I sniggered

(Click for a bigger picture.)

Tip of the old clown wig to some or other b3tard.

"Homosexuality is not normal"

Oh for fuck's sake. Can the professionally-aggrieved and the mincing arse-bandits not fucking take the slightest fucking criticism any more?

Why is being offended such a fucking get-out card nowadays?

A coalition for cunts

Yvette Cooper-Bollocks? Here's a newsflash, you miserable little bollock-muncher: There is a well-known coalition for cunts, and it's the awful LibLabCon cuntsoup that you are a part of.

A gurning fuck knuckle speaks

I just watched "it", you know, the snot-gargling Scottish fuckmonkey's latest clusterfuck (because somehow, "faux pas" just doesn't cut it) and the thing that struck me was his rictus grin during his equally appalling mea culpa press meeting.

It wasn't the embarrassed, shamefaced grin of someone ashamed of what they've done. It was the arrogant sneer of someone saying "well, if I do this little thing, I can get away with fucking anything - you people are so fucking dumb."

I can't, offhand, think of anyone I have ever despised so much. I don't just want him gone. I want him crushed, destroyed and forced to contemplate his fall from grace for a very, very long time.

The utter, unspeakable, motherfucking cunt.

Fucking hell

Still not weekend.

Mercy!

Exhaustion

I can't keep up this pace for much longer. How long till the weekend?

So...

... it turns out that it is possible to overdose on baked beans.

What a crappy day!

And there's no signs of it getting any better.

Three ways to effin'

Nope. Still balls deep.

The twins of delight again

Blogging will be slight as I "boom" over some busts again.

The sucker punch

Anna Raccoon is such a tease, writing about the Hornsey and Wood Green constituency candidate:

Some candidates bring both an unusual career and an intriguing and unexpected personal life story to the electoral ‘table’. They are self evidently those candidates who have entered politics later in life, rather than fresh from an MA in Political Science.

Needless to say, fools rushed in where clowns feared to tread:

Henry North London, who is in fact an independent candidate running in Hornsey Wood Green named Rohan Kapur, is someone with whom you fell out with quite badly a year or so back.

It is this person you will be focusing on, right? I think it only fair of you to level with readers. If in fact you do intend to critique this particular candidate, then you should explain and disclose whatever it is that caused you to fall out with him and any other details that may colour your opinion.

Otherwise there could be the potential for, well, I don’t know. Unfair bias I guess.

And:

I do think it fair that you be open about exactly WHY you are choosing this one constituency and candidates to focus on.

Cue egg on face. Parliament was dissolved on April 6, so Anna had her scoop before then. Henry North only confirmed that he was standing on April 16.

The only thing I can say that might ease the shame is that she suckered me too. I was just lucky enough not to say something. So I got away with i...

Oops.

(It's been a good 24 hours for bloggers winding up commentards, hasn't it?)

Senior Citizenship

It's been coming for a while now, but this morning, while making my daily cafetière à piston, I managed to put the sugar in the cafetière, rather than my cup.

The only thing that gives me hope is that I noticed it immediately.

Please tell me I'm not alone?

Some guys have all the luck

JuliaM must be livid. Day after day she ruthlessly dissects the feral underclass and she never gets a nibble. Al Jahom throws out a line and gets a massive bite first time.

The comments on this post have reduced me to tears.

Of laughter.

St Nicholas and public scrutiny

CF nails it pretty well here. And considering how he's been playing the "new politics" card, it's hard to deny that his followers have been indulging in comments and counter-claims that are completely indistinguishable from Tory and Labour tribalist cockwaffle.

It's like the Woking Wombats making it from the 75th division to the premier league and then claiming that they represent the "new soccer". They don't. They're playing the exact same game, following the exact same "rules", diving the exact same dives, indulging in exactly the same off-pitch spit roasts ...

Nick Clegg may be winning the beauty contest because he's a fresh face, but he's no William Webb Ellis.

And really, all the other parties are ploughing the same tired old social democratic, statist, corporatist, special-interest-group furrow. There's only one party that really believes that you know what is best for you, that puts your liberty ahead of the best interests of the political class, the needs of the media and the "wisdom" of the chattering classes.

So if you're lucky enough to live in a constituency with a Libertarian candidate, vote for some real change.

Update: Bless those Lib Dems, they're just so fucking different from the others, aren't they?

Wiggy on Vince

After Wiggy's attack on Chris Mounsey, I was curious to see the destruction of St Vince the Elder. And I enjoyed it and felt it was just, because it was entirely aimed at the flip-flopping lunacy of Vince's economic pronouncements.

Would that he had accorded Chris the opportunity to defend Libertarianism, rather than his blog.

On charity and the development of nations

How about charity, Obo, can't you even give a good word for that in your nasty, shilling little diatribe?

Well, I have several words, good and bad, to offer on the subject of charity.

The first point to make is that a lot of what passes for charity nowadays is just rent-seeking and lobbying, sponsored by the government, with high-priced execs coining it and using your money to tell you how to live your life.

There is still good charity out there. Unfortunately, I suspect a lot of it has been crowded out of the market by the guys who can afford TV campaigns. Why would you donate to a donkey sanctuary when you're giving a fiver a month to the RSPCA? The fact that your fiver isn't saving any animals but is paying for third-sector bully to harass you is irrelevant, I'm sure.

But let's put aside the fact that Oxfam and the WWF are just lobbying organisations now, let's pretend that we're only dealing with "good" charity.

There is always a call for humanitarian charity, in the event of a crisis. Some of it actually makes it past the grasping hands of those corrupt officials who skim off the top. But there is only so far any charity can go. If all the charity was directed at a specific and small enough group of people, it might actually help them out of poverty, but it could only do so at the expense of everyone else.

It's very unlikely that people, with increasing pressure on their own lives, would find a case for funding an entire nation out of debt. And it would be a zero-sum game - those giving to the charity would have their own lives diminished by what they are giving (apart from that lovely warm glow, of course!)

And what would the recipients of that charity have at the end of it? A pile of money with nothing to buy and nothing to sustain their wealth. When they run out of that money, do they tap us up again? What happens when we run out of money?

Oh! They're going to start their own factories and stuff, are they? With what expertise? With what motivation?

No, I'm afraid that charity (and "development aid") are not a solution to this: free and honest trade between nations with no tariffs, no barriers and no pointless regulation is the only way for Nation A to help Nation B get out of the horror of subsistence farming as quickly and as sustainably as possible.

The single biggest barrier to Africa getting wealthy in a sustainable fashion is probably the Common Agricultural Policy, which keeps (mainly French) farmers wealthy while starving African food producers.

The biggest act of charity you could perform would be to destroy the CAP.

Another day, another desperate roll of the dice*

I didn't want your readers, or your recommendation, and you know it because we have the same fucking readers you retard! What would be in it for me? Nothing.

This is a very interesting observation. I'm sure that every member of my readership reads (for example) Devil's Kitchen, but it doesn't stop me attributing (in a very cuntry club manner, of course!) when I borrow from or riff off his work. In your mind, this is merely mutual masturbation.

