: Rick Perry, their candidate of choice, is about to officially throw his hat in the ring.

Rick who?

Perry calls global warming “all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight.” Unlike many of the other GOP presidential candidates, he hasn’t expressed concern about climate change in the past, so he won’t have to do any back-pedaling.

Oh that Rick Perry. The Governor only the people of Texas got to vote for. I don’t live in Texas love so why should I get a moist gusset over him even if he is an AGW sceptic?

Notorious climate denier Marc Morano is a big fan: “Based on climate views alone, anyone who is holding their nose voting for Mitt Romney because there’s no other viable candidate will now rejoice to have an option with Rick Perry.”

AGW sceptic Marc Morano: the bloke who gets the Church of Climate Alarmism foaming madly at the mouth. More foaming mad than usual that is.  Yeah, I can see why Guardianistas like Lisa the Loser would revile people like Marc. They achieve positive results by applying rational solutions and this kind of extreme behaviour is absolutely unacceptable to tax-frenzied Marxist scum compassionate, wealth redistributing socialists.

The Texas governor will announce his intentions in the early primary state of South Carolina on Saturday, then head to New Hampshire and Iowa to rub elbows with all of the other aspiring commanders-in-chief. As a social and fiscal conservative, governor of a state that’s been adding jobs (even if they’re low-wage), and owner of a full head of lustrous hair, Perry is expected to swagger to the front of the pack in the contest for the Republican nomination.

Gosh! Rick creates jobs, isn’t a slaphead and is in danger of developing a confident gait. What an unconscionable bastard! Clearly, a man unfit for high office…

Perry served as Al Gore’s Texas campaign chair in the 1988 presidential race, just before switching his party allegiance from Democrat to Republican, but conservatives don’t have to worry that Perry holds any residual affection for the former veep. “I’ve heard Al Gore talk about man-made global warming so much that I’m starting to think that his mouth is the leading source of all that supposedly deadly carbon dioxide,” Perry said in 2007.

Ahhhh! Now I get it. Rick is a lefty apostate as well as an AGW heretic. I’m beginning to warm to him.

Anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist, for one, isn’t concerned: “If Perry was president, one of the things I’d not worry about is a carbon tax,” Norquist told Politico. “I’d worry about big spiders eating New Jersey first.”

Anti-tax zealot? Is poor wickle Lisa fwightened of the small-statist, tax reforming bogeyman den? Good! I hope he gives you nightmares you vapid, mouth breathing bimbo.

But plugging your ears and going “la la la la” doesn’t make global warming disappear. Perry’s state is getting absolutely hammered by heat and the worst one-year drought in its recorded history. The hot, dry weather in Texas is desiccating rivers and lakes, devastating farmers and ranchers, and driving wildfires that have burned up millions of acres. In the face of these crises — which are just what you’d expect in a climate-changed world — Perry proposes neither adaptation nor mitigation but rather supplication. He’s been praying for rain and calling on other Texans to do the same. So far no luck.

Under the circumstances, if I lived in Texas I’d be praying for rain too but in a wishful thinking kind of way. In fairness to Lisa, praying for divine intervention is on a par with copulating for virginity – frigging stupid. All of which makes Rick an anti-science, Christian extremist, neo-con lunatic in the eyes of AGW nurturing cultural Marxists. You see, for climate alarmists there is but one green genie god and her profit prophet is Al Gore.  Eschewing prayer, the lefties apparently expect to be given access to a magical rain machine that will spontaneously materialise if people are taxed hard enough.

Taxing people until they bleed because of dodgy science and statistics triggered by the unrecovered, and therefore unexamined, bodies of three, maybe four dead polar bears allegedly seen floating in the Beaufort Sea sea after a storm, is a cataclysmically idiotic solution. What about the severe, multiple year droughts of the Thirties and Fifties? The ones not caused by apocryphal AGW? Disastrous wildfires aside, is the current one year drought worse than the one that encompassed nearly all of the US back in the thirties? Has Lisa been partaking of the Book of the Holy Goracle without a biblical pillar of salt at hand to help it go down?

