Hello'
Ladies and Gents I give you Austin Michell MP and his hilarious expenses claims with some help from the little lady. God I wish they'd all drop dead.
Cheerio
Showing posts with label idiots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label idiots. Show all posts
12/11/2009
11/02/2009
Look!
Hello,
It's not the most startling or original observation in the world but I am compelled to repeat it -Sting and his awful wife are tools of the devil. Look at them. I've seen people assaulted for less. Come to think of it I've been assaulted for less.
Cheerio
It's not the most startling or original observation in the world but I am compelled to repeat it -Sting and his awful wife are tools of the devil. Look at them. I've seen people assaulted for less. Come to think of it I've been assaulted for less.
Cheerio
10/16/2009
Let's Hope Jan Moir Dies Fucking a Goat.
Hello,
What drugs is Jan Moir on? Has a tragic accident in the kitchen caused a logic bypass? What on earth had poor Stephen Gately ever done to anyone?
As you may be aware Stephen Gately from Boyzone died rather unexpectedly last weekend in Majorca. Given his youth and the sudden nature of his death a postmortem was carried out which found his death was from natural causes. In addition the police investigated presumably to establish what happened on the evening leading up to his death and to rule out anything more sinister than a tragic premature and sudden death.
Despite having no evidence or expertise in investigating deaths, Jan Moir has decided that the coroner got it wrong and Mr Gately died because he was gay. I can only assume that Jan's first draft entitled 'The Filthy Queer Had it Coming' proved too much even for The Daily Mail. Consequently the repulsive, fat bitch had to haul her big, lardy, arse back to her keyboard and find some justification for rejoicing over the barely cold corpse of a dead man in his early thirties.
I'm afraid Jan doesn't do very well. She gives us an account of the the known events of the evening and implies that these must be the real cause of death despite all the evidence pointing towards natural causes. In any case even if he'd died of exhaustion following a record breaking horse orgy his death would still be sad, what with him being a fairly pleasant young man with friends and relatives who loved him.
Incidentally if Jan Moir really feels so strongly about death resulting risky lifestyles she would be better seeking help for her most obvious problem - lack of appetite control and exercise. Her byline photo shows that she is not merely overweight but morbidly obese. It's hypocritical to go pointing fingers at dead gays for what she feels were their dangerous, sleazy lifestyles when she is very likely to die prematurely as a result of her excessive consumption of food. Judge not lest ye be judged porky! That's just some of those Christian values the Mail are so fond of but never get round to practicing.
Still not content with dancing on Stephen Gately's grave Kevin McGee, the ex partner of Matt Lucas is dragged into it. Kevin McGee killed himself. Stephen Gately died of natural causes but they were both gay and in civil partnerships so in Jan's mind there must be a link. According to Moir their completely unrelated and the entirely different circumstances of their deaths 'strike another blow to the myth of happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships'.
I must say I had no idea there was any such myth. It must be news to the government as well because there are procedures in place for ending such partnerships. It's almost as if it's expected that some partnerships will succeed and some will fail. I expect that's why the few folk I know who are in one gave it a bit thought before taking the plunge.
Quite how two deaths prove anything about homosexuality or civil partnerships is not made clear but I'm sure Jan knows what she's talking about. After all she can prove a coroner is wrong simply by disapproving of the corpses lifestyle. Fuck me, fatty is a genius. This brings me to some troubling news for married hetrosexuals. Neil Ellerbeck was recently jailed for killing his wife, not only that a married woman was locked up a few weeks back for fiddling with kids and I think we can all think of someone we know who has been divorced. Now if you completely ignore all the happy and successful marriages out there I think you'll agree the above cases all demolish the case of marriage.
The headline of Moir's article is quite peculiar. I can't see anything strange, lonely or troubling about Gately's death. He died in his sleep after what sounds to me like a good night out. The only troubling aspect of his death was that he was so young. Then again I rather like the idea of folk being happy and enjoying themselves whereas Moir seeks to cheer herself up in between snacks by dragging everyone else down. I can only assume it took a crowbar or the miracle of photoshop to get her smiling like an ageing hooker in her byline snap rather than displaying her usual cats arse of a mouth.
It's ironic that Stephen Gately stayed in the closet for the early part of his career for fear of public reaction to his sexuality, only to come out and find reactions ranged from supportive to indifferent. I took that as a sign we might have moved on a bit. And indeed we have. Shame Moir's idea of progress is waiting until gays are dead before launching nasty, unwarranted, small minded poisonous attacks on them.
Cheerio
What drugs is Jan Moir on? Has a tragic accident in the kitchen caused a logic bypass? What on earth had poor Stephen Gately ever done to anyone?
As you may be aware Stephen Gately from Boyzone died rather unexpectedly last weekend in Majorca. Given his youth and the sudden nature of his death a postmortem was carried out which found his death was from natural causes. In addition the police investigated presumably to establish what happened on the evening leading up to his death and to rule out anything more sinister than a tragic premature and sudden death.
Despite having no evidence or expertise in investigating deaths, Jan Moir has decided that the coroner got it wrong and Mr Gately died because he was gay. I can only assume that Jan's first draft entitled 'The Filthy Queer Had it Coming' proved too much even for The Daily Mail. Consequently the repulsive, fat bitch had to haul her big, lardy, arse back to her keyboard and find some justification for rejoicing over the barely cold corpse of a dead man in his early thirties.
I'm afraid Jan doesn't do very well. She gives us an account of the the known events of the evening and implies that these must be the real cause of death despite all the evidence pointing towards natural causes. In any case even if he'd died of exhaustion following a record breaking horse orgy his death would still be sad, what with him being a fairly pleasant young man with friends and relatives who loved him.
Incidentally if Jan Moir really feels so strongly about death resulting risky lifestyles she would be better seeking help for her most obvious problem - lack of appetite control and exercise. Her byline photo shows that she is not merely overweight but morbidly obese. It's hypocritical to go pointing fingers at dead gays for what she feels were their dangerous, sleazy lifestyles when she is very likely to die prematurely as a result of her excessive consumption of food. Judge not lest ye be judged porky! That's just some of those Christian values the Mail are so fond of but never get round to practicing.
Still not content with dancing on Stephen Gately's grave Kevin McGee, the ex partner of Matt Lucas is dragged into it. Kevin McGee killed himself. Stephen Gately died of natural causes but they were both gay and in civil partnerships so in Jan's mind there must be a link. According to Moir their completely unrelated and the entirely different circumstances of their deaths 'strike another blow to the myth of happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships'.
I must say I had no idea there was any such myth. It must be news to the government as well because there are procedures in place for ending such partnerships. It's almost as if it's expected that some partnerships will succeed and some will fail. I expect that's why the few folk I know who are in one gave it a bit thought before taking the plunge.
Quite how two deaths prove anything about homosexuality or civil partnerships is not made clear but I'm sure Jan knows what she's talking about. After all she can prove a coroner is wrong simply by disapproving of the corpses lifestyle. Fuck me, fatty is a genius. This brings me to some troubling news for married hetrosexuals. Neil Ellerbeck was recently jailed for killing his wife, not only that a married woman was locked up a few weeks back for fiddling with kids and I think we can all think of someone we know who has been divorced. Now if you completely ignore all the happy and successful marriages out there I think you'll agree the above cases all demolish the case of marriage.
