Put An 'X' in Which Box?

Who do we vote for at the next election?  The choices:

1. The party run by megalomaniacs & Trotskyites that:-

a) Sold off our gold reserves for a pittance and then spent the money on employing millions of people to do jobs that we didn’t need in the first place.  Who, in order to fund these jobs once the proceeds of the gold reserves had run out, went on to borrow billions of pounds in our name that we will never be able to pay back.

b) Took us to one war that cost the deaths of 179 British servicemen, injuries to 1000s more and £9 billion based on lie.  The lie conveniently covered up by the death (allegedly by suicide) of a leading scientific advisor.  And who also arranged the vilification of the BBC and one of its reporters in order prevent exposure of the lie.

c) That rewarded an ex-minister with the post of European Commissioner after he had been forced to resign twice following allegations of wrongdoing.

d) Signed away huge chunks of the country’s sovereignty to the EU without any mandate and often without informing the public.

e) Began the process of destroying the British Justice system by removing ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ from proof of guilt in criminal prosecutions; amongst other things.

f) Created an ‘open door’ immigration policy with total disregard to the consequences and thereby changing the face of Britain forever, creating friction and a rise in racism. 

g) Signed us up to a ‘human rights’ policy that seems to protect the rights of those some of the most undesirable people, and which can be used for absurd and trivial issues for which it was not intended.

h) Devised an NHS service so expensive and unworkable that it almost collapsed under the weight of its own bureaucracy.  This included a new contract for GPs that entitled them not to treat people in the evenings or at weekends.

i) Got us involved in a second unwinnable war on the other side of the globe that after 10 years has so far cost us £37 billion, the lives of nearly 450 British service people and God knows how many other casualties.  Afghanistan is now exporting more drugs to the UK than it did before we started.

j) Passed a new law for almost every day they were in office creating opportunities for many of the people mentioned in (a) above to snoop on you and/or prosecute you.

k) Kick started the break-up of the United Kingdom by devolving powers to the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament.

l) Introduced Student Loans that it are almost impossible to repay.

 

2. Maybe the party that: a) Promised a referendum about the EU and then reneged on it.

    b)  Set about changing the welfare system in a manner that makes life even more intolerable for the most vulnerable.  Pushing elderly and disabled people out of their homes and an exponential rise in food banks like we have not seen since the depression.

c) Continued the destruction of the British justice system by denying worthwhile Legal Aid representation to the vast majority of the public, handed over the court interpreter service to an incompetent con artist and is currently dismantling the probation service.

d) Did little or nothing to rectify the immigration policy referred to in 1f above.

e) Set about ‘reforming’ the NHS at enormous expense with no idea as to whether their plans will work.  (for 'reforming' read 'privatising')

f) Set about ‘reforming’ the education system at enormous expense with no idea as to whether their plans will work.  (for 'reforming' read 'privatising')

g) Discarded its historical identity and attempted to become all things to all men and set about tearing itself apart in order try to create a new one.

h) Introduced tuition fees at university and increased the afore-mentioned Student Loans so they are completely impossible to pay back.

i)  Handed over public service contracts worth billions of pounds to suppliers, many of whom are party donors and who pay their tax overseas and also have long established histories of incompetence and dishonesty.

 

3. Or perhaps the minority party that: a) joined a coalition government and then spent most its time preventing the same government from enacting some of its policies (thankfully some might say).

b) Made absolute and unconditional promises to its voters and then reneged on them.

c) Appointed a minister who subsequently ended up in prison for lying to a court.

d) Would readily hand over the keys to the borders, the treasury and just about everything else to the EU

d) Advances a load of half-baked idealistic policies imagining some post-electoral Utopia where people of all races, religions, sexuality, conviction and/or nationality suddenly experience a miraculous renaissance and start to live harmoniously side by side regardless of their history or culture.

 

4. Then of course there’s the party that champions the environment whose policies include: a) Protecting the environment from dangers that may or may not be (i) real, or (ii) caused by things we have any control over; and

b) Oh wait a minute that’s their only policy.

 

5. The party with less than 10 articulate politicians and holds amongst its electoral candidates a selection of extreme disaffected former members of (2) above and some the would have been at home alongside Oswald Mosely .  That has adopted as its manifesto all the worst policies from (2) above because before that only had one policy.  That promises to extract us from the EU and then afterwards what ??????

6. Of course we could choose any one of the parties that claim to be patriots and chooses to take to streets as a disorganised rabble as soon as anybody mentions nationality, colour, race or religion especially if any or all these can be perceived as coming from outside the UK; who are thinly disguised Nazi xenophobes.

7. Or the other party that claim to be patriots and chooses to take to streets as a disorganised rabble as soon as anybody mentions nationality, colour, race or religion especially if any or all these can be perceived as coming from outside the UK; who are completely undisguised Nazi xenophobes.

 

Why can’t we just have the option ‘None of the above’?

Be Back Soon

Sorry I've been away, but my critical juices dried up a bit for a while, but I find recent events seem to have got them flowing again.  Should be a little missive next week.

Yet Another Pointless Waste Of A Life

Ben Kinsella stabbed to death because he failed to show 'respect' to his killers. Not paying respect to a gang of knife-wielding, drug-crazed lunatics; whatever next?