Perry also prays for a rollback of EPA regulations: “Frankly I pray for the president every day,” he recently told CBN News. “I pray for his wisdom. I pray that God will open his eyes. I wish this president would turn back the health-care law that’s been passed, ask that his EPA back down all these regulations that are causing businesses to hesitate to spend money.”

Praying for the return of political sanity and fiscal accountability? Extremist ideas like that should be stamped out immediately before they spread like the plague and give people funny ideas about reducing taxes, reducing the size of the state and allowing businesses to expand and create jobs as well as wealth.

But Perry’s efforts to hog-tie the EPA haven’t stopped at prayer. Last year, his administration filed suit against the EPA to block the agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. The suit centered on claims that the so-called “Climategate” emails undermined climate science, though the whole Climategate faux-scandal has been thoroughly debunked.

So Rick doesn’t rely on God reaching for his heavenly hose and doing the right (sic) thing. He’s also prepared to take direct Earthly action. But Lisa doesn’t like that. Not one itty bitty bit. She’s in total denial that the Hockey Team did anything wrong so it must be Rick who is at fault for daring to question the practices of data fudging, consensus groupthink and post normal pseudo-science.

As for the evidence of scientific fraud faux-scandal, to paraphrase Lisa: Plugging your ears and going “la, la, la” doesn’t make the Climategate emails disappear.

Perry has also fought the EPA in defense of his state’s “flexible” air-pollution permits for oil and chemical refineries. And last month, Perry lashed out against an EPA rule that calls for reducing power-plant emissions that drift across state lines, calling it “another example of heavy-handed and misguided action from Washington, D.C., that threatens Texas jobs and families.”

Maybe because defending the livelihoods and the welfare of the people of Texas against the destructive forces of bogus climate alarmism, green taxes and policies that demonise plant food and restrict the generation of affordable energy for no good reason, is high on Rick’s political agenda…?

As a Texas Republican, Perry is, of course, a friend of the oil and gas industry. He even stuck by BP during the Gulf of Mexico gusher, saying the well blowout was “an act of God” and insisting that he had “full confidence” in the company’s response.
Perry has cozied up to the oil-baron Koch brothers. In June, he flew off secretly to Colorado to speak at an exclusive closed-door meeting convened by the Kochs — even as his state was suffering through some of the worst wildfires in its history. In 2010, the Koch Industries’ PAC gave $50,000 to the Texans for Rick Perry PAC.

Oh, noes! Rick is a card carrying member and apologist for Big Oil and Big Gas, the corporate monsters who…er…give millions to the AGW cause and who pollute the planet with poisonous plant food. He is a receiver of filthy money, donated by people who deliberately use their toxic hydrocarbons as an accelerant to burn Texas down to the subsoil before pissing on the ashes and blaming natural climate variability for the catastrophe. Send in the Green Police and arrest the evil fracker at once!

Perry is big fan of coal too. He tried to speed up approvals and smooth the way for a number of controversial coal-fired power plants proposed for Texas in the mid-00s.

Because no reasonable person in their right mind should be constructing efficient, coal burning power plants that keep the lights on.  Coal also allows air conditioning to cool homes and workplaces in a southern state that, drought or no drought, tends to be dry and hot summerwise.  We can’t be having that, can we.  And lets not mention that Texas has the Chihuahuan Desert and the arid Tamaulipan mezquital because of poor annual rainfall. They existed long before CO2 became the enemy of the universe but I guess that geographical snippet slipped Lisa’s mind because destroying the energy security of the West saving the world from the grip of wicked capitalists and free marketeers is a stressful occupation.

On the greener side, Perry has supported the wind industry in Texas, which now has far more installed wind-power capacity than any other state, and more than all but five countries [PDF]. He also supports a $5 billion effort to build transmission lines from wind farms in West Texas and the Panhandle to the state’s more populous areas. As Tom “Smitty” Smith, head of the Austin office of Public Citizen, explains it, the fast-growing wind industry “warmed his market-based heart.”

A right-wing oil shill seeking to fully utilise the power produced by thousands of existing Texas wind turbines. Unbelievable! And all because it warms the cockles of his black, market-based heart rather than genuflecting to the edicts of the Holy Goracle. Let’s keep schtum about the troubling fact that, during periods of high wind, half of the turbines need to be shut down because the power grid cannot take the extra load.