The headline of Moir's article is quite peculiar. I can't see anything strange, lonely or troubling about Gately's death. He died in his sleep after what sounds to me like a good night out. The only troubling aspect of his death was that he was so young. Then again I rather like the idea of folk being happy and enjoying themselves whereas Moir seeks to cheer herself up in between snacks by dragging everyone else down. I can only assume it took a crowbar or the miracle of photoshop to get her smiling like an ageing hooker in her byline snap rather than displaying her usual cats arse of a mouth.
It's ironic that Stephen Gately stayed in the closet for the early part of his career for fear of public reaction to his sexuality, only to come out and find reactions ranged from supportive to indifferent. I took that as a sign we might have moved on a bit. And indeed we have. Shame Moir's idea of progress is waiting until gays are dead before launching nasty, unwarranted, small minded poisonous attacks on them.
Cheerio
10/26/2008
Easy Lionel!
Hello,
It's not often the world of gaming comes to my attention but that outlet for mediocre drivel the Metro letters page has been quivering with rage about Muslims getting offended.
I am referring to Sony's decision to withdraw 'LittleBigPlanet' because a song featured on it 'might' offend Muslims. Please note that is might rather than will.
I will leave aside Sony's failure to acknowledge my outrage at them sticking three words together because of the calm disposition I am famed for. No laughing at the back.
Anyway this piece of nonsense started because a Muslim gamer who had been playing the game in trials advised them that the use of music quoting The Qu'ran 'could' be offensive. Please note 'could' rather than is.
Clearly Sony have commercial considerations to take into account, Muslim's money being as good anyone else's but I'm still puzzled. The controversial music was recorded by Toumani Diabate who intended it as a celebration of The Qu'ran perhaps with him being a Muslim. From what I can gather he is affronted at the notion that he's done anything offensive.
A simple reading of the facts indicates that there is no single Muslim opinion on this. Some Muslims will be offended, others will be indifferent and some might be chuffed at the inclusion of a bit of religious music in the game. Nevertheless I am puzzled as to why the views of the easily offended should take precedence.
If it's because Sony are concerned about violent reprisals then I have to say I find this troubling.
It is, of course, true that there a minority of Muslims who have no qualms about the use of violence and clearly these people are a significant threat but pandering to them is hardly likely to reduce that threat. As anyone bullied in school can tell you backing down to bullies doesn't make them go away it just spurs them on to greater heights. Arguably Sony have social responsibility to publish and be damned in defence of freedom of expression. After all without that they'd find it hard to sell any games at all.
Furthermore Islam is a world religion with as many, if not more adherents amongst the poor, ill-educated and dispossessed as amongst the affluent and well educated. Is it wise to perpetuate the notion that only those who shout loudest, adopt the most extreme positions or bomb most will be listened to? Unfortunately that message won't only be absorbed the the black slaves of Sudanese Muslim Arabs or women treated like animals in the theocracies of the Middle East, the folk who want to blow up your flight to Malaga will be taking note too.
The only alternative to us all putting up with each other is perpetual war or a heavily policed, segregated world. Personally I'd prefer it we could all co-exist quite amicably. Strengthening tolerant and progressive voices is one means of achieving this. Acting like a spinster fleeing a mouse every time you might ruffle a few Islamic feathers is as bad as actively promoting oppression.
I shall end by stating that I have no particular wish to see Muslim's offended. There are aspects of Islam I like and aspects that appall me - as with every other religion I've studied. I don't mention this out of fear or a belief that all and every Muslim is a terrorist. It's not pandering to extremists. It's true I wouldn't bother with a statement like this if I were criticising Christianity. I do so only to distance myself from the knuckle draggers who know enough to tart up their anti- immigrant bilge up in concern about the influence of Islam but not enough to know that it really is unlikely every Pakistani who comes to Britain get's £30,000 cash from the government at the airport.
Cheerio
A simple reading of the facts indicates that there is no single Muslim opinion on this. Some Muslims will be offended, others will be indifferent and some might be chuffed at the inclusion of a bit of religious music in the game. Nevertheless I am puzzled as to why the views of the easily offended should take precedence.
If it's because Sony are concerned about violent reprisals then I have to say I find this troubling.
It is, of course, true that there a minority of Muslims who have no qualms about the use of violence and clearly these people are a significant threat but pandering to them is hardly likely to reduce that threat. As anyone bullied in school can tell you backing down to bullies doesn't make them go away it just spurs them on to greater heights. Arguably Sony have social responsibility to publish and be damned in defence of freedom of expression. After all without that they'd find it hard to sell any games at all.
Furthermore Islam is a world religion with as many, if not more adherents amongst the poor, ill-educated and dispossessed as amongst the affluent and well educated. Is it wise to perpetuate the notion that only those who shout loudest, adopt the most extreme positions or bomb most will be listened to? Unfortunately that message won't only be absorbed the the black slaves of Sudanese Muslim Arabs or women treated like animals in the theocracies of the Middle East, the folk who want to blow up your flight to Malaga will be taking note too.
The only alternative to us all putting up with each other is perpetual war or a heavily policed, segregated world. Personally I'd prefer it we could all co-exist quite amicably. Strengthening tolerant and progressive voices is one means of achieving this. Acting like a spinster fleeing a mouse every time you might ruffle a few Islamic feathers is as bad as actively promoting oppression.
I shall end by stating that I have no particular wish to see Muslim's offended. There are aspects of Islam I like and aspects that appall me - as with every other religion I've studied. I don't mention this out of fear or a belief that all and every Muslim is a terrorist. It's not pandering to extremists. It's true I wouldn't bother with a statement like this if I were criticising Christianity. I do so only to distance myself from the knuckle draggers who know enough to tart up their anti- immigrant bilge up in concern about the influence of Islam but not enough to know that it really is unlikely every Pakistani who comes to Britain get's £30,000 cash from the government at the airport.
Cheerio
9/10/2008
A Julie Bindel Fan Comments!
Hello,
There I was devoid of much to sharpen my claws on when along comes a member of the Julie Bindel fan club. A few of weeks back I asked for help with a spot of gardening. Around three weeks later a Bindelette seizes the chance to attack!
Apparently next time she's gardening she'll be 'worried' about who's she's with. Good God! Does it think I rule all the gardeners in Britain? Does she think I'm going to order them all to rape her, kill her and dump her body on the compost heap? Does it think at all?
No wonder it was too embarrassed to put a name to it's pathetic blathering. What's gone wrong with the anonymice? I remember when it was all death threats and bad spelling round these parts. Now I'm reduced to laughing at 'worried' gardeners. Changed days indeed.
Cheers
There I was devoid of much to sharpen my claws on when along comes a member of the Julie Bindel fan club. A few of weeks back I asked for help with a spot of gardening. Around three weeks later a Bindelette seizes the chance to attack!
Apparently next time she's gardening she'll be 'worried' about who's she's with. Good God! Does it think I rule all the gardeners in Britain? Does she think I'm going to order them all to rape her, kill her and dump her body on the compost heap? Does it think at all?
No wonder it was too embarrassed to put a name to it's pathetic blathering. What's gone wrong with the anonymice? I remember when it was all death threats and bad spelling round these parts. Now I'm reduced to laughing at 'worried' gardeners. Changed days indeed.
Cheers
8/16/2008
Oh Looky!
Hello,
I just picked up The Guardian two minutes ago and as a result have discovered the most wonderful website! It is a compilation of the wit and wisdom of the various contributors to the BBC Have Your Say pages.