Yet when I fail to show you the exact same courtesy, it is somehow a calamitous slur.

Ah! Perhaps there is something in it for you: common courtesy and an acknowledgement that someone else found your thoughts worth comment or discussion.

But that's just because it's you, of course. For anyone else, it's just a "cuntry club" wankfest of mutual backslapping.

*Tip of the clown wig to Mark Wadsworth for the title idea.

Astounding journalism

What an astonishing display of fact-checking journalism:

Martin’s ‘biography’ was unusual to say the least. It gave no personal details nor quoted any political beliefs, in fact it appeared to be positively frivolous.

Martin Cullip, Libertarian
Plays with Surrey Darts team and helps maintain their Toe the Oche website.
The website cites his hobbies as The Cranberries, AFC Wimbledon and “running across all eight lanes of the M25 at junction eight dressed only in a basque and a pair of Pretty Polly 15 denier stockings”.

To see why we should not have the slightest bit of faith in bloggers and why we should only trust the printed media, I suggest you click here.

And a doff of the clown wig to a blogger who has done libertarianism a great favour by exposing this pathetic rag's incompetence and spite.

A coruscating attack on lipstick libertarians

Take no prisoners!

Tip of the clown wig to Swindon Alan.

Shit? Meet fan. Fan? Meet shit.

Blogging will vary between erratic and sporadic for the next fortnight or so.

Or it may not. I might pull a miracle out of my arse, but somehow I doubt it. Fucking northern knobjockey CUNTS.

A reaction to the Catholic kiddy fiddler crisis

Update: This.

MEGA-LULZ

Tip of the clown wig to Dizzy.

Too true

Having just received my quota of LimpDumb junk mail, these fuckers aren't breathing a word about proportional representation any more. And they're suddenly also very happy to use the two-horse race idiom.

Cunts.

In defence of child labour

I fully realise that this is going to be a tough sell, but before I start, take five minutes to read this.

Now think about the farmers' kids in that scenario. They're not going to school, they're not facebooking on their iPhone, they're not taking meow-meow. They're fucking agricultural slaves.

They're not badly-paid agricultural workers, they're agricultural slaves. And if they weren't useful on the farm, or there was a bad year, they'd be sold into prostitution.

By comparison, a tough life in a factory is like a holiday. It's still a shit life, and it's not one I'd wish for my child or, indeed, anyone. But those kids are the generation or generations that have to carry that pain so that their kids will be able to go to school and facebook on their iPhones and take meow-meow.

They're still better off than they would have been on the farm. They're not slaves any more. They're not being sold into prostitution. Their desperate poverty is actually more comfortable to them than their previous agrarian lifestyle.

As painful as it may be for bleeding hearts to deal with this, there's nothing that you can realistically do for them but treasure the fact that their gradually improving lives will lead to a revolution for their children.

Ideals, aspirations, rhetoric - none of these count for shit when it comes to picking a society up by its bootstraps. If there's nothing there, the wealth has to be created. It gets created sheer bloody hard physical work. And much like those kids are there to work the farm for the survival of the family, the reality of it is that they're there to work in the sweatshop for the (slightly better) survival of the family, too.

Oh, and a corollary to this: if you want those kids to get out of the sweatshops more quickly, spend your efforts getting free trade implemented with these poorer nations. Our protectionist policies like import tariffs, the CAP and so forth just drag out the time those kids are stuck in the sweatshop.

The faster we can buy stuff from them and the more of the money that goes to them, the better off both parties are: we get stuff slightly cheaper and they get a bigger market. And the faster they get their wealth, the faster they'll be able to afford schools and the faster those kids will get out of the factories and into lifestyles more like ours.

Another completely unattributed post

Political blogging is such fun, and there's nothing better that a good old fashioned series of 'Hat Tips' or 'H/T' as we call it in-house here at The Country Club.

It works something like this, little people, whom I don't give a damn about because I'm so cool and suave here in my handsome polo shirt and cheeky little loafers. I'll give a good old 'hat tip' (or h/t as it's known in code) to my Westminster village buddy Iain Dale, and then he'll hat tip me in return.

Then I'll hat tip him, then he'll hat tip my pal DK, who'll then hat tip Old Holborn, who'll then engage in a vigorous series of hat tips with Anna Raccoon (not a fully fledged member of the club, but moving up the junior league of Club Aspirants. At the moment she's just a caddy, but bless her, eh).

And just to round it out, an equally unattributed comment from my blog:

You cunt.

This is clearly in reference to my recent piece, insults included.

And the double snub of not even giving credit to the fucking inspiration for the article.

You are truly a fat headed useless toss bag.

Cheers for that, you rude cunt.

Colour me confused. Perhaps it's only "country club" if you're tipping your hat to the wrong person. Perhaps it's "good manners" when you tip your hat to the right person.

Or perhaps I just don't give a shit about hypocrites who slag off good manners except when it applies to them.

Am I missing something?

The normally fairly astute Dizzy asks an interesting question:

This could soon become very interesting, because, if it's sustainable (still questionable) and the Lib Dems came first in the popular vote, they would probably still end up only the third largest party in the Commons. If that happened then PR will be inevitable, after all, none of the other parties could win the argument that the system produces an equitable outcome.

So, let;s play a game for a second, imagine the Lib Dems won the popular vote but were the third largest party. Would we perhaps see a very short Parliament that produced just one law change, the introduction of proper PR along the lines of the Single Transferable Vote, and then a quick dissolution and General Election under the new system?

Given the Teflon-coated behaviour of politicians since 1997 and the complete apathy of the British public, what makes him think that whoever wins would give a fuck about "winning the argument that the system produces an equitable outcome"?

Dizz, baby, I don't know if you've noticed, but our politicians don't give a flying fuck what we think.

Oh, the irony!

It does, however, serve as a reminder that in this election socialism comes in various guises

Say what, Mr Tory?

Deconstructing the sweatshop story

Every so often, a sweatshop story makes it into the papers. Every single time, middle class tossers get their panties wedged about it until the next thing comes along to distract their gadfly attention span.

So, let's go back to first principles a bit, shall we?

Outer Cuntistan is a poor, agricultural country. Not cozy, Range Rover-driving, John Deere-tractoring agriculture though. Manual, back-breaking, eking-out-a-miserable existence, with-nothing-left-to-trade agriculture. The kind that demands you have twenty children just to provide you with a labour force to ensure your survival. Education? Who's got time for that? You work flat out from the moment the sun comes up till the moment you can't see your hand in front of your face and then you stagger back to your hovel and collapse after eating a bowl of nasty gruel made with rotting vegetables, because you don't have a fridge. Fuck the fridge, you've never even heard of electricity!

So along comes this guy, a gaijin or a gwailo or a lekgoa - and an utter cunt to boot. He sees all these meatsacks that he can exploit cheaply to make stuff for rich westerners. So he organises a factory to be built, gets the government to set up electricity for his facility, and goes around hiring the very best workers for the square root of fuck all.