Let’s also ignore the fact that Rick’s market-based sensibilities slashed 50% off the proposed budget for new transmission lines that will carry the extra energy load by insisting upon upgrading existing lines as well as constructing sensitively sited new ones, thus potentially saving Texas taxpayers $5 billion. Unfortunately, protecting the interests of taxpayers and ensuring Texas gets value for money from its wind turbines just shows what an irresponsible prick of a politician Rick is. Everyone knows that when it comes to public expenditure there are no limits. If taxpayers aren’t cash cows to be milked without mercy in order to fund socialist projects, what use are they? So yeah, when it comes to Big Green soaking up billions in taxpayer dollars, we don’t want any right-wing deniers jumping aboard the gravy train and easing down on the throttle, do we.

Perry has been less supportive of solar energy, refusing to back a non-wind renewable standard that solar advocates have sought. With all the sun Texas is getting this year, that’s looking awfully short-sighted. The crippling heat has had residents cranking the air-conditioning and setting records for energy demand, leading on at least one day to electricity prices 40 times higher than usual. As Christopher Mims writes at Grist, “if Texas had a German- or Chinese-style incentive for its residents to install solar panels, it could save itself enormous amounts of money on sunny summer days, when high demand is matched by high output from solar panels.” And if the state adopted a suite of solar-promoting policies, it could do a better job of attracting and retaining solar companies, which currently are jumping ship to more solar-friendly states like California, according to a 2010 report [PDF] by the Go Solar Texas coalition.

Maybe it’s because Rick realises that solar energy is even more expensive and less efficient than wind, would need to cover thousands of acres of the precious environment in massive solar panel farms.  Such farms will be far more ecologically damaging than any power station, for no functional energy gain and to the detriment of the existing power grid. He may also be aware that the incentivised German solar energy industry only survives because it is heavily subsidised by taxpayers and not because the sun constantly shines, which it doesn’t.  Left to market forces, solar power would die without the subsidies because it is not commercially viable.

The Chinese cash in because they are only too happy to sell us solar panels while they cheerfully ensure their own coal based energy security will continue to keep the lights on long after ours have gone out. As for solar energy companies heading for the People’s Republic of California, best place for them I say. They can move into the industrial units and factories vacated by viable businesses who refuse to be mugged by tree hugging hippies on a mission to empty wallets in the name of Gaia.  Green taxes kill jobs so companies have subsequently gone elsewhere, taking vital jobs and revenue with them.

Lisa continues to wibble on about why Texans shouldn’t vote for, or support, tainted Republican, Rick. She wheels out all the usual lefty smears and ad hominems accompanied by the bitter stench of hypocrisy. Presumably she believes Texas should have voted for tainted Democrat, Bill White, a lawyer, federal bureaucrat and profiteer who enriched himself by millions while in office. But then, such enrichment is a prerequisite of lefty politicians and is a proscribed practice when it comes to right-wingers.

That’s it, folks.  This is my farewell post. I will now relinquish my Kitty Counterdom and return to the lurking commentariat from whence I came.  Thanks for reading my rants and for mostly posting positive and informative comments. :0)

A life choice?

When was the last time Britain had an honest to God warrior Prince? Well, Phillip was a warrior, but wasn’t a member of the Royal Family at the time.

Andrew? He didn’t make a life career out of it. Charles? Hmph. A stint in the military does not a warrior make.

Cry ‘God for Harry, England, and Saint George!’


Exeunt. Alarum, and chambers go off

Mexican Wank Off

DPM Clegg has delivered another one off the wrist after pre-empting a recently commissioned review into the safety of UK nuclear power stations following the Fukushima incident. So, like a bastard child of Mystic Meg and Angus McTango, he’s using the barely underway and unpublished review to rip the balls off the only coherent energy strategy being put forward, a strategy the government already agreed in principle.  Does he know something we don’t?  Like the outcome of the review as yet unwritten, for instance?  What is the brief of the safety review?  What questions are they asking?  Is this exercise merely an anorexically disguised Libtard deep green energy stitch-up?