It's almost impossible to choose a favourite -though Jack Taft has to be a contender. Then again Jim Bob's expose of those evil darkies and their selfish insistence on eating hot food is comedy gold. Still there can only be one winner and after much dithering I crown Angela of Birmingham the HYS Queen for her comments on lads mags and her apparent belief that they encourage paedophilia by showing adults with their baps out.
Go and marvel!
UPDATE!!!!
Sorry Angela remove your crown and step off the podium! I have a new winner. Before I introduce you to the improbably named 'Mohammed Pork' of Mecca, Pakistan let me ask you to think about possible answers to the following question.
It's a tricky one but nothing and I mean nothing could have prepared me for Mr Pork's reply;
'Time has come to anhiliate pakistan and bangladesh from the map of the world… the muslims need to be punished…they have lost their license to live'
Mohammed Pork, Mecca, Pakistan
Seriously can we give this guy his own show? I can see it now 'Pork's World' in which Big Mo Pork gives us his views on the issues of the day before choosing which Muslim nation should be eradicated at the end of each show in revenge for the world's woes. Imagine the studio audience banging their feet chanting 'no licence to live' as Mo announces that the congestion charge is just sharia law under a so called trendy pc name and blows up Iran as revenge! Obviously the PC brigade would never allow Mo to nuke Iran for real but he could do something symbolic like write 'Iran' on a single mother's forehead and let the studio audience kick her to death.
I just picked up The Guardian two minutes ago and as a result have discovered the most wonderful website! It is a compilation of the wit and wisdom of the various contributors to the BBC Have Your Say pages.
It's almost impossible to choose a favourite -though Jack Taft has to be a contender. Then again Jim Bob's expose of those evil darkies and their selfish insistence on eating hot food is comedy gold. Still there can only be one winner and after much dithering I crown Angela of Birmingham the HYS Queen for her comments on lads mags and her apparent belief that they encourage paedophilia by showing adults with their baps out.
Go and marvel!
UPDATE!!!!
Sorry Angela remove your crown and step off the podium! I have a new winner. Before I introduce you to the improbably named 'Mohammed Pork' of Mecca, Pakistan let me ask you to think about possible answers to the following question.
'What should be done to improve parenting skills?'
It's a tricky one but nothing and I mean nothing could have prepared me for Mr Pork's reply;
'Time has come to anhiliate pakistan and bangladesh from the map of the world… the muslims need to be punished…they have lost their license to live'
Mohammed Pork, Mecca, Pakistan
Seriously can we give this guy his own show? I can see it now 'Pork's World' in which Big Mo Pork gives us his views on the issues of the day before choosing which Muslim nation should be eradicated at the end of each show in revenge for the world's woes. Imagine the studio audience banging their feet chanting 'no licence to live' as Mo announces that the congestion charge is just sharia law under a so called trendy pc name and blows up Iran as revenge! Obviously the PC brigade would never allow Mo to nuke Iran for real but he could do something symbolic like write 'Iran' on a single mother's forehead and let the studio audience kick her to death.
7/20/2008
Eavesdropping
Hello,
It's not a habit I'm proud of but I do enjoy a good eavesdrop so when I overheard a Labour activist by the name of Frank chatting to an accquitance about the campaign I couldn't help but take an active interest.
Could Frank be the most sensible man in the Labour Party? I merely ask because his opinion of the current state of the party seems to chime with my own -well up to a point.
He thinks very highly of Margaret Curran, I am somewhat less impressed though I'd wholeheartedly agree with his view that she should have been first choice rather than fourth or fifth. She is without doubt the best of a pretty poor bunch.
Poor Frank like me is at a loss as to who the new leader in the Scottish Parliament should be. With Margaret Curran out the running he's not too impressed with the remaining candidates. He reckons Andy Kerr will get it despite being 'another mamby-pamby'.
I doubt he'd endorse my wholehearted support of Charlie Gordon for the job. I somehow can't see a staunch Labour man finding an even bigger laughing stock in charge as funny as I do.
Cheerio
It's not a habit I'm proud of but I do enjoy a good eavesdrop so when I overheard a Labour activist by the name of Frank chatting to an accquitance about the campaign I couldn't help but take an active interest.
Could Frank be the most sensible man in the Labour Party? I merely ask because his opinion of the current state of the party seems to chime with my own -well up to a point.
He thinks very highly of Margaret Curran, I am somewhat less impressed though I'd wholeheartedly agree with his view that she should have been first choice rather than fourth or fifth. She is without doubt the best of a pretty poor bunch.
Poor Frank like me is at a loss as to who the new leader in the Scottish Parliament should be. With Margaret Curran out the running he's not too impressed with the remaining candidates. He reckons Andy Kerr will get it despite being 'another mamby-pamby'.
I doubt he'd endorse my wholehearted support of Charlie Gordon for the job. I somehow can't see a staunch Labour man finding an even bigger laughing stock in charge as funny as I do.
Cheerio
6/22/2008
Have These People Actually Met A Benefit Claimant?
Hello,
There I was heartily cheering on good old Mr Eugenides for his excellent post on Taysides bribery of smokers to quit the noble habit, when I spoiled my day by reading the comments. I should say that some of them are quite marvellous but a couple got my goat.
Tayside are paying the bribes by way of a smart card that prevents the recipient spending the money on booze and fags. Would you be surprised to learn that some folk think that in part at least it is a good idea?
'Why should we taxpayers have to pay for the fags & booze for feckless scrounging deadbeats?
And further, if benefit dosh could only be spent on essential "non-fun" items I dare say we'd see a lot more of the parasites out looking for work and perhaps even taking some of the jobs which they currently think are beneath em.'
It may surprise Bulldog to learn that in the real world there are some people who should actually be receiving benefit. I know it's amazing but some folk are genuinely disabled. Why in God's name should we be able to tell them how to spend their money? He/she might want to target fraudsters with his proposals but there is no way of doing so without treating genuine folk worse than we already do.
To be fair it is quite difficult for the average person to make sense of the complicated UK benefits system but I would urge anyone who is in the least bit interested in it to make the effort to learn more about it and meet some claimants. I believe Citizens Advice deal with a fair few benefit claims and take volunteers, failing that if you have knowledge and experience of disabilities you may be able to get paid work on benefit tribunals should a vacancy arise. Both these opportunities will bring you into contact with all the claimants you can handle, including those scrounging old wasters aged 65+ that want something for a life times work. Worse still there are scroungers on the Down's Syndrome bandwagon and their carers looking for a handout. My recent caseload includes such scrounging wasters as a gang raped and battered woman who went on benefits after her employer sacked her for taking too much time off after the attack, a 9 year old with very severe autism, a woman who contracted MRSA after a double mastectomy two months ago. Quite frankly if these people or their carers want to spend a few quid on a pint and 20 fags then I reckon they've earned it. Unless of course you think they've started cutting their tits off to scam money?
I do realise that there are chancers out there. I've spent many a happy hour asking people who are too frightened to leave the house how they managed to get to my office unaccompanied. Incidentally the answer is usually indicates that my idiot assistant told them to put that on the form. It is at times like this I realise I'd be a rotten lawyer -I cannot bring myself to make much of an effort for these people at tribunals - I should also add with regret add that these are my native as opposed to my refugee clients who could teach us all a thing or two about standing on your own two feet and how fucking ace this country really is. On the other hand I'll do absolutely everything within my power for a genuine case. I'm often found poring over dull benefit law books into the wee small hours when I've got a proper case. It is of course the chancers that bring the whole notion of state benefits into disrepute and I've said it before and will say it again a proper medical not just a dishonest multiple choice shambles would boot thousands off benefits and allow the genuine claimant to avoid the unpleasantness of appeals and endless form filling.