What Price ‘Stability’ in the Housing Market?

So Gordon Brown is considering intervening in the housing market in order to kick start the economy. This, only weeks, after the Chancellor has told his Cabinet colleagues that the kitty is dry and any additional spending would need to be met from existing budgets. When will this so-called prudent economist ever learn that it is precisely because of government policies that the economy is in the diabolical state it is? Borrowing more money to shore up his socialist dogma has no benefit; other than to convince the most gullible that he knows what he is doing. If Gordon Brown thinks that he can buy his way back into the hearts of the British public then he is more stupid than I thought. Enabling more people to buy over-priced houses they can’t afford with money the banks haven’t got to lend will not get this country back on track. It would take a lot more than that or the prospect of some cheap loft insulation to pull the wool over the eyes of the beleaguered electorate this time (I hope and pray).

The fall in the value of houses, that some have called a crash, is in fact no more than realignment to the rest of the economy. The vastly over-inflated price of property has been fuelled at the government’s encouragement in order to ensure greater and greater income from taxation. Of course the banks have colluded in this by lending money on properties to people who have little or no hope of ever paying it back. I mean, what on earth is a 120% mortgage all about? Even a normal adjustment in the market would make that seem obviously a bad investment for any sane bank. However, sanity is in pretty short supply with Bush in the White House and Labour in Downing Street. Banks on both sides of ‘pond’ have been allowed put the whole world economy in jeopardy in order to fuel a ‘feel good factor’ among their respective populations and distract them from turmoil and incompetence of their administrations.

But never mind we have yet another cabinet member to keep us entertained; with the Schools Secretary going on TV demonstrating healthy cooking for schoolchildren. I wonder, is he the first government minister to be appointed to his post because he has the same name as the language he speaks (educational balls)?

Jester, Amuse Thyself

So Charles Clarke thinks that Gordon Brown should resign if things don’t improve? So what? Almost everybody else thinks he should have resigned before he came into office. But even so, surely Mr Clarke’s remarks are a bit rich coming from someone who after a few months in charge of a government department, it was described as being ‘unfit for purpose’ by one his own colleagues. Of course, these comments come from a man who has yet to master the art of shaving, has the savoir-faire of a Tourette’s sufferer and the dress sense of a ‘Big Issue’ salesman.

But what else can we expect from a Labour Party politician; the organisation that has brought us the seemingly endless succession of clueless buffoons, incompetents and dogmatic pseudo-socialists we have had the misfortune to call a government over the last eleven years? Let us review this Z list of political wannabes and failures; it includes such illustrious names as: John Prescott, Frank Dobson, David Blunkett, Geoff Hoon, Des Brown and Stephen Byers to name but a few examples of the embarrassingly ineffectual and damaging personalities that we have had to suffer in Westminster over the last few years. Against this lot George W. Bush looks positively erudite.

Ours is a government that has, amongst other things, masterminded the break-up of the United Kingdom; the handover of (for all practical purposes) sovereignty of the nation to a European federal government; and the destruction of our economy. Now, finally, just as it all starts to go to hell in a handcart; they start to spot the inadequacies of each other.

Who Sets The Standards For Our Police?

On 19th August I read that ‘a man was arrested when he photographed a police van outside a fish and chip shop after he had seen it reversing the wrong way along a one-way street’. Apparently an officer came running from the shop and battered the camera from the man’s hand on to the floor and arrested him for three crimes, none of which he had committed. After the incident ‘the officer faced a disciplinary inquiry and was made to apologise in person to Mr Carter but still held on to his job’; and the deputy chief constable also wrote to the man, apologising for the officer's 'totally unacceptable' behaviour.

Today I read ‘that two policemen have been sacked and a third told to resign for assaulting and threatening a 16-year-old boy and then trying to cover up their actions’.

What’s with this ‘unacceptable behaviour 'and 'made to apologise'? And what on earth do they mean ‘sacked and told to resign’? In any just society police officers are held to higher standard of accountability than the rest of us plebs. In both cases there were attempts to pervert the course of justice which would have brought prosecution and automatic imprisonment for those found guilty. But what do I know?

As One ‘Criminal’ To Another

I read that our illustrious government now intends to recruit hundreds of people whose sole job will be to issue ‘on the spot’ fines to people who contravene one of the regulations or bylaws introduced to make us a ‘better’ society. These will include parking, littering, playing in the street, annoying your neighbour, and practically anything to do with wheelie bins, refuse collection or recycling.

If you fill your wheelie bin too full you will be fined; if you leave your wheelie bin too far from the kerb you will be fined; if you leave your wheelie bin the wrong way round you will be fined; if you put additional rubbish bags out with your wheelie bin you will be fined; if you put your rubbish in the wrong container you will be fined; and if you put your rubbish out on the wrong day you will be fined; and what’s more if you obstruct the pavement with your rubbish you will be fined. Of course if you drive any or all of your rubbish to the tip in order to avoid falling foul of any of the afore-mentioned regulations and pump additional greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, that’s okay.

Since coming to power this government has introduced laws creating over 3,000 new criminal offences. These come under guise of improving or protecting the environment, and enhancing law order.

By the time this government leaves office there will only be two classes of people left in this country; criminals and people who work for the government. New Labour, new Stasi.