Jacqui Smith Waterboarded.
February 20, 2009
My favourite Peter Brookes cartoon of the week, shamelessly ”borrowed” from Times Online…
Home Secretary’s Home Secrecy.
February 18, 2009
You know, I can sum up my thoughts regarding Jacqui Smith quite succinctly. In bullet points, even!
- Political lightweight.
- Promoted to a job that is quite obviously beyond her.
- Already feeling the knives in her back.
- Destined to rise no further.
- Working the system shamelessly. (I’m being generous here.)
- Possibly a pawn, probably ignorant of the fact.
- As damaging to this country as the rest of her buddies.
Time for her to go, along with Brown and that weird bottom lip of his (his wife really should tell him to stop breathing it in like that — it’s annoying.) My feeling is, however, that Jacqui’s political demise will come a lot sooner than Brown’s. I give her a couple of months at the most.
Well, I can hope, can’t I?
Science: Back Where It Belongs.
February 16, 2009
If there’s one thing guaranteed to spur this normally quite reserved and reticent (no, really, I am) gentleman into voicing his opinion, it’s an assault on science and reason — especially one, as my regular readers will know, that comes from a nonscientific background. The Bush administration, for this and many other reasons, was therefore of great concern to me, and the consequences of what may have happened had Obama not won the presidency simply didn’t bear thinking about.
So when Obama promised during his campaign and his inaugural speech to reverse Bush’s ban on embryonic stem cell research I was, naturally, over the moon. Yes, I was a little sceptical. Obama has a great deal to live up to — too much, I think — and there was a niggling doubt at the back of my mind over whether he would actually fulfil this particular promise. I am, however, happy to now say that it looks as though my scepticism (“caution” might be a better word) was unwarranted.
There are people out there who will argue that embryonic stem cell research is immoral/unethical, and even some who will argue that it is a futile or unnecessary line of research. I would disagree with both of these positions. We have a duty and responsibility to at least try to explore all treatment possibilities and, until the alternatives are perfected, this for me is a significant step in the right direction.
The possible scientific/medical benefits apart, it strikes me as hugely symbolic. Obama is clearly sending out a very strong message. A message I for one appreciate.
Disrespectful, Innit? (Actually, No, It Isn’t.)
December 19, 2008
This has to be the most pointless and ridiculous story I’ve read in a while.
Hip-hop star, Estelle (okay, I’ll hold my hand up; never heard of her), has apparently accused Jeremy Paxman of being disrespectful to the rapper Dizzee Rascal. As she would have it, Paxman treated Rascal like “an idiot” by asking him “Do you feel yourself to be British?” — within the context of a discussion about race and “Britishness”.
Having watched the interview I actually found Paxman to be quite affectionate (for him!) and the notion that asking a black British man if he feels British is somehow out of order shows a distinct lack of intelligence and, quite possibly, prejudice on the part of Estelle.
“That was so… crazy,” Estelle said. “I don’t ever want to diss another artist that I know is in the same struggle and grind as me, but it was the look on Jeremy Paxman’s face.”
That look suggested to me a good-humoured leg-pull. All three participants seemed to be enjoying the discussion, however different their walks of life may be.
It strikes me that it is actually Estelle who is being the disrespectful one here. Disrespectful to Paxman and to Dizzee Rascal.
Obama Apparently Set to Unpick Bush’s “Most Egregious Acts”.
November 10, 2008
Whatever my concerns regarding the possibility of Obama returning to protectionist ways, I still have absolutely no doubt that the recent electoral result was most emphatically the right one.
In the Guardian today, Ed Pilkington reports that:
“Barack Obama will move swiftly to unpick many of what he sees as the most egregious acts of the Bush administration when he enters the White House in January, including restrictions on stem cell research and moves to allow oil drilling in wilderness areas, a leading member of his transition team said yesterday.”
Whilst I applaud all of these intentions, the one that really stands out for me is the easing/possible removal of restrictions on stem cell research. This sets the tone, I believe, for the impending Obama administration’s attitude to science in general, and it’s one that leaves me feeling hugely relieved. For too long the religious right has dominated and limited one of the most scientifically and technologically able countries in the world — superstition and self-righteousness, disguised quite crudely as morality, stalling advancement and (let’s not be coy about it) ultimately killing people.