Assisting small businesses and charities to hire disabled folk would also see yet more folk able to get by without benefits. Certain disabilities cost money to accommodate and this is money that small organisations cannot afford. When I was self-employed I couldn't have employed anyone who was wheelchair bound for example, as my premises were up three flights of stairs and the cost of installing a chair lift would have put me out of business. I deplore unfair discrimination but had anyone wheelchair bound approached me for a job I would have been forced to come up with a good excuse to say no.
Similarly changing the emphasis of work focused interviews from trying to shove folk into any old job regardless of suitability to installing the idea that they are in charge of their own life and are capable of generating their own income. The underclass are the most natural and unconscious entrepreneurs of any class. All that drug dealing, money lending and flogging of stolen goods should give us a clue where their talents lie. Make it easier and more worthwhile to go legit and they'll follow the money. There's stacks of tax payers cash swilling about, use it properly and we'll all be on tax cut.
I must admit I'm baffled by the benefit claimant= scum argument. When I was unemployed I claimed Jobseekers Allowance and then when I started my business the £30 a week for six months the tory government were dishing out to folk who started businesses. When I was on JSA I put £30 p/w into buying stock for my business and had the princely sum of £6.50 p/w to spend on myself, as I was living at home home I spent that on fags, to this day I cannot see why my right to do so should have been taken away. More so and this is one for the capitalists reading, when I made a fair bit selling t-shirts decorated with fag burns- seriously they flew out the door at £14 a pop .
Just think if the state had deprived me of fags they'd have destroyed a lucrative and enjoyable source of income. I'd also like the claimant =scum mob to tell me when I ceased to be scum, was it when I decided to start a business, when I got a loan to get it going, when my enterprise allowance ran out or am I tainted forever by having claimed state benefits over a decade ago? I'm genuinely intrigued.
Cheerio
There I was heartily cheering on good old Mr Eugenides for his excellent post on Taysides bribery of smokers to quit the noble habit, when I spoiled my day by reading the comments. I should say that some of them are quite marvellous but a couple got my goat.
Tayside are paying the bribes by way of a smart card that prevents the recipient spending the money on booze and fags. Would you be surprised to learn that some folk think that in part at least it is a good idea?
'Why should we taxpayers have to pay for the fags & booze for feckless scrounging deadbeats?
And further, if benefit dosh could only be spent on essential "non-fun" items I dare say we'd see a lot more of the parasites out looking for work and perhaps even taking some of the jobs which they currently think are beneath em.'
It may surprise Bulldog to learn that in the real world there are some people who should actually be receiving benefit. I know it's amazing but some folk are genuinely disabled. Why in God's name should we be able to tell them how to spend their money? He/she might want to target fraudsters with his proposals but there is no way of doing so without treating genuine folk worse than we already do.
To be fair it is quite difficult for the average person to make sense of the complicated UK benefits system but I would urge anyone who is in the least bit interested in it to make the effort to learn more about it and meet some claimants. I believe Citizens Advice deal with a fair few benefit claims and take volunteers, failing that if you have knowledge and experience of disabilities you may be able to get paid work on benefit tribunals should a vacancy arise. Both these opportunities will bring you into contact with all the claimants you can handle, including those scrounging old wasters aged 65+ that want something for a life times work. Worse still there are scroungers on the Down's Syndrome bandwagon and their carers looking for a handout. My recent caseload includes such scrounging wasters as a gang raped and battered woman who went on benefits after her employer sacked her for taking too much time off after the attack, a 9 year old with very severe autism, a woman who contracted MRSA after a double mastectomy two months ago. Quite frankly if these people or their carers want to spend a few quid on a pint and 20 fags then I reckon they've earned it. Unless of course you think they've started cutting their tits off to scam money?
I do realise that there are chancers out there. I've spent many a happy hour asking people who are too frightened to leave the house how they managed to get to my office unaccompanied. Incidentally the answer is usually indicates that my idiot assistant told them to put that on the form. It is at times like this I realise I'd be a rotten lawyer -I cannot bring myself to make much of an effort for these people at tribunals - I should also add with regret add that these are my native as opposed to my refugee clients who could teach us all a thing or two about standing on your own two feet and how fucking ace this country really is. On the other hand I'll do absolutely everything within my power for a genuine case. I'm often found poring over dull benefit law books into the wee small hours when I've got a proper case. It is of course the chancers that bring the whole notion of state benefits into disrepute and I've said it before and will say it again a proper medical not just a dishonest multiple choice shambles would boot thousands off benefits and allow the genuine claimant to avoid the unpleasantness of appeals and endless form filling.
Assisting small businesses and charities to hire disabled folk would also see yet more folk able to get by without benefits. Certain disabilities cost money to accommodate and this is money that small organisations cannot afford. When I was self-employed I couldn't have employed anyone who was wheelchair bound for example, as my premises were up three flights of stairs and the cost of installing a chair lift would have put me out of business. I deplore unfair discrimination but had anyone wheelchair bound approached me for a job I would have been forced to come up with a good excuse to say no.
Similarly changing the emphasis of work focused interviews from trying to shove folk into any old job regardless of suitability to installing the idea that they are in charge of their own life and are capable of generating their own income. The underclass are the most natural and unconscious entrepreneurs of any class. All that drug dealing, money lending and flogging of stolen goods should give us a clue where their talents lie. Make it easier and more worthwhile to go legit and they'll follow the money. There's stacks of tax payers cash swilling about, use it properly and we'll all be on tax cut.
I must admit I'm baffled by the benefit claimant= scum argument. When I was unemployed I claimed Jobseekers Allowance and then when I started my business the £30 a week for six months the tory government were dishing out to folk who started businesses. When I was on JSA I put £30 p/w into buying stock for my business and had the princely sum of £6.50 p/w to spend on myself, as I was living at home home I spent that on fags, to this day I cannot see why my right to do so should have been taken away. More so and this is one for the capitalists reading, when I made a fair bit selling t-shirts decorated with fag burns- seriously they flew out the door at £14 a pop .
Just think if the state had deprived me of fags they'd have destroyed a lucrative and enjoyable source of income. I'd also like the claimant =scum mob to tell me when I ceased to be scum, was it when I decided to start a business, when I got a loan to get it going, when my enterprise allowance ran out or am I tainted forever by having claimed state benefits over a decade ago? I'm genuinely intrigued.
Cheerio
6/07/2008
It's Not Us it's You.
Hello,
Some of you may recall I wrote a rather rude post a while back about Tanya Gold. Would you believe it she's annoyed me again?
On my internet travels -well checking my stats and scrutinising what brought people to this well of loneliness, I came across Tanya's account of speed dating.
This article or rather disgraceful piece of snobbery and hollow intellectual boasting just about sums this moron up. It poses the question which I'm sure we've all asked ourselves, do men prefer 'dazzlingly literate human rights lawyers' or 'gibbering idiots who work as florists'.
It's perhaps symptomatic of living in a predominantly working class city but snobbery of this variety always knocks me off my feet. Has some form of class apartheid been introduced where Ms Gold lives? I merely ask because her idea of what she thinks folk who work in florists must be like beggars belief.