According to Rosa Prince of the Telegraph,

The Liberal Democrat leader insisted that no extra government money would be found to meet additional costs and suggested that energy firms would struggle to raise investment from the private sector as a result of the Japanese near-meltdown.

I’m sorry, did he say government money?  It’s not government money, it’s our fucking money!  And what exactly are these “additonal” costs?  Is the cunt seriously suggesting that we should expect and prepare for Japanese style earthquakes and tsunamis?  Is he proposing exorbitantly expensive precautionary measures disguised as government sanctions that will render the construction or replacement of any nuclear power station unviable?

His remarks, made in a briefing to journalists on a visit to Mexico, throw into doubt the future of Britain’s energy supply.

Ya think?

The Government has given provisional approval to the building of at least 10 new nuclear reactors, costing around £50 billion each, at eight sites as part of the pledge to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent in coming decades.

And ordinary people are being forced to foot the colossal bill for this fraudulent, anti-carbon wankfest.  So we scrap the nuclear option.  What’s left?  Wind turbines and PV cells that anyone capable of critical thought now knows are as much use as a marshmallow dildo.  Will we get a rebate on our energy bills if Cleggy successfully fubars the nuclear component of the de-carboning programme?  Will we fuck.

Experts have cast doubt on the capacity of the oil, gas and coal sectors to fill the energy gap if the 19 existing reactors are not replaced as they age over the next decade.

Who needs experts, rational energy policies and “carbon” belching power stations when you have a green fairy to sprinkle magic moondust around.

The Lib Dems had long opposed nuclear power but agreed in Coalition negotiations last year that existing power stations could be renewed as long as no public funds were involved.

Yes, let’s not invest in the technology that produces almost 20% of our generating capacity.  Instead let’s pour hundreds of billions into “sustainable” technology that doesn’t fucking work!

They demanded that energy firms no longer benefit from generous public subsidies and be self-funding.

Let market forces decide.  I’m all for that.  So how come the public subsidy guzzling corporations energy firms that operate the wind farms aren’t exposed to the market?  Surely, with all those R&D billions that have been pissed against the wall invested in turbine technology, they should be self-funding as well as productively functional otherwise what use are they?  So how about it, Cleggy, you cockwaffling, hypocritical streak of goat’s piss?

Now Mr Clegg believes the extra costs of protecting the new plants could prove unsustainable.

Protecting them from what? Asteroid impact?  The Easter Bunny?  It is government energy policy that’s unsustainable.  Clegg needs to understand that if the lights go out thanks to this insane fuckwittery we’ll happily create our own fiery brands to steer the tumbrils by.

“We have always said that there are two conditions for the future of nuclear power,” he said. “They [the next generation power stations] have to be safe, and we cannot let the taxpayer be ripped off, which is what they always have been in the past.”

Oh, that’s fucking precious.  He’s protecting us from being ripped off is he?  Does he think we’re as stupid as he looks?  What a swivel-eyed, double dyed, weapons grade cunt.

Mr Clegg said that, under the terms of the Coalition agreement, he had the right to veto the provision of any additional government funds. He insisted that no further public funds would be made available to fill the gap. “There will be no rowing back from the Coalition agreement on this.”

Thus speaks an unelected ecofascist who needs to consult a colorectal surgeon whenever he gets a toothache.

You can read the rest of the sorry story here.

Think Tank Wank

Neil O’Brien, in his own words, is the Director of Policy Exchange, an independent think tank working for better public services, a stronger society and a more dynamic economy. He also thinks he knows what makes people tick politically. What do you think?

I’m going to assume that you’ve just  ploughed your way through several paragraphs of risible punditry so that I can move on to his right vs left questionaire.  You are asked to chose between what O’Brien classes as “right” and “left” and he breaks the choices down into four categories.  The choices on the left are what O’Brien classes as conservative.

Traditional Social Structures

1)   Traditional institutions & monarchy v. Republicanism

Lemme see.  The prospect of a royal parasite like King Jug-ears or a political parasite like Blair, Brown or Cameron.  I choose neither option, Neil, so that buggers up your attempt to pigeonhole me right from the get go, doesn’t it.