But these workers are now quite respected members of the community. They work indoors, they have ready access to tap water, they work the same sort of hours, but it's not so physically demanding. And they get money. They can actually buy things, something they've never been able to do before. And in terms of their value, they probably "earn" twice as much as they used to. It's a shit life, but it's marginally less shit than it used to be.

Unfortunately for the utter cunt running this shop, you can't keep a bargain quiet and soon, other people are opening up sweatshops there. More people are getting employed and suddenly, the hardest workers are in a curious position. Rather than just taking what life has handed out to them, they can suddenly find themselves choosing to go work elsewhere ... for more money!

Over a couple of years or decades, people forget the horrors of their agrarian lives, they start to hear about Western luxuries, something called "health and safety" and start assimilating these ideas into their own lives. Kids learn to read. Gradually, Outer Cuntistan stops being a great place to do business as they lift themselves out of abject poverty into a reasonable lifestyle via the sweatshop.

The utter cunt eventually gets fucked off to the max and decides to look elsewhere, perhaps Africa this time. And the cycle repeats in country after country as the utter cunt selfishly exploits the principle of comparative advantage, looking for ruined or non-existent economies to exploit in his quest for near slave labour. Country after country is painfully and messily lifted from agrarian hell to a semblance of Western standards.

Don't speak too harshly of the sweatshop owner. After all, after another decade of statist, corporatist, social democrat catastrophe, we can expect him back in this country soon enough.

And you wouldn't want to deny your children and their children the chance to a better life, would you?

I'm baffled...

A centrist, statist, social democratic party has leapt out of nowhere to challenge the other centrist, statist, social democratic parties, and everyone is excited because the new guys wear yellow ties??????

What a pain in the arse!

A brilliant day, curtailed by one.

And the fucker's not going anywhere.

If the yanks will eat their spinach...

... why wouldn't we?

The news that a Rasmussen poll has Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) running in a dead heat against President Barack Obama in a hypothetical Paul-Obama face-off for the White House has the pundits fuming. Ben Smith, over at Politico, can hardly contain his annoyance: the poll "is a useful reminder of how totally flaky early polling is," he rants, and "this is the Ron Paul who polled, literally, thousands of votes placing fifth in the Iowa caucuses," and then only breaking ten percent after everyone but McCain had bailed. This evaluation depends on a static model, however: back then, there was no bank bailout, no insurance industry takeover, no tea party movement, and Ron had no real public record to run on – the 2008 campaign, in short, was a way for the country to get to know Rep. Paul, and the Rasmussen poll is a clear indication they liked what they saw. Instead of invoking Paul’s showing in the Iowa caucus, it’s more useful to compare this poll to the results of another similar Rasmussen poll taken in 2008, in which, as the pollster reported, "For Ron Paul, 10% of all voters would definitely vote for him. Fifty-nine percent (59%) say it’s No, no matter what."

Voter sentiment is now completely reversed: today, he’s in a dead heat with a sitting President. No matter how hard you try to minimize that, it’s an astonishing fact.

It's probably nothing, just a poll blip ... but, hell, if he did win, I'd be over there so fucking fast, my feet wouldn't touch the ground.

Quote of the hectodeminanosecond

* - they're not.

Nick Robinson: cunt

Jesus fucking Christ.

I can only imagine that he's been sucking the tripartite cock for so long, his brain has started to disconnect:

And the winner is... the British electorate

The first ever Prime Ministerial debate will be remembered not - as so many predicted - for a gaffe or a scripted put-down or a bead of a sweat. It will be remembered as a serious debate about serious issues

Either Nick Robinson is a clueless motherfucker, right up the anus of the Westminster bubble, totally out of tune with the rest of the world, or he managed to watch something else last night.

The Mass Debate

No, not the snake oil and lies peddled by the leaders of the three factions of the LibLabCon Party, but the debate about who won.

Everyone seems to agree that Clegg "won", Cameron did OK, but not great and The Flunking Cyst was useless. There was some amazement that it wasn't entirely dull and stilted.

The LimpDumbs are unshutupable about their new-found impotence, er, importance. The Tories are furiously decrying Cleggover's shameless lies while equally furiously ignoring the utter bollocks their leader spouts. Labour is delighted that there might be someone taking Tory votes but are being very quiet about the performance of the nutter with the stutter.

But people seem to think that this facile beauty parade is all a "game-changer". In the mean time, the country is racing towards a trillion-and-a-half Pounds of debt, we're spied on in new and exciting ways ever day, our kids can't read or write and we're drowning in laws, regulations and statutory instruments which even the people who promulgate them can't keep track of. None of them are going to change this.

Our "leaders" are steaming vigorously towards the iceberg and we're deciding who's going to look best behind the wheel as we die screaming, drowning in freezing waters (well, we'll drown - they'll be on a fucking luxury lifeboat!) Adulating lunatics, blindly cheering on their rosette colour and arguing over things that, ultimately, lead us over the same cliff.

I think I'm going to start drinking now. And I don't think I'm going to stop.

Update: Blimey: the Guardian!

Clegg: The other two are just liars and we want to do things differently.

Brown: The other two are just liars and we want to carry on doing the same.

Cameron: We are going to be tough on immigration because I once met a black man who is worried about it.

Clegg: We're going to be even tougher.

Brown: What's he doing here?

Cameron: I haven't a clue.

Clegg: We will have millions more policemen because I've met someone who has been burgled.

Cameron: We'll have even more.

Brown: No, you are going to cut them.

Clegg: They sound exactly the same.

Brown: Ha, ha. I'm going to kill you later.

Cameron: I'm going to keep Trident to nuke the Chinese.

Clegg: I can save billions by taxing Lord Ashcroft.

Brown: We have to carry on spending on the NHS because I met a cancer patient who said she was only alive thanks to me.

Alastair Stewart: Well, you three look half dead. Same time next week

Libertarian self-interest

Wow. She buggers off, she comes back and she pisses all over us again:

The whole point of libertarianism is acting in your self interest, and the belief that when people do that there’s a better result overall. Turns out Devil’s Kitchen, as it was, wasn’t in the Devil’s self interest and the result is, presumably, something that’s a lot better for him personally , his employer and possibly for the party he represents.

Damn your eyes woman, why are you so good?

And then there's this:

Tonight's debate

This political junkie has decided that he will be having an adrenaline-fuelled evening in front of the television.

I'm going to fire up the PS2 and do some laps of the Nurburgring.

Volcanic ash cloud isolates Europe

Via Mark Croucher on Facebook:

As British airspace was closed following the eruption of an Icelandic volcano, there were fears that Europe was once again isolated.

As the cloud of fine white particles began to drift over Cheshire, Iceland said that it may yet be forced to recall Kerry Katona, who could probably get it all up her left nostril in a single snort.

Comenting on these reports, Ms Katona said, “That’s why mums go to Iceland”.

Icelandic spokesman Shagyar Dottirson denied that the eruption was a release of the pent up feelings of Icelandic citizens annoyed at the EU’s stance over the collapse of their banks, and said he could give no indication of when Europe would cease to be isolated.

Meanwhile, Europe’s isolation looked set to continue as a spokesman for Eurostar said it had all 8 of its trains stuck in the Channel Tunnel due to an electrical fault caused by the wrong type of dust.

Weather forecasters expect the ash cloud to persist for several days. A European Commission spokesman said in Brussels that they were fearful of the effects of not being able to transport British cash to Europe for a period of up to 48 hours, but said emergency arrangements were in place to ensure that the wholesale robbery of British taxpayers could continue unabated as soon as their isolation ceased.

"Luckily, no-one will ever know, as there is a general election campaign in Britain at the moment. There's no danger of any discussion about the EU", he said.

President of the European Council Herman van Rompuy said, “I don’t like the British anyway, but not having access to British taxpayers pockets on a daily basis is inconvenient. We may have to stop wasting cash for a few days. On the plus side, it means Baronness Ashton can’t get here.”

Self-selecting?

I'm not sure if it's just that the people who would communicate with me are inclined to share my views, but even on Facebook where I see a lot of "friend of a friend" stuff, it looks to me that loads of people really are completely disenchanted with the whole LibLabCon sham.

The mainstream political parties are ignoring the issues that people are really exercised about and I think loads of people are going to be voting BNP and UKIP (along with other, smaller parties) this time around.

Since I regard the BNP as the provisional wing of the corporatist LibLabCon clusterfuck, they can all get to fuck as well. But I really hope that independents, UKIP and smaller parties piss heavily into the chips of the corporatists.

And I really hope that our LPUK candidates get elected.

What the FUCK????

What the hell is this?

Oh for Christ's sake!

Is anyone actually dumb enough to fall for this shit?

Attn: Beneficiary !!!!!From the Anti-Terrorist And Monetary Crimes Division

We the Anti-Terrorist And Monetary Crimes Division FBI Headquarters In Washington, D.C.Federal Bureau Of Investigation. Edgar Hoover Building 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001.
we would like you to contact us via email: for further information on your $900,000,00 Yahoo Windows Lives Awards winning lottery fund. E-mail: fbi.gov.govdiliveryyy@live.com

Something to look forward to!

Pisces (20 FEB-20 MAR)
Tyne, Dogger, Hebrides. Northeast 4. Occasional sodomy, becoming good.

DK on the telly

So, I finally got around to watching today's little contretemps. I don't think that Andrew Neill gave Chris that hard of a time, to be honest, but I am completely disappointed at the dismissive focus on Chris's blog with absolutely no attempt to allow him to explain how the LPUK would help Britain or what our policies are.

Chris did very well. He is, I fear, a natural media whore.

His principled offer of resignation to the NCC after the interview on the grounds that his blog might bring the LPUK into disrepute was rejected on equally principled grounds by the NCC.

I am very proud of both Chris and the LPUK after today.

I don't really understand the problem

I really do struggle with why politicians won't say the "c-word". The papers are full of examples of profligate waste that get people exercised. And yet no-one wants to tackle our frightening government debt.

Labour have us on course for a £1.4trillion debt. The Tories have us on course for a £1.399999trillion debt. The SocDems probably have us on course for a £1.5trillion debt, but that's academic.

Are taxpayers really that well-trained as milch cows that we won't accept that we can cut the state's profligacy without any pain to ourselves?

Put me in charge. I'll fucking sort it all out.

On the money again

Spot on*:

The polls suggest voters want change, but many don’t want to make sacrifices or accept the idea of Britain living within its means. They’ll moan about rules and red tape but they fear the state withdrawing in any meaningful way. It’s why Gordon Brown is still in this race.

*For RonniesOak: the attribution is the link embedded in the words "Spot on". You fucking mong.

Cutting!

Anyway, Tory manifesto today… decided not to risk further injury and merely skimmed it. Unlike Labour’s manifesto it’s full of pictures, diagrams, case studies and other fun little highlights to give a pleasingly friendly, caring and progressive impression. No idea if the substance matches. I’ve given up trying to work out what the Tories stand for.

I thought that was a bit rich coming from a bloody LIB-DEM!!

Fucking hellski!

I just heard some news that, if true, will mean that someone actually listened to me.

We will find out the truth of it in June.

Manifesto comparison

Hah!

The Tories' sombre and austere Daily Mailogram contrasts sharply with the cover of the Labour manifesto, published yesterday, which depicts an optimistic British family looking forward to a new life in the Dordogne.

Dear Gordon

I see that you're now going to spend our money "wisely".

I was just wondering, you utter cock-sniffing, clinically insane, arse bandit fuckwit: why, after 13 years of pissing our money away like a drunken sailor in port for the first time in six months, you suddenly feel like you may be able to spend our money "wisely", and more importantly, why the cunting fuck you haven't fucking been spending our money wisely to date?

I look forward to hearing your answer, but I'm really not holding my breath.

You cunt.

The Mark Thomas Privacy Product

I don't often agree with this egregious lefty twat, BUT:

Last I checked, I wasn't above the law. The same rules that apply to you also apply to me. And I'm a celebrity!

So it seems rather obvious that the people who often set these rules - our MPs - should also live by them.

But they don't - especially when it comes to how government treats our personal information. And it's time we put a stop to it.

Tell every would-be MP standing for election in your area that you'll no longer accept one rule for them and another for all of us.

All our children are now documented on the government's ContactPoint database, but MPs can get their children "shielded" for the sake of their privacy. What about our privacy?

Hundreds of MPs voted in favour of each and every one of us being fingerprinted for the ID database and having an ID card. Yet I'm sure I don't have to tell you that very few MPs have chosen to get one, even though they're now available to those who volunteer.

But what should we expect? After all, dozens of these same MPs voted to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information Act, all in the name of their "privacy" of course, whilst passing laws that erode all of our privacy.

I've had enough of these hypocrites, haven't you? Join us in demanding that all candidates commit to scrapping the ID card scheme, and to defending our privacy - and that of our children - as fiercely as they defend their own:

http://www.power2010.org.uk/privacy

Tell your local cunts what you think of them.

Fisking the Labour Manifesto

What a monstrous pile of cunt:

First off:

Under the Labour proposals, residents could trigger takeovers of individual police divisions within a year, with chief constables facing the sack if they fail to meet minimum standards after three years

Three years? Who wants to wait three fucking years for something to be put right? And who gets to decide these minimum standards? That wouldn't happen to be the fucking government, would it? And who gets to measure the police against these standards? That wouldn't be the fucking government, would it?

Labour will also pledge that a third of all secondary schools would be merged or put under the direction of new “superheads” to spread the benefit of existing reforms.

Oh, hoo-fucking-ray! So good schools will be merged with bad schools to "spread benefits"? Yeah, sure, that's gonna fucking work, isn't it?

Addressing voter concern over immigration, the party will pledge to extend the English language requirement to all new applicants for public sector jobs.

WHAT? You mean you don't have to fucking be able to speak fucking English to "work" in the public sector? WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK???????????

It will also promise to increase the minimum wage and outline new measures to tackle youth unemployment.

Yay! Job destruction and more splurging on useless initiatives that will "help" three people.

Labour will offer guaranteed levels of public service with rights of redress where they are not met.

Great. So if the public service - that I already pay for - fucks up, then Gordon's going to steal more money from me to give back to me. After three years and filling in eleventy-bazillion forms, it will give me back 50p after extorting another £50 from me.

I like that idea.

It will pledge to let patients go private if they are not treated by the NHS in time ...

Look, if the NHS doesn't treat you in their ludicrously generous target times, you're fucking dead already.

... and to double paid paternity leave to four weeks.

Who's paying for this fucking paternity leave? Me? Or is this coming out of Gordon's personal fucking back pocket?

Let me fucking guess.

What a load of utter shit.

Update: The Daily Mash sums it up well.

OK ...

... that's enough quality blogging. It's back to the knob jokes now.

Terrifying

There's no other word for it.

It's not just the singing that's disturbing!

Yesss ...

Sometimes you read a blogpost and it just makes you feel a tangible sense of relief:

Dawkins is no humble seeker after truth. He is a grandstanding arsehole.

See, I'm an atheist. But I really struggle reading the abuse militant atheists spew out, it's completely indistinguishable from Fred Phelps in tone and content. And in much the same way I respect the ownership of physical things by people who've worked for them, I am quite happy that people believe whatever the fuck they want as long as they don't force it upon me.

I think that's a perfectly libertarian point of view.

The Dangers of Centralised Power - Part 2

Earlier, I wrote:

I was reminded of the great Swine Flu non-pandemic of 2009 and the hundreds of thousands of deaths that didn't ensue, despite the World Health Organisation's prognostications.

And an observation in the comments stirred something in my brain:

Well, at least someone did well out of it – the company who got the multi-million pound contract from the Government to produce the vaccine.

Ironically, this comment was made by Letters From A Tory, who no doubt will be doing his very best to make sure that the Tories get to decide which contracts get signed with the government for the next five years and is doubtlessly confident that his tribe is populated by noble, faultless people who will make the right decision every time.

This also leads on to the other great danger of centralised power: there are fewer people that you need to convince for things to happen. If I manage to convince Ed Miliband that by building a wind farm, I'll save the planet, then I'll get my wind farm and all my lovely subsidies. I may only be getting a tenner from each taxpayer, but I get £300 million, thank you very much. And I get to charge for the dribble of 'leccy I provide as well. It's taken a couple of agreeable lunches and some schmoozing with a complete dickbrain, but I'm now seriously quids-in. And as I said before, I have a major, clear interest in this scam continuing, you have a much smaller, more vague interest in stopping me. So you probably won't.

Now imagine, for a moment, that you're in an anarcho-capitalist society. There are still 30 million people engaged in economic activity, but there's no government. I come up with this wizard wheeze to make some money, but instead of convincing Ed Miliband, I now have to convince 30 million people. Individually.

Now I have a much bigger problem. Assuming I can convince a large enough number of people to invest, I actually have to show them that I'm saving the planet, or when next year comes around, people are going to tell me to fuck off.

Fuck it, I'll try banking, instead.

Having a government at all also makes it easier to co-opt. Who is going to invade a country where every single house is its own government? if you want to defeat the EU, you just have to take over the European Council. If you want to defeat the UK, all you have to do is take over the government. If you want to defeat Afghanistan, you have to take over the government and defeat hundreds or thousands of small warlords all snapping at your ankles. Nobody's managed it in centuries of trying.

Now, imagine trying to defeat 30 million little rag-bag armies.

"Fuck it, let's go after France, instead."

OK, pretty impressive really...

SERVICE?

Service, my festering fucking cock!

Shagadelic baby!

Still at it.

The election, in pictures

Courtesy of b3ta:

Fucked off

I'm having a dirty weekend with a pair of nymphomaniac teenage wenches. Try not to miss me too much.

Look ...

It's not fucking hard, you cunts: keep left.

Not keep left unless you feel like it, or keep left when there's not another car between you and the horizon. It's just keep fucking left.

And you, in the new black M3 convertible? I'm fucking especially talking to you, you stupid cunt.

The Dangers of Centralised Power - Part 1

I was reminded of the great Swine Flu non-pandemic of 2009 and the hundreds of thousands of deaths that didn't ensue, despite the World Health Organisation's prognostications.

And an observation in the comments stirred something in my brain:

Well, at least someone did well out of it – the company who got the multi-million pound contract from the Government to produce the vaccine.

Ironically, this comment was made by Letters From A Tory, who no doubt will be doing his very best to make sure that the Tories get to decide which contracts get signed with the government for the next five years and is doubtlessly confident that his tribe is populated by noble, faultless people who will make the right decision every time.

But back in the real world, the reality of it is this: people make bad decisions all the time. I've been divorced twice. I've made loads of terrible decisions and in almost all the cases, I can hand on heart say that my motivation was good. In some cases, even noble.

The good thing about my bad decisions is that they may have affected people, but at the very worst (and it was probably my very worst decision ever) it affected a few dozen people.

Nobody died, or was even hurt. At worst, they were angry, inconvenienced and discomforted. So with the "power" that I had, the worst decision that I took affected less than 40 people and did them no material harm.

Let's look at what happens when you centralise power, though. A while ago, a number of councils decided to invest our money in Icelandic saving schemes. In doing what seemed like a very good idea at the time, they fucked up royally and threw away billions of our money. Services had to be cut, taxpayers had to be squeezed even harder, thousands of old, poor and disabled people who depend on council largesse certainly suffered as a consequence.

The faceless bureaucrats who made the decision are still there, still making more nobly-motivated bad decisions.

Now look further up the scale. The British government signed a contract with no "get-out" clause to buy tons of vaccine off the back of this scare. I heard something like a billion Pound Sterling was involved. I've also read scare stories about the side effects of the vaccine. It may not be statistically significant, but if just one person died because of that bad decision, that's a terrible cost. And if that was a billion Pounds of our money that was cynically thrown away, think about how many Inclusive Diversity Outreach Co-ordinators schoolz-'n'-hospitalz it could have funded. And of course, the person making that decision is still doing that job, making more bad decisions for the greater good.

So, a decision which directly cost you a night's beers or a tank of fuel could also have killed someone. Which seems like a better deal, a night out or a corpse? It's not a difficult choice is it?

The faceless, unaccountable bureaucrat who made that bad decision was probably bounced into it by the panic created by another unaccountable quango and the no "get-out" clause was probably in exchange for a better price. So, the decision was made for perfectly valid, noble reasons, but it was an incredibly bad decision.

Now look further up the scale: we have the United Nations and the European Union, both of which are accruing decision-making power to themselves. Now imagine the potential impact of and EU-wide or UN-wide bad decision. Look at the EU and their shit "low-carbon" lights, packed with poisonous mercury, inconveniencing half-a-billion people. Look at the swine flu thing (WHO is part of the UN), where millions of people around the world got ripped off via their governments and probably dozens or hundreds of people died taking the vaccines.

The greater the centralisation of power, the more people suffer from each bad decision.

Change we can believe in

It's all so different from what it was before: the President of the USA is not spending huge amounts of taxpayer money on his cronies, he's not pissing money away on meaningless pork barrel projects, he's closed Gitmo ... yes, it's all so very different.

But now the Nobel Peace Prize winner has taken a bold step that will have Dubya smacking his forehead and asking himself: "Why didn't I think of that?"

He has publicly authorised the murder of a US citizen. This is, as far as I'm aware, an entirely unprecedented move. I'm sure the government of the US has killed annoying citizens before, but they've never openly done this.

Fortunately, it's one of those dusky, foreign looki... uh... anyway, he's a terrorist, definitely. Look, here's the proof:

He gained prominence after it emerged that he had been in frequent e-mail contact with Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the army psychiatrist who went on a shooting rampage in Fort Hood, Texas, in which 13 people died last November. After the Christmas Day airliner plot, US and Yemeni officials said that Mr al-Awlaki had met the suspected bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who tried to ignite explosives sewn into his underwear.

Yes! He's sent some emails to someone and it's alleged that he's met someone else. And he's said lots of things that the POTUS doesn't like to hear. On that basis, I'm sure nobody else in America has anything that they need to worry about.

There is no way that this could be interpreted as a warning to "right-minded" citizens of the USA to calm down on their criticism of the government, lest they suddenly find themselves associated with a couple of people who have suddenly found themselves facing a show trial, nudge, nudge, narmean?

And I, of course, am not reminded in the slightest of the authoritarian New Labour project. It's becoming clear to me that Obamalamadingdong is nothing like the amoral, unprincipled, vacuous control freak, Tony Blair.

What America needs is more Hope like this! It's a Change anyone can believe in!

Tip of the clown wig to the ASI.

Post-coital sleep

You know how sometimes a shag leaves you feeling energised and other times it leaves you exhausted and you just want to sleep?

Well, I had been hoping that this election announcement was going to energise me. But instead, I feel like I just want to sleep until it's all over. It's not going to make any fucking difference, anyway.

Death by a thousand cuts*

I was faced with one of life's egregious little cunteries a couple of days ago. I can't even remember what it was. I remember it offended my libertarian sensitivities and I thought, "I'd like to tear that down. I'd like to hound those fuckers into the grave."

And then I thought, if I did this, what would it gain me? As it turned out, it would have been about 20 or 30 quid a year. It would have saved every other taxpayer in the country 20 or 30 quid as well, but the mere thought of trying to convince them all to spend 20 minutes for that money was too horrifying for words, especially because 90% of them would probably have wondered why I was advocating strangling kittens or something.

So I just gave up. It wasn't worth it to me. It would have been worth 600 or 900 million quid to the country as a whole, the thick end of a billion quid ripped out of the hands of feckless, unaccountable bastards and firmly wedged back into our own wallets for beer or fags or drugs or whatever.

But the problem is this: there are only about 1500 feckless, unaccountable bastards using that 600 or 900 million quid. These are 1500 people who already work for the same organisation, who are all lorded over by the same fuckwit, who have a very good reason to ensure that awkward bastards like me don't just piss all over their budget. It's much easier to mobilise 1,500 ignorant fucks than it is to mobilise 32,000,000 ignorant fucks. And those 1,500 ignorant fucks have their jobs on the line. So of course, they're going to fight like motherfuckers. Whereas the rest of us, well, we're fighting for 20 or 30 quid. How hard would you fight for 20 or 30 quid? I probably wouldn't fight at all.

Even though "society" would benefit hugely overall from having 1,500 fewer interfering, hectoring, nannying arsebandits sticking their fucking noses into some aspect of our lives, never mind the aggregated benefit of depriving the grasping state of the thick end of a billion quid and never mind the aggregated benefit of us spending the thick end of a billion quid on something that we really want, rather than "inclusive diversity outreach co-ordinators", I just couldn't be bothered, because at the end of the day, it's 20 or 30 quid.

That's the problem that we're faced with: hundreds or thousands of 10 quid, 20 quid, 30 quid irritations. They're petty irritations to you, there's too many of them and no individual one is worth the arseache. However, for the occupants of that bit of hectoring or nannying or bullying, their livelihood is at stake.

And that's why we never get rid of all these fucking government "initiatives" or programs. People get employed and when their job is done, they don't think "what will I do next?" They think "How can I stretch this out?"

The only solution to this is to starve the government of funds. Do every legal thing you can to keep your money in your back pocket. Do your tax return with ruthless accuracy. Don't let the fuckers get a penny more than you're legally obliged to give them. Try to find legal ways of buying things to keep money out of the government's coffers - like buying fags in France or Spain. Fuck this bunch of spendthrift knobjockeys sideways.

If we all take just an extra 200 quid home at the end of the tax year, we'll have done more to cunt up government spending than any of the big three parties are promising.

Do your duty.

Update: The UK Libertarian has an excellent video on this and more, here.

*My fingers typed "Death by a thousand cunts" all by themselves. And it is a perfectly valid title, but I went with this instead.

Even for a government, this is bad

99p out of every £1 spent on the railways is wasted.

Is it really impossible to cut spending without affecting "the front line"?

Is Tarantino a paedo pornographer now?

I'm fairly sure Kill Bill has an animated sequence showing a Japanese gang boss indulging in pederasty. And now the Coroners and Justice Act is in force:

Henceforth, you will be committing an offence if you possess non-real, non-photographic images that are pornographic, "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character" and focus on a child’s genitals or anal region, or portray a range of sexual acts "with or in the presence of a child".

I have a copy of Kill Bill in my DVD collection. It's been on Sky Movies. Am I breaking the law? Probably.

As I've said before, none of Labour's new laws have anything to do with protecting people or children or any such thing. It's all about creating swathes of new offences that can be used to cow people into a state of perpetual fearfulness about whether or not they might be breaking the law. It used to be simple not to break the law, and this allowed a precedent to be set: ignorance of the law is no excuse.

But as Barrenness Scuntland showed us, even the people who define the laws can't keep on top of them all, with their highly-trained legal minds and all. What chance do the little people have? Do you really know you've made it through the day without breaking some law or contravening some regulation somewhere?

I never do, and I lead a very unremarkable life.

Luckily, we have high hopes that the Tories will sweep to power and do away with all this nannying and bullying and ...

Oh.

Quote of the day

They said Blair deserved the benefit of the doubt, back in 1997. He didn't. He was worse than anyone could have imagined.

"New Labour was a recognition that the values of enterprise and aspiration could be fused with a commitment to social justice and fairness. And the party that best exemplifies that view now is David Cameron's Conservative Party.".
Michael Gove, quoted in the Telegraph, March 2010

The warning signs are all there, from "heir to Blair" to "cast iron promises". If you support the Tories and help to put the new Blair on the throne, you will regret it.

-- Vladimir

From my very own blog's comments, as well!

Hysterically funny

Janet and John go to see the Queen:

“Are you ready to go to the Palace to see the Queen, Gordon? Did you put on my favourite mauve tie of yours? You did. Let me look at you… you look sooooo smart. I am so proud of you Gordon.”

I get the distinct impression that Iain Martin thinks Gordon Brown is a bit of a cunt.

Are there any Tories left?

Via BlueLabourHome:

Mr Duncan Smith may prove to be the most influential ex-leader of all time.

God help us all.

Traditional Tories have always been suspicious of the term "social justice". It would seem to imply that social outcomes could be determined in the political equivalent of a courtroom. So when IDS called his new think-tank the Centre for Social Justice, old-fashioned Tories did not know whether to be amused at the clothes-stealing or alarmed at the implications. But there was no need for alarm.

Au cuntraire, there's a load of need for alarm. Cameron is a wet, tax and spend, big "society" Labourite. IDS is enamoured of social justice. Grayling, Lansley, Osborne, and more, all so wet you can shoot snipe off them*.

Even Ken Clarke is so pro-EU that his value as a Tory is diminished and of course, he's quick to smoke the Cameron pole. Hannan, Carswell, Redwood will all rather awkwardly suck Cameron's cock when it comes to the push.

So, are there any proper Tories left?

Oh the Drama!

Once again, I see a pair of old cunts has turned away a pair of pooves from their B&B.

I'm very ambivalent about this. I'm pretty sure that someone who harbours one bigotry probably harbours many and such people are not nice people. But I don't buy into this thing of "if they want to take money from the public, they aren't allowed to discriminate."

Personally, I'm of the opinion that you have the right to do business with whoever you want to. Back in a former life, I had a right old bag of a customer. She was extremely irritating, was never happy with anything, always wanted stuff at the drop of a hat, was rude, surly and unpleasant to deal with. After a while, I just couldn't face it any more and politely severed the business relationship. I now make it a point of not doing business with surly, miserable old bags. In exchange for that, I forgo the income I might get from dealing with surly old bags.

So, I pay a direct price for my discrimination against surly old bags. Should I also endure legislative action and the opprobrium of the intermong for my discrimination? I don't think so.

Frankly, I am entirely unconvinced that any business should not be able to choose who they do business with. I don't care if it's an hotel that doesn't want gays, a restaurant that doesn't want fatties, or a tobacconists that doesn't want smokers.

They are the ones taking a direct hit by not accepting the cash of the people they're bigoted against. Go somewhere else. Tell your friends to boycott the place. The market will sort it out.

But stop making out that it's fucking homophobic oppression, for fuck's sake. It's a weekend out, not fucking gas ovens in Dachau.

Update: Fuck me. Maybe I need to reconsider my opinion.

Update 2: Legend. Is there no beginning to this man's talents? And more.

Update 3: Tim Carpenter weighs in.

Update 4: Got back from the pub and found everybody on twatter trying to outgay each other. Cumbuckets full of faux outrage and claims of hate speech. They were all trying to be "cornholier than thou".

Cunts.

Update 5: The loveliest of lovelies weighs in on the side of the cunts.

Update 6: The UK Libertarian has a different angle and a handy cut-out-and-keep guide.

Irony for @oleuanna : GO BOERS!

In a remarkable turn of events, a mad racist who spent years saying how black people were scum, rapists and murderers has been brutally beaten to death by ... a couple of black people, who claim he didn't pay them for work done.

I wonder if the deranged old fuck was grimly satisfied at being very slightly vindicated.

Just. Fuck. Off.

OK?

A BRIT chemist who helped flood the UK with meow meow has warned of an even DEADLIER legal high about to hit us.

Worried Dave Llewellyn told The Sun that the new drug NRG-1 will be "Britain's worst nightmare" leading to mass brain damage and death.

And:

The chemical make-up of both mephedrone and naphyrone are only slightly different - and BOTH are terrifyingly similar to ecstasy.

Look, I'm the least drug-addled person out there. I've never, ever even taken a puff of weed, let alone disco biscuits or any such crap. But this just reeks of made-up bollocks to me. Half the fucking stuff in the world will have some sort of upper or downer effect on you and kill you if you OD on it. Fuck, you can even OD on water (it's called "drowning", look it up) ... so why the fuck are people getting so piss-arsed about something that costs 25p a hit? It's unlikely to lead to a major crime surge at that price.

And people are always going to try and get squiffy. Why the fuck are you trying to stop them? You may as well try and stop the tide from coming in, like that other King Cunt.

Fucking morons.

World War 2 did not end the great depression

The ASI nails more woolly thinking.

To lose one adviser is careless ...

... but really, if you lose SEVEN do you not maybe need to rethink your strategy a little?

Eric Carlin has become the seventh government drugs advisor to resign, causing further embarrassment to ministers over their handling of drugs policy.

Mr Carlin said that the ban on the “miaow-miaow” party drug this week was rushed through as a politically motivated attempt to make the Government look tough prior to the election.

In a letter to Alan Johnson, the home secretary, Mr Carlin said the decision was "unduly based on media and political pressure".

He added that he was “extremely unhappy” with the way the drugs council operates.

The resignation will not stop mephedrone – linked to 26 deaths in Britain – being added to the list of illegal drugs within a fortnight, classified as a Class B drug.

However the Government’s key relationship with the ACMD is in tatters, and several other advisors are also understood to be considering their positions.

Mr Carlin is the seventh expert to resign from the committee since October, when the controversial chairman Professor David Nutt was sacked.

Two members, Les King and Marion Walker, quit immediately in protest.

Mr Johnson met the ACMD a month later to reassure the expert panel of its independence, but was faced with three more resignations from council members who were not convinced.

Dr Polly Taylor, a consultant veterinary surgeon and long-standing member of the council, then offered her resignation to the home secretary on the eve of mephedrone being banned.

Lest, however, you think that the Tories will be even millimetrically better on this shit, you may wish to reconsider:

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said: “The relationship between the government and its drugs advisory council has become utterly shambolic.

"The decision on Mephedrone was the right one, but this latest resignation suggests pretty clearly that the Home Secretary has been completely unable to restore his relationship with the experts who advise him.”

No, Mr Grayling, you utter cockspanner, it's precisely because the fucking experts that are so fucking vaunted in this fucking shit hole of a cuntry were completely ignored and run roughshod over, that they're resigning in fucking droves.

As you will find out yourself in the unlikely event of a fucking Tory victory.

You useless fucking oxygen thief.

What a B'stard!

Hiding from the Stasi

I find it seriously depressing to think that the free and wild internet of my youth has become so spied upon that projects to protect your privacy are now so common.

It's very difficult to surf anonymously any more, with endless cookies and logs being kept by ISPs to allow the state to spy on your surfing habits. If this bothers you, have a look at TOR. It's rough and ready, and it's not a one-stop anonymiser, but because of the way things work, I doubt they'd ever be able to achieve a one-stop anonymiser.

In a nutshell, all you have to do is go to http://tor.eff.org and leech a binary, run it, and config everything for socks A proxy on port 9050, but that wouldn't be much of a article would it?

More here.

Same old Tories? Or Caring, Understanding New Tories?

Lately, I'm starting to feel sympathetic to some of the charges levied by Labour against the Tories. For one thing, the Tories have historically had a whiff of the jackboot about them. And while Labour are not immune from this charge by any means, anyone voting Tory in the hopes of getting a slightly less nasty government will be unamused by this:

Since 1997, Labour has, true to its roots, concentrated on building big government. Gordon Brown’s unremitting control-freakery has peppered public services with targets and processes, regulation and paperwork. The result has been a bigger state.

So, the first thing that is hypocritical of the Caring Understanding New Tories is that their control-freakery means they wouldn't publish a polite criticism of their blog post. LabourList Mk II, anyone?

Since the Tories are really just pink-frilly-knickers with no fucking balls and can't face criticism on their own blog, I guess I'll just have to criticise the useless motherfuckers here, won't I?

But really, given an intro like that, what could I possibly find to criticise? Well:

We want to make it easier for people to contribute to the lives of their communities in the ways they see best. We want a bigger society.

Is that "society" as in "social justice", "social care", "social services"? You'll excuse me if I say that the last fucking thing we need is more of that fucking shit, you utter cunt.

This mentality drives one of our most exciting proposals for young people – the National Citizen Service. This will offer all 16-year olds the opportunity to take part in a three-week social project in the summer after they’ve finished their GCSEs. First and foremost we want young people to experience a challenge – we’ll take them out of their comfort zones on a residential team-building course of a week or more.

Ah yes. Moving them out of their comfort zone for a week. What harm can that do? Not much, I suppose. But I suspect this week will become two, then three, then six, then twelve weeks -- which is roughly what the Soviet military reckoned was enough to take well over 95% of the population and mould them into compliant little drones. just 12 weeks of "being out of your comfort zone" ... and that comfort zone would get gradually less and less comfortable, with increasingly strict discipline, less freedom, earlier wakeup calls, more physical activities and less time to think. Groupthink and "communal values" would be encouraged.

And certainly, the "no-comfort zone" would not allow in any but state-approved media and state-approved reading material.

After that they will be sent back to their own communities to consider what they think they can do to help meet their area’s needs. They will then draw up plans for social action projects which they will set up and keep going with volunteer work in the following year. This will be inspirational hard work giving every young person the opportunity to rub shoulders with others from very different walks of life and work with them to build better societies and communities.

If that paragraph doesn't give you an involuntary shudder of horror and revulsion, you're probably better off dead.

Just think, once you have been moulded into a useful little drone, they will send you back to meet with king and queen bees, who will guide you in the paths of righteousness.

So, after the true spine-chilling horror, we move back into the fatuous uselessness we have come to expect of iDave's Caring Understanding New Tories:

Equally we need to build better rites of passage for young people in this country. At the moment too many of the perceived markers for adulthood are negative – getting drunk, smoking, having underage sex – NCS is an opportunity for us to offer the youth of today an indication that society will value them by what they put in, not what they take out.

Which just goes to fucking show what a completely unaware poltroon wrote this shit. Listen, you nasty little aspiring-fascist bowl of rancid monkey spunk, by the time kids are 16, they're either OK or they're already fucked. This creepy, horrible and appalling idea of yours is the wrong thing and far too fucking late to fix the ostensible problem anyway.

Cuntservatives: striving to be every single bit as bullying, nasty and awful as Labour. Oh, and "Tim Loughton"? You're definitely a CUNT.

Standing for parliament - in small words

April Fool.

Thought for the day

Imagine how different the story would've been if Jesus had been crucified on April Fool's Day...
-- Suman Biswas

Something for @rogthornhill

New Government Department: DOGW

That's my kind of beer!

Fucking Hell!

Standing for parliament - update!

Just in case you hadn't all guessed ...

LHC II planned for Circle Line

All I want to know is, is this coming out of taxpayer money?

Fewer roadworks imminent!

Hurrah! An alternative to digging up roads to lay cables has finally come about!

Length matters

I don't want to bore non-techies with this one, but I do want you to think about your passwords for just a few minutes.

The first thing is this: even if your password isn't something obvious like "password" or "obo", then hackers don't have to guess them. There is free, readily available software out there to do brute-force password hacking. So they can fire it up, go out for a cup of coffee, do the groceries, have a good night out and come back to find your password ready and waiting for them.

The second thing is this: the longer your password is, the longer it takes to crack.

The third thing is this: the more types of characters you use, the longer it takes to crack.

Let me give you a for instance: if I choose the password "obo", a brute-force cracker will take an average of 0.02 seconds to crack. So, "immediately". If I choose a slightly longer password, like "obnoxio", that will take two and a quarter hours. Much better, but still not really secure. However, if I simply change the password to include numbers and special characters, e.g. "Obnox1o$", it will take 210 years to crack.

And "Obnox1o$ Cl0wn" could take 154,640,721,434,000 years to crack using brute force.

So, put a bit of effort in, mix it up a little and make it just a little bit longer. Because it's worth it.

More info here.

Standing for parliament - update!

After a bit of phoning around, I've discovered I can stand in Cambridge.

This could be fun!

Vote Labour. Or else.

The Guardian has pictures of Labour's new attack campaign posters here and detailed analysis here.

Look, can we just shitcan this Keynesian crap now?

Timmy has an excellent dissection here:

The car scrappage scheme has protected about 4,000 jobs in the UK auto industry, Government estimates have claimed.

At a cost of £400 million.

As stimulus measures go this isn’t all that effective. The number of jobs saved is of course at the high end of estimates: no, don’t be silly about this, this is the people who spent that money defending the decision to have done so. Of course they’ve put the best gloss on it.

So £100,000 per job saved. Given median incomes of around £25,000 saving a job for a year costs four times what that job pays for a year. So we have a multiplier of 0.25…..which really, really, isn’t the sort of number which gives one confidence in the merits of Keynesian spending. For that we want a multiplier of over 1.

And as for the idea that such Keynesian spending pays for itself….well, the tax take on £25,000 is something like £8,000 (income tax plus NI) so we’re spending £100,000 to get £8,000 back in tax……which again doesn’t look like such spending pays for itself.

This shit just never works. No government spending has ever been shown to "pay for itself", let alone magically create more wealth. In the example above, it would have been scads cheaper to just let businesses go to the wall and give everyone two years' pay. And in two years, anyone can find a job if they want it. I also bet that not all of the businesses would have folded or that all those 4000 jobs would have gone, either.

I know it's appealing to think that the government is trying to help. But for fuck's sake, when it's making everyone worse off, how the cunting fuck is it helping?

Tax and spend just doesn't work. End of.

Standing for parliament

I've been mulling it over, and inspired by Old Holborn's example, I've decided that I'm going to stand for Parliament. I think I may have missed the deadline for signing up as an official LPUK candidate, so I may stand as an "Independent Libertarian" or some such.

I've had enough of the shameless, arrogant cunts who think they know better than all of us. I'm prepared to take the pay cut to stand up and speak truth to power.

I am, however, entirely clueless as to how this all works and while I can Google stuff, I would be grateful if anyone could provide me with any definitive pointers as to how to go about this.

Fucking hellski.