In the interests of research Fat Tan hauls her vast arse out speed dating, the first time pretending to be a human rights lawyer and the second pretending to be a florist. She skews her research by cunningly behaving like an aggressive, objectionable bore in her guise as a lawyer. What this is meant to tell us about men isn't clear. I cannot stand people who endlessly bang on about their qualifications or folk who try and foist their opinions on you at totally inappropriate moments and I'm a woman. Is a speed dating event really the right place to air your views on wearing leather or the Middle East?
Of course unlike Fat Tan I'm not not single and even when I was I didn't really mind. I've always been able to get along nicely, anything additional is just a bonus. Poor Tan -a fine brain and not a shred of dignity or self reliance! Even when I was single I was rarely short of company, perhaps that's why I never felt the need to write self pitying articles complaining that men don't fancy me.
Anyway to return to her contempt for florists of all people. What on earth this largely female group of semi-skilled working class people did to rile feminist Tanya is never explained but her contempt for them is obvious. To convince her potential suitors she is a florist she giggles a lot, pretends not to know what a geneticist is, asks what a chair is, asks why water is wet and most hilarious of all pretended that she wanted to open her own florists.
I drew the conclusion a while back that what most western feminists mean by women's rights is the world saying how high when a middle class women says jump. We see endless articles by stuck up middens on juggling career and motherhood or the pain of being mildly rebuked for some lifestyle choice or another but precious few on juggling a life worth living with a pitiful existence in a theocracy or the miserable lot of elderly women on crime ridden council schemes.
I wouldn't mind if they'd at least be honest about it. Perhaps we could do a deal those folk interested in the well being of women could call ourselves feminists and Tanya Gold and chums could be known as Violet Elizabeth Bott's Barmy Army. At least that way we'd all know what we were getting. Honestly every time Tanya Gold uses the word feminist I want to alert Trading Standards or reach for a blunt instrument.
Cheerio
Some of you may recall I wrote a rather rude post a while back about Tanya Gold. Would you believe it she's annoyed me again?
On my internet travels -well checking my stats and scrutinising what brought people to this well of loneliness, I came across Tanya's account of speed dating.
This article or rather disgraceful piece of snobbery and hollow intellectual boasting just about sums this moron up. It poses the question which I'm sure we've all asked ourselves, do men prefer 'dazzlingly literate human rights lawyers' or 'gibbering idiots who work as florists'.
It's perhaps symptomatic of living in a predominantly working class city but snobbery of this variety always knocks me off my feet. Has some form of class apartheid been introduced where Ms Gold lives? I merely ask because her idea of what she thinks folk who work in florists must be like beggars belief.
In the interests of research Fat Tan hauls her vast arse out speed dating, the first time pretending to be a human rights lawyer and the second pretending to be a florist. She skews her research by cunningly behaving like an aggressive, objectionable bore in her guise as a lawyer. What this is meant to tell us about men isn't clear. I cannot stand people who endlessly bang on about their qualifications or folk who try and foist their opinions on you at totally inappropriate moments and I'm a woman. Is a speed dating event really the right place to air your views on wearing leather or the Middle East?
Of course unlike Fat Tan I'm not not single and even when I was I didn't really mind. I've always been able to get along nicely, anything additional is just a bonus. Poor Tan -a fine brain and not a shred of dignity or self reliance! Even when I was single I was rarely short of company, perhaps that's why I never felt the need to write self pitying articles complaining that men don't fancy me.
Anyway to return to her contempt for florists of all people. What on earth this largely female group of semi-skilled working class people did to rile feminist Tanya is never explained but her contempt for them is obvious. To convince her potential suitors she is a florist she giggles a lot, pretends not to know what a geneticist is, asks what a chair is, asks why water is wet and most hilarious of all pretended that she wanted to open her own florists.
I drew the conclusion a while back that what most western feminists mean by women's rights is the world saying how high when a middle class women says jump. We see endless articles by stuck up middens on juggling career and motherhood or the pain of being mildly rebuked for some lifestyle choice or another but precious few on juggling a life worth living with a pitiful existence in a theocracy or the miserable lot of elderly women on crime ridden council schemes.
I wouldn't mind if they'd at least be honest about it. Perhaps we could do a deal those folk interested in the well being of women could call ourselves feminists and Tanya Gold and chums could be known as Violet Elizabeth Bott's Barmy Army. At least that way we'd all know what we were getting. Honestly every time Tanya Gold uses the word feminist I want to alert Trading Standards or reach for a blunt instrument.
Cheerio
4/09/2008
I Have To Refuse To Believe This
Hello,
Naturally the arrest of Karen Matthews has come to my attention today what with the ladies in work almost forming a giant lynch mob which nearly turned on me when I admittedly half-heartedly muttered something about innocent until proven guilty. I say half heartedly not because I don't believe she is entitled to a fair trial but because I wanted to lamp her long before arrest. It's strange I love cows but the slightest trace of bovine in a person sends me insane.
However I am refusing to believe and will maintain this position in the face of any evidence up to and including a confession signed in blood that the idea for the alleged fake kidnap came from an episode of Shameless. My mind simply cannot accept that level of idiocy. No adult human being could be that suggestible could they? I do realise we aren't talking about a likely contender for Mastermind here but even so. If I allowed myself to think it was true I would be cast into a black despair so awful I may never emerge.
As such I prefer the possibility that she was planning to leave her partner, bottled it then reported her daughter missing in a panic. It seems more plausible and is slightly less evil than a cash scam. As for reports that the McCann's were approached for donations it's entirely possible that this was done by chancers with nothing to do the the Matthews family hoping to scam a few quid on the back of a missing child.
It's just all so depressing I can imagine how upset and cheated everyone who helped out with the search must be feeling. Not to mention the Matthews children involved who at least might get the decent upbringing they are entitled to now that their family such as it was has fallen to bits. I just hope that next time a child goes missing and sadly it will happen again that people don't immediately suspect a scam and do nothing to help the family out.
There is also the small matter of the £5million spent searching for Shannon diverting valuable resources away from investigation of crimes against children and other vulnerable people. If the kidnap does turn out to have been a scam I'd make the fuckers pay back every last penny and if they died before they'd paid it back I'd send the bailiffs into Hades after them.
Cheerio
Naturally the arrest of Karen Matthews has come to my attention today what with the ladies in work almost forming a giant lynch mob which nearly turned on me when I admittedly half-heartedly muttered something about innocent until proven guilty. I say half heartedly not because I don't believe she is entitled to a fair trial but because I wanted to lamp her long before arrest. It's strange I love cows but the slightest trace of bovine in a person sends me insane.
However I am refusing to believe and will maintain this position in the face of any evidence up to and including a confession signed in blood that the idea for the alleged fake kidnap came from an episode of Shameless. My mind simply cannot accept that level of idiocy. No adult human being could be that suggestible could they? I do realise we aren't talking about a likely contender for Mastermind here but even so. If I allowed myself to think it was true I would be cast into a black despair so awful I may never emerge.
As such I prefer the possibility that she was planning to leave her partner, bottled it then reported her daughter missing in a panic. It seems more plausible and is slightly less evil than a cash scam. As for reports that the McCann's were approached for donations it's entirely possible that this was done by chancers with nothing to do the the Matthews family hoping to scam a few quid on the back of a missing child.
It's just all so depressing I can imagine how upset and cheated everyone who helped out with the search must be feeling. Not to mention the Matthews children involved who at least might get the decent upbringing they are entitled to now that their family such as it was has fallen to bits. I just hope that next time a child goes missing and sadly it will happen again that people don't immediately suspect a scam and do nothing to help the family out.