2)   Traditional British history v. Unbiased view of our colonial past

Well I never!  A loaded question with a distinct leftist slant.  Chose the former and you are a biased Tory.  Chose the “unbiased” socialist option and your kids grow up concentrating on the sins of their great-grandfathers because absolutely nothing positive came out of British colonialism whatsoever, did it.  High time “independent” partisan idiots like you were made history, Neil.  I hope the taxpayers aren’t funding this wank because frankly, that would make me very annoyed.

3)   Pro-family policies v. Neutral view about different types of family

I’m a right-winger who doesn’t possess a polemic view on how people should form relationships and build family units so long as they are happy and harm no one.  That’s another one of your questions I find irrelevant.  How am I scoring so far, Neil?

4)   Patriotism v. Internationalism

I’d vote “No” to the EUSSR in a flash. And do you know what, Neil?  I can tick the “No” box without draping myself in a St George’s flag and chanting moronic slogans with a drunken slur.

5)   Personal responsibility* v. Needs-based welfare, universal and unconditional

Hmmm.  Personal responsibility or the unconditional handing out of other people’s money to feckless types with an outrageous sense of entitlement.  Yes, I’m going to have to think hard about that one…

6)   Opposition to immigration v. Anti-Racism, freedom to migrate

Opposition to mass immigration isn’t racist.  I’m quite happy to accept genuine asylum seekers and people with desired skills or the ability to support themselves.  What I take exception to is people flocking to these shores in the hope of a free ride and then refusing to integrate and dictating how we should behave if we say something they don’t like.  Feel free to migrate any time you like, Neil.  The sooner the better.

Traditional Morality

7)  Anti-gay rights, gay marriage v. Pro

Gay militants do more damage to their cause than any Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells ever could.  As for me, what people do with each other in intimate privacy is no business of mine.  If they want to put their relationships on a legal footing then so what?  I couldn’t give a stuff either way.

8)  Anti-Abortion/Pro-life v. Pro-choice

I stand with the individuals who opt for an abortion on valid medical or social grounds, but not as a means of contraception because they were too lazy to bother before they opened their legs.  So, I’ve got a foot in both camps there, Neil.

9)  Anti-stem cell research v. Pro

FFS!  Anti-science is a full-on right-wing concept is it?  Tell me, Neil, do you work for the BBC or the Grauniad by any chance because you’re coming across like a regular frigging Moonbat.  You seem to be getting the majority of secular conservative voters and religious conservatives seriously (deliberately?) mixed up here.  Why don’t you call us all deniers?  I suspect you want to.  Your leftist bias is beginning to grate, Neil.

10)  Anti-Drugs v. Pro-liberalisation

Er…wasn’t it Alan Johnson who sacked Professor David Nutt for daring to suggest ecstacy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol?  Funny kind of pro-liberalisation, don’t you think, Neil?  Actually, as I work through this specious bullshit questionaire, I’m rapidly reaching the conclusion you might not do much thinking beyonf socialist bias, period.

11)  Anti-Prostitution v.Pro-liberalisation

I’m against sex slaves and enforced prostitution.  Women who take up prostitution as a business opportunity I don’t have a beef with.  Oops!  I fell through the gaping crack again, didn’t I…

12)  Anti-Premarital sex v. Pro

Dunno about you, Neil, but I reckon there’s an awful lot of conservative types who enjoy shagtastic, premarital sex.  Religious conservatives, on the other hand, would rather pretend they don’t indulge.

13)  Anti-Euthanasia v. Pro-choice

I’m all for sufferers who decide upon a swift and dignified exit from life and who make a personal choice to do so.  Doctors (talking about the Liverpool Care Pathway here) dehydrating the elderly and terminally ill to death over a period of time isn’t euthenasia, it’s drawn-out cruelty.  Not doing well, am I?

14)  Coarsening of the culture & swearing, violence and sex on TV v. anti-censorship, free expression

Is it just me or does choice 14 not make any fucking sense whatsoever?

15)  Fear of “political correctness” v. Anti-racism, anti-homophobia

Well you see, Neil, here’s the rub.  I don’t grok the special minority interest thought police crap.  If someone calls me a bad name then so what?  I learned to get over crap like that in primary school.  And what’s this “fear” shite?  I’m not afraid of political correctness.  Every place I see it I’ll treat its nasty fascist arse with the contempt it deserves because I don’t need the State or any kind of groupthink  to tell me how I should think and express myself.  If I want to call a spade a shovel I will.