A good first step. Long may it continue.
Billy Connolly and Sarah Palin.
November 2, 2008
Yes, I know, I’m probably having rather too much fun at Sarah’s expense, now, but with a bit of luck this kind of humour will be past its sell-by-date within a couple of days — so I’m using it whilst I can.
It’s a Sunday and as those of you who actually pay attention will know, I’m not exactly the type to do church. My head spins round and I vomit pea soup at the mere thought of it. So, instead, I spent the morning productively.
No, I didn’t work on the outlines for The Dummy. That’s for weekdays. Instead, I concentrated on that other dummy, sweet, succulent, sycophantic Sarah. First I found the Sarkozy episode and then, later, this piece from a couple of months back.
Mention of George W. Bush’s similar problem then brought to mind a Billy Connolly piece that I particularly enjoyed.
[WARNING: This video contains foul language like "fucking", "shit" and "George W. Bush".]
I can just see Billy playing a 21st Century Henry Higgins to Sarah Palin’s Eliza Dolittle in a really bizarre and possibly quite disturbing version of Pygmalion.
“It’s fucking nuclear, you brick!”
From My Arse, I Can See Belgium.
November 2, 2008
Oh dear. Sarah Palin gets reeled in by quite possibly the worst French accent (and the guy was from Montréal?!) since Peter Sellers had trouble with that dratted “minkey” in the Pink Panther movies.
The Unholy Trinity.
November 1, 2008
Ah yes. It was only a matter of time, wasn’t it, before McCain rolled out the esteemed and intellectually challenged Arnold Schwarzenegger to make up his Rapturous Unholy Trinity? With talk of war heroes and backlashes, he wowed his audience and looked… well… suitably Arnie-ish.
I have no idea how Mr Schwarzenegger’s rhetoric and hyperbole sounds to your average American voter, but I would seriously hope that they find it as unimpressive and hollow as I.
A couple of points that got me shaking my head and sighing:
- Apparently, Mr Obama — with the money he used for television ads — could have bailed out the banks and paid off everyone’s mortgages. This was hyperbole, wasn’t it? He wasn’t really being serious, right? You see, from this side of the pond it’s difficult to be completely certain — but I’m going to assume that he was speaking literally, even though I realise he probably wasn’t, because I can
Obama’s campaign budget was estimated at the beginning of October as being somewhere in the region of $450 million. This was money raised for campaign purposes. The money allocated to television ads would have been a percentage of this. I don’t know the actual figures and it’s irrelevant, anyway. The point is, this money was never intended to be used as an economic crutch — or anything else other than campaign funds. It is preposterous to even suggest (with or without hyperbole) that it could have been used in any other way. Yes, it is rather excessive but, on an interesting side note, back in 2006 Arnold Schwarzenegger’s personal wealth was said to be around the $800 million mark. Hey, Arnie, why don’t you bail out the banks? Jerk. - John McCain was a prisoner of war. D’you know something, I have a deep-seated suspicion of war heroes who use their past exploits in this way. My great-grandfather (who died when I was about eight or nine) fought in the trenches in France during the First World War, and no one in our family knew anything of what he went through during that time — other than the fact that it was so distressing that he chose not to talk about it. Now this isn’t to say, of course, that everyone who talks about what they went through during battle is somehow embroidering the facts. People quite often need to talk, to share, to help others — from friends to historians — understand the reality of the situations in which they found themselves. But to use those memories, the dead colleagues and friends, the suffering… to use them on the campaign trail, to allow fellow campaigners to refer to them, that I’m afraid strikes me as cynical and inherently suspicious. There were many heroes during the Vietnam War, some in the Armed Forces, and some on the steps of the Kent State University. If Mr McCain is a real hero, it may well have served him better to not have used it for possible political gain.
There’s a definite superficiality to McCain’s campaign that seems to be predominating. Whilst I’m no political commentator — and certainly not the obsessive campaign-watcher that some are — it does strike me that this is the fundamental difference between McCain and Obama. Granted, the latter is far from perfect (anyone who chooses to be a politician is by definition imperfect in my book!) but he at least seems to have something like substance.
I may be wrong — but when I hear Schwarzenegger referring to Obama’s “scrawny little arms”, I tend to feel that I’m not.
Hey, Arnie! Another suggestion for you