There is also the small matter of the £5million spent searching for Shannon diverting valuable resources away from investigation of crimes against children and other vulnerable people. If the kidnap does turn out to have been a scam I'd make the fuckers pay back every last penny and if they died before they'd paid it back I'd send the bailiffs into Hades after them.
Cheerio
4/07/2008
God It's Hard To Blog/ Save the Lollies
Hello,
It may be a peculiar quirk exclusive to me but it's bloody hard to blog when you're happy. Readers may be delighted to hear that I'm feeling very chipper. I've been very busy over the last week with my business stuff and was on a course in London over the weekend.
My tail is also in the air because I've just realised that my current business plan whilst good is rather too ambitious for a start up with my limited resources. I was chatting to someone over the weekend and suddenly realised that I've horribly over complicated everything. I need to sit down and do some hard sums and make a few phone calls but if I'm right I could be in business within the next couple of months. Not only that but I'll have the basis for a plan to expand my business within the next 18 months. I'm also grappling with a job application as I need a stop gap job while I'm getting started and this job pays a good £6000 per year more than my current one, is within walking distance of my home and if I'm honest is one of those made up jobs that provide one of the few skiving opportunities left to the 21st century worker. Assuming I'm successful I'd like to offer my sincere apologies to the tax payer but may it comfort them to know that they'll be helping to fund a business start up so it's not a complete waste.
Still that's enough about me. I want to draw your attention to the plight of the poor Lollipop men and women of Glasgow. The council in it's infinite wisdom has decided to get them picking up litter in addition to their other tasks. In fairness the council have given them a choice they can either pick up litter or take a cut in hours and pay.
Such is the climate of lunacy in the City Chambers they actually think this will make it easier to recruit new lollies. People this is how stupid they think we are and can you blame them? Why do we as a city trot along year after year and vote Labour muttering darkly that we 'cannae let a tory in'. My mums local councillor is a tory and having been in the position for roughly a million years is as pointless and complacent as any Labour councillor. Quite why the thought of a waster in a blue rosette is more terrifying than one in a red rosette has never been explained. All I know is that they must not be let in. Quite frankly I'm not fussy I'd rather The Natural Law Party were in charge than Labour.
Giving the poor lollies more work is an admission of failure on the part of the management of the cleansing department. Let's face it they've proven that the litter problem can be effectively managed -my fellow residents may recall how clean the city was when the Commonwealth Games application was under consideration. I'm awful for getting swept up in things but I foolishly thought that at last the council were starting to get it right. How wrong I was, we were like a fat man holding his stomach in as an attractive woman strolls by. As soon as the application was successful we let our muscles relax and started chucking half eaten kebabs about again.
Of course the wages paid to street sweepers are higher than those received by the lollies which has more to do with the decision than anything else. I understand that the council have a budget to work to and when limited funds are available sometimes cuts have to be made. However I presume the litter that is being dropped by school children and their half-witted parents on the way to school. So instead of making a badly paid but useful job harder why not get the schools involved and get the kiddiewinks litter picking? This would provide the children with an incentive not to drop litter, teach them an important lesson about actions and their consequences and make the place look better. Better still get them to sort the rubbish for recycling and teach them about all the marvellous things that can be made from rubbish if it's put in the correct place. It could be a nice little project for them they could write an essay on it or stand on a chair and bark or whatever it is they get up to in schools nowadays.
Failing that I note that councillors are now paid for their work surely with a bit of time management they could double up a litter pickers. I'm perfectly serious. I'd be rather impressed with any councillor willing to get their hands dirty and pitch in with the rest of us to improve the city. Unless of course our good 'socialist' councillors are far too grand for that sort of thing and would rather place the burden on the lowest paid workers instead.
It may be a peculiar quirk exclusive to me but it's bloody hard to blog when you're happy. Readers may be delighted to hear that I'm feeling very chipper. I've been very busy over the last week with my business stuff and was on a course in London over the weekend.
My tail is also in the air because I've just realised that my current business plan whilst good is rather too ambitious for a start up with my limited resources. I was chatting to someone over the weekend and suddenly realised that I've horribly over complicated everything. I need to sit down and do some hard sums and make a few phone calls but if I'm right I could be in business within the next couple of months. Not only that but I'll have the basis for a plan to expand my business within the next 18 months. I'm also grappling with a job application as I need a stop gap job while I'm getting started and this job pays a good £6000 per year more than my current one, is within walking distance of my home and if I'm honest is one of those made up jobs that provide one of the few skiving opportunities left to the 21st century worker. Assuming I'm successful I'd like to offer my sincere apologies to the tax payer but may it comfort them to know that they'll be helping to fund a business start up so it's not a complete waste.
Still that's enough about me. I want to draw your attention to the plight of the poor Lollipop men and women of Glasgow. The council in it's infinite wisdom has decided to get them picking up litter in addition to their other tasks. In fairness the council have given them a choice they can either pick up litter or take a cut in hours and pay.
Such is the climate of lunacy in the City Chambers they actually think this will make it easier to recruit new lollies. People this is how stupid they think we are and can you blame them? Why do we as a city trot along year after year and vote Labour muttering darkly that we 'cannae let a tory in'. My mums local councillor is a tory and having been in the position for roughly a million years is as pointless and complacent as any Labour councillor. Quite why the thought of a waster in a blue rosette is more terrifying than one in a red rosette has never been explained. All I know is that they must not be let in. Quite frankly I'm not fussy I'd rather The Natural Law Party were in charge than Labour.
Giving the poor lollies more work is an admission of failure on the part of the management of the cleansing department. Let's face it they've proven that the litter problem can be effectively managed -my fellow residents may recall how clean the city was when the Commonwealth Games application was under consideration. I'm awful for getting swept up in things but I foolishly thought that at last the council were starting to get it right. How wrong I was, we were like a fat man holding his stomach in as an attractive woman strolls by. As soon as the application was successful we let our muscles relax and started chucking half eaten kebabs about again.
Of course the wages paid to street sweepers are higher than those received by the lollies which has more to do with the decision than anything else. I understand that the council have a budget to work to and when limited funds are available sometimes cuts have to be made. However I presume the litter that is being dropped by school children and their half-witted parents on the way to school. So instead of making a badly paid but useful job harder why not get the schools involved and get the kiddiewinks litter picking? This would provide the children with an incentive not to drop litter, teach them an important lesson about actions and their consequences and make the place look better. Better still get them to sort the rubbish for recycling and teach them about all the marvellous things that can be made from rubbish if it's put in the correct place. It could be a nice little project for them they could write an essay on it or stand on a chair and bark or whatever it is they get up to in schools nowadays.
Failing that I note that councillors are now paid for their work surely with a bit of time management they could double up a litter pickers. I'm perfectly serious. I'd be rather impressed with any councillor willing to get their hands dirty and pitch in with the rest of us to improve the city. Unless of course our good 'socialist' councillors are far too grand for that sort of thing and would rather place the burden on the lowest paid workers instead.
3/22/2008
Advice For Chaps
Hello,
As a lady who is rather fond of male company I do not like to speak ill of the chaps but sometimes events force one to reach conclusions. The following is directed to the more excitable chap and was provoked by an incident that took place about ten minutes ago.
Unless I am very much mistaken there is no law against women popping down to the shops of an evening. Nor has a curfew been imposed on the ladies. In fact if a gender based curfew were to be imposed I don't think the birds would be subject to it. If there is a case for movements to be restricted it is the chaps given the statistics on who is more likely to be a victim of violent crime and who is more likely to be the perpetrator. Not that I'm calling for a curfew to be placed on men. On the contrary I think they should be left to go about their business unmolested and if they could extend me the same courtesy we'd all get along famously.
There I was strolling back from the shops when a young fellow at least ten years my junior jumped on my back and asked where the party was. Being somewhat startled at being attacked from the rear and not wishing to appear daft because I had and have no idea where the party is I kicked him.
Well you'd have thought I'd tried to rape him the way he carried on. I calmly asked him to imagine how he'd feel and react if a strange man jumped on his back. This seemed to get him and his friends very angry indeed, prompting one of them to steal my hat and kick my arse. I then asked why it required six of them to harass one women. To which they responded that they were in fact having a laugh. Well with it not being at all funny I'd missed that.
By this point all I wanted to do was get home and take the painkillers I'd popped out to purchase. Just as I thought I was going to be stuck there all night trying to negotiate the return of my hat the police strolled into view. The hat was then handed over very quickly and the chaps made their exit. Which is peculiar because up until the police appeared they were adamant they hadn't done anything wrong.
Still this sort of thing shouldn't require the threat of the law to deal with. If we all follow a few basic ground rules when we're out and about the world will go round a good deal more smoothly than it does. I therefore unveil the lessons to be drawn from this sorry episode.
1. Do not jump on peoples backs it is startling and you do not have the right to lay hands on a another individual without their permission.
2. If you really must jump on folks back do not act the injured innocent when they take reasonable steps to defend themselves.
3. Do not steal peoples hats. Until a government is elected on a socialist programme of hat redistribution this sort of thing is illegal.
4. It really doesn't take six men to harass one female. The Yorkshire Ripper managed to kill stacks of them all by himself. I suggest you allow for women's inferior physical strength and only harass large groups of women. I will of course hoot as you are debagged, humiliated and beaten senseless. Strength in numbers cuts both ways.
5. Never do anything in public you could not justify to the police. Or if you do don't whine at getting caught.
6. A woman walking along the street is not a target but a human being going about their business. If that is too difficult for you to grasp then ponder the fact that between the ages of 19 and 20 I rarely went out without in a knife and a can of hairspray in my handbag. The boy who jumped on me was quite lucky to suffer nothing more than a bruised shin.
7. If I wanted male attention I would court it. I expect I'd get all dolled up and show a bit of cleavage. I would not be walking along in baggy clothes and a hat making eye contact with the space six inches above your head. I am not subtle. If I want your attention you'll know all about it.
8. Treat women going about their business the way you'd want your wife, sister, girlfriend or mother treated. Unless you regularly jump on their backs.
9. Men hanging around in packs, wearing excessive aftershave and crap shirts tucked into their jeans appeal to only the silliest of women. Note the furrowed brow! I might be daft but I'm not brain dead -you operate way beneath my head.
10. If you really can't contain yourself in the presence of women stay at home and look at pictures of them on the Internet and seek urgent medical advice.
Cheerio
As a lady who is rather fond of male company I do not like to speak ill of the chaps but sometimes events force one to reach conclusions. The following is directed to the more excitable chap and was provoked by an incident that took place about ten minutes ago.
Unless I am very much mistaken there is no law against women popping down to the shops of an evening. Nor has a curfew been imposed on the ladies. In fact if a gender based curfew were to be imposed I don't think the birds would be subject to it. If there is a case for movements to be restricted it is the chaps given the statistics on who is more likely to be a victim of violent crime and who is more likely to be the perpetrator. Not that I'm calling for a curfew to be placed on men. On the contrary I think they should be left to go about their business unmolested and if they could extend me the same courtesy we'd all get along famously.
There I was strolling back from the shops when a young fellow at least ten years my junior jumped on my back and asked where the party was. Being somewhat startled at being attacked from the rear and not wishing to appear daft because I had and have no idea where the party is I kicked him.
Well you'd have thought I'd tried to rape him the way he carried on. I calmly asked him to imagine how he'd feel and react if a strange man jumped on his back. This seemed to get him and his friends very angry indeed, prompting one of them to steal my hat and kick my arse. I then asked why it required six of them to harass one women. To which they responded that they were in fact having a laugh. Well with it not being at all funny I'd missed that.
By this point all I wanted to do was get home and take the painkillers I'd popped out to purchase. Just as I thought I was going to be stuck there all night trying to negotiate the return of my hat the police strolled into view. The hat was then handed over very quickly and the chaps made their exit. Which is peculiar because up until the police appeared they were adamant they hadn't done anything wrong.
Still this sort of thing shouldn't require the threat of the law to deal with. If we all follow a few basic ground rules when we're out and about the world will go round a good deal more smoothly than it does. I therefore unveil the lessons to be drawn from this sorry episode.
1. Do not jump on peoples backs it is startling and you do not have the right to lay hands on a another individual without their permission.
2. If you really must jump on folks back do not act the injured innocent when they take reasonable steps to defend themselves.
3. Do not steal peoples hats. Until a government is elected on a socialist programme of hat redistribution this sort of thing is illegal.
4. It really doesn't take six men to harass one female. The Yorkshire Ripper managed to kill stacks of them all by himself. I suggest you allow for women's inferior physical strength and only harass large groups of women. I will of course hoot as you are debagged, humiliated and beaten senseless. Strength in numbers cuts both ways.
5. Never do anything in public you could not justify to the police. Or if you do don't whine at getting caught.
6. A woman walking along the street is not a target but a human being going about their business. If that is too difficult for you to grasp then ponder the fact that between the ages of 19 and 20 I rarely went out without in a knife and a can of hairspray in my handbag. The boy who jumped on me was quite lucky to suffer nothing more than a bruised shin.
7. If I wanted male attention I would court it. I expect I'd get all dolled up and show a bit of cleavage. I would not be walking along in baggy clothes and a hat making eye contact with the space six inches above your head. I am not subtle. If I want your attention you'll know all about it.
8. Treat women going about their business the way you'd want your wife, sister, girlfriend or mother treated. Unless you regularly jump on their backs.
9. Men hanging around in packs, wearing excessive aftershave and crap shirts tucked into their jeans appeal to only the silliest of women. Note the furrowed brow! I might be daft but I'm not brain dead -you operate way beneath my head.
10. If you really can't contain yourself in the presence of women stay at home and look at pictures of them on the Internet and seek urgent medical advice.
Cheerio
2/14/2008
New Depths
Hello,
There are those who spend their day's marvelling at the heights of human intellectual achievement and those who prefer a good old belly laugh at the idiots. Can you guess which group I fall into?
Anyway it has been brought to my attention that in America 'at least 82 youths have died from playing the "choking game" since 1995'. The game involves either choking yourself or another 'player'. The object is not to die but to obtain 'cool and dreamy feeling'. I am not making any of this up.
Warning signs that your child is involved in the game apparently include 'discussion of the game, including other terms for it; bloodshot eyes; marks on the neck; severe headaches; disorientation after spending time alone; ropes, scarves and belts tied to bedroom furniture or doorknobs or found knotted on the floor; unexplained presence of things like dog leashes, choke collars and bungee cords'. For some reason there is no mention of an absence of common sense, total stupidity or moving ones lips when reading, all of which I though no expert, feel are vital clues.
I'm not sure if this an American thing or if just wasn't on the go in my day. Oh if only it had been, think of the idiots I'd have been spared. Not even bloody lighter fuel saw any of that lot off and believe me I did everything in power to facilitate such a happy event amongst my school chums. It's depressing but to this day my regular scan of the death notices in the local papers has failed to turn up a single school related corpse. Perhaps I should post details of the 'choking game' on Friends Reunited.
Cheerio
There are those who spend their day's marvelling at the heights of human intellectual achievement and those who prefer a good old belly laugh at the idiots. Can you guess which group I fall into?
Anyway it has been brought to my attention that in America 'at least 82 youths have died from playing the "choking game" since 1995'. The game involves either choking yourself or another 'player'. The object is not to die but to obtain 'cool and dreamy feeling'. I am not making any of this up.
Warning signs that your child is involved in the game apparently include 'discussion of the game, including other terms for it; bloodshot eyes; marks on the neck; severe headaches; disorientation after spending time alone; ropes, scarves and belts tied to bedroom furniture or doorknobs or found knotted on the floor; unexplained presence of things like dog leashes, choke collars and bungee cords'. For some reason there is no mention of an absence of common sense, total stupidity or moving ones lips when reading, all of which I though no expert, feel are vital clues.
I'm not sure if this an American thing or if just wasn't on the go in my day. Oh if only it had been, think of the idiots I'd have been spared. Not even bloody lighter fuel saw any of that lot off and believe me I did everything in power to facilitate such a happy event amongst my school chums. It's depressing but to this day my regular scan of the death notices in the local papers has failed to turn up a single school related corpse. Perhaps I should post details of the 'choking game' on Friends Reunited.
Cheerio
1/11/2008
Startling Idiocy
Hello,
Those of us unfortunate enough to have been state educated will remember the appalling torture of sharing a book with an illiterate fool who took about an hour to read a paragraph. Before you accuse me of being catty about stupid folk, let me point out that they were more than able to stand up for themselves. Ah yes those happy days of having ones head bounced off walls for being a 'pure swot' or reading at a normal speed as it's generally known.
I often wonder what on earth happened to these folk, haunted as I am by the fear of running into one of them. Anyway I am delighted to report that their spirit lives on. Only today I was browsing the Internet when I came across what I think might be the most stupid thing I've ever read in my life (Councillor Kelly excepted). It's not so much stupidity that upsets me but the complete refusal to admit that one might not know everything and compulsion to attack anything that remotely challenges one's view of oneself or the wider world.
Imagine if you will a Chinese woman writes a book which is less than flattering about Chairman Mao. You might decide to read the book, you may be indifferent, you might read a few extracts in a Sunday paper intend to buy it and forget, you might buy it and use it as a doorstop, you might draw attention to some alleged inaccuracies in it. All of those would be sensible and normal reactions.
However as ever the moronic community have their own unique way of dealing with this outrage. Witness the behaviour of the staff of Revolution Books at a visit from Jung Chang and Jon Halliday to discuss Mao: The Unknown Story to Berkeley in the USA.
'It's just outrageous," said Gary Miller, a volunteer at Berkeley's Revolution Books, as he leafleted the authors' event on campus. "A lot of people look with a great deal of affection at the Mao years because China's been turned into one giant sweatshop.'
Isn't it hilarious! As if all the workers earned a fortune and danced the day away under Mao. I wonder if Gary Miller has ever reflected just how long his job at Revolution Books would last under the dear old chairman? Mind you it strikes me that Gary might have a wee touch of Chairman Mao about him; 'It's just outrageous' -what writing a book and answering questions about it in front of an audience? Good God where will such 'outrageous' conduct lead?
I'm also curious to who these folk are that look 'look with a great deal of affection at the Mao years' are because other than the people at the very top of of the Chinese Communist Party everyone seems to have had a miserable time and to be fair more than a few of the top boys were treated appallingly. Honestly what sort of maniac looks back on picnics like The Cultural Revolution with 'a great deal of affection'? It certainly won't be the poor Chinese proletariat who suffered unbearable horror despite being the supposed beneficiaries of a society purged of bourgeoisie elements. It certainly won't have been anyone with an appreciation of art, literature or their cultural heritage. It won't have been the peasant farmers who were given the gift of skinny teenage workers more suited to looking wistful at a window than tough farm work. In fact I'd say that anyone who looks back with 'great affection' at The Cultural Revolution and Chairman Mao is a wicked barbarian and only just worth shooting or sending to the countryside for re-education.
As a distraught fifteen year old I was all for communism but even I thought countries like China were a bloody nightmare. At the time I thought this was just because they'd done communism wrong and if the right set set of folk were in charge it would be champers for the workers all the way. These days having met enough people to know better my view on communism can be best be summed up by this quote from the movie Ben Hur 'Balthasar is a good man. But until all men are like him, we must keep our swords bright!', only I would add, our tills ringing and government in it's place.
None of which is to imply that China is now heaven on earth. It's far from it. Conditions there would provoke an uprising in Britain but it's better than it was and I'm appalled that some pampered American oaf who's worst experience is being marketed at would seek to prevent a woman who lived through the affectionately remembered rule of Mao from speaking her mind or are all the goodies of democracy the sole preserve of the west?
I merely require information.
Cheerio
Cheerio
1/05/2008
Oh God The Poor Bloody Idiots
Hello,
There's nothing to make me feel like I'm back at work than idiots and their antics. Firstly I learned something on the Jeremy Kyle Show this morning. Seriously. For the past six months or so I'd been amazed by the number of folk with grown up sons who refuse to sign on. It baffled me because all the fellows involved were heavy drinkers or drug users so one would have thought they'd have been desperate for money but instead they point blank refuse to claim a penny in benefits.
At last, thanks to the show of shame I know why and curse myself for being silly enough to have missed it. According to some pitiful family or other the boys don't want to sign on because they'll be sent on courses. I refrain from making further comment except to suggest that their mothers stop subsidising them just see what happens.
Moving on I see some unfortunate child has been killed by a rottweiler. Exactly how stupid does one need to be to have a dangerous dog in the house with small children? I merely ask because I've thought it through backwards and forwards and can't actually think up a decent reason.
It all rather reminds me of the moment my cousin realised social work was the wrong career. She'd been trying to reunite some moron and their poor toddler, it was all going swimmingly until mummy on the eve of the reunion purchased herself a pit bull and a persian cat claiming she was lonely. Apart from the obvious cruelty to the animals -neither being designed to live in a high rise, where do you start. I mean really.
Anyway to return to the story at hand poor Archie-Lee was killed by his grannies rottweiler despite the heroic efforts of his aunties (aged 16 and 7) to save him. I keep saying I'm far too selfish and irresponsible to have children but one wonders. Why on earth would anyone leave a child in a house with a dangerous animal? Totally fucking idiocy is my best guess.
I mean most parents are neurotic oafs about animals. My nieces killjoy bastard parents have barred the most beautiful white cat by the name of Ricksen from their house in case it upsets baby. It doesn't, I lured him in while they were out and all was well. Though my mummy was outraged! Before you all start I could take a cat out easily, murder dogs I'm less sure of.
Look at the bad press the McCanns have had for the admittedly stupid act of leaving their kids for a few hours in an unlocked apartment. Yet the idiots who left this child in a house with a dangerous dog have barely been mentioned. It's a rum old world.
Here are mum and dad's tribute sites. Read them, despair and pray the infertility fairy strikes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)