16)  Pro-faith schools, large role of Christianity in public life v. Secularism

Because all Church schools breed foaming at the mouth religious bigots, right?  Well you’re wrong.  I went to an Anglican school and so did my son.  Both of us are as secular as can be.  Why is this?  Because Church schools actually educate kids and teach them responsibility and how to think for themselves rather than religiously indoctrinate them.  Or at least they used to prior to 1997 and the onset of undiluted Fabian social engineering.  I notice you didn’t mention the “I” word when it comes to faith schools.  How come?

A Strong State

17)  Tough punishment, longer prison sentences v. tackling the social causes of crime (poverty, racism)

Time to kick the blame culture into touch and make people responsible for their own actions, don’t you think?  The “soft” option clearly doesn’t work no matter how hard the State tries to fiddle the statistics and makes excuses for granny-bashers and other nasty malcontents.

18)  Strong armed forces v. de-militarisation, disarmament

Because we’ll never have to fight another war, will we.  Oh wait…

19)  National security, control orders, DNA database v. Civil liberties*, liberal judicial activism

I think you’ve got that one arse about face, Neil.

Freedom From the State (Freedom “From” Rather Than Freedom “To”)

20)  Fox hunting v. Hunt ban

Yes, in order to stick it to traditional conservatives let’s let the poor little foxy-woxies be shot, gassed, poisoned and have their skulls bashed in rather than give them a head start.

21)  Anti-nanny state, anti-“elf ‘n safety” v. Safety at work

Because of course there is no difference whatsoever between an oppressive, precautionary agenda that prevents kids playing football in the playground in case someone skins a knee and safe practices in the work environment that are designed to prevent injury or death.  As much ninny state as nanny state, eh Neil?

22)  Opposition to the smoking ban, anti-drink and cigarette taxes v. Public health

What, exactly, has enjoying a fag and a pint in a pub got to do with public health?  Public health is about environmental matters such as adequate sewerage, safe drinking water and regular waste collection.  It is not about interfering in people’s personal recreational choices.   You really are a biased twerp aren’t you Neil.

23)  Opposition to “political correctness”, quotas, equalities legislation, v. Equality, positive discrimination, anti-racism

All people are supposed to be equal under the law so why the hell should special interest groups have special considerations just because someone called them names and hurt their oh so fragile feelings?  Certain types get off calling people like me a “denier” and that I should be locked up for being a “climate criminal” but I don’t go whining to the police because I feel insulted and threatened.  Quotas restrict the market and force prices up which impacts on the poor.  Maybe you should have a word with deep green lefty Caroline Lucas about energy quotas and why it’s bad that the poor and elderly are at risk of freezing to death in order to save the planet from mythical CAGW.  As for positive discrimination and anti-racism, when I see secular homosexuals teaching militant alternative lifestyle choices in madrassas across the country we’ll talk, okay Neil?  Until then you can stick your divisive discrimination where the sun doesn’t shine because you see, I don’t condone discrimination of any kind, especially political fucking correctness.

The Biggest Cock in Georgia

Pavlov’s Cat has pictures of a giant cock he once saw.

Pavlov’s Cat, you ain’t seen nuttin’ yet!

Yes, I did once ask directions and was told to, “Turn left at The Big Chicken – you can’t miss it” and I thought some good ole boy was yanking my chain. But I didn’t want to appear rude (not being from those parts) and sure as eggs are eggs you can’t miss it and we got where we were going.

The Shirking Classes*

Graeme Paton, Education Editor of the Daily Telegraph has this to say:

Despite billions spent attempting to boost social mobility under Labour, academics found the gap between rich and poor pupils widened throughout early education.

You don’t say.  Neither do you define what academics consider to be rich or poor.  Does rich include the middle classes or are they only important for the purposes of being taxed into extinction and otherwise ignored as a demographic majority?

Academics said the number of books in the home, parental qualifications, regular mealtimes and bedtimes, the state of housing and the quality of early childcare all had an impact on children’s education.

So rich = professional  and professional = middle class even if a large chunk of them are treading water very hard just to stay afloat.  Therefore it’s low income blue collar workers and the unemployed we are obligated to be worried about.  Are they all so tragically incapable of owning a library card, setting domestic routines and playing with their kids while living in rented accomodation?  Is that what you’re saying?

But Dr Alice Sullivan, senior lecturer at the University of London’s Institute of Education, who led the research, said Government policies designed to improve parenting skills were not enough to address chronic under-performance among deprived pupils.

I’d like to hear what Dr Alice has to say on the chronic under-performance of state schools depriving kids of a decent education.

She suggested that welfare reforms – including access to housing and jobs – would have a bigger impact on school standards.

“Our research shows that while parenting is important, a policy focus on parenting alone is insufficient to tackle the impacts of social inequalities on children,” she said.

So crap state education passed beneath her radar then.  So what does Dr Alice suggest we do about these problem parents?

“Redistributive economic policies may be more effective than policies directly addressing parenting practices.”

Like that worked last time?  And the time before that?  Lefty morons like Dr Alice are happy to throw good money after bad because it’s what they do best.  When socialist wet dream projects fail spectacularly lefties always fall back on their tried and busted trusted spend, spend and spend again policies in the hope that no one will notice their expensive clusterfucks.  They then attempt to silence their critics by telling them how much is being squandered spent to make thing worse better.  After all, socialist cunts like Dr Alice ain’t the ones footing the bill, it’s poor buggers like us.  And since when did handing out other people’s cash improve anyone’s IQ?

As part of the latest study, academics tracked the performance of more than 11,000 seven-year-olds in reading and maths. They also analysed teachers’ assessments of children’s abilities in other subjects such as speaking and listening, writing, science, maths, PE and creative arts.

I hope the study was conducted over a level playing field.  Thousands of kids from penniless immigrant families have a tenuous or worse, non-existant grasp of the English language which would add bias to the study conclusion. We wouldn’t want to tax people on fudged or artificially skewed results now, would we…

The report – part of the Millennium Cohort Study, an on-going analysis of children across the UK born between 2000 and 2002 – compared education standards with pupils’ family backgrounds.

It found the children of parents in professional and managerial jobs were around eight months ahead of those with parents who were long-term unemployed.

Those bloody middle class scumbags depriving underpriviledged kids by being smarter, eh.  You know what really pisses me off?  The way the old grammar schools recruited dumb as rocks kids from poor and working class backgrounds for decades and gave them a sound education with excellent life prospects. That was so fucking patronising of them don’t you think, Dr Alice?  And, getting back to the study, what about the kids whose professional parents are unemployed thanks to Nein Arbeit?  What category do they fall into?  Or are they cast into limbo because they don’t fit the contructs of the study?

The study found this gap had widened over the last two years. A similar test carried out when pupils started school aged five found that the gap was just four months – half as wide.

So the conclusions we can draw from this are either the diminished parenting skills of the underclass are inversely proportional to the size of rent a lefty social engineer is seeking or state education is even more shit than we suspected and growing worse by the day.

*I’m not referring to people on benefits.  It’s the unfit for purpose state education system I have in my sights.

Religion of Peace

You have heard the sad news that Christopher Hitchens has been diagnosed with cancer?

How does a real religion of peace, and love, respond to its critics?

We must show love to Hitchens and pray for him.  Would he want our prayers?  Well his attitude might be that of one of his followers who commented on his cancer announcement:

“Spit in the eye of the religious and get well!” – Chris Phillips

I hate to break it to Chris and Christopher, but getting well won’t be spitting in our eyes.  It’ll give us reason to praise God.  Why?  Because we are going to pray that you do get well.  We’re going to pray that you recover and that through your rough journey ahead, the light of truth and faith will beam in your heart.

And I personally will pray that as Hitchens suffers in his battle, that he will look to the One who suffered for Him.  I pray he gets a glimpse of the One who came to save us from our disease of sin and who one day will return to end all pain, all tears, and all cancer.  My mother is with that One now, and I hope Christopher gets to meet both of them one day.

Or an alternative viewpoint:

radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam

Rosie O’Donnell


%d bloggers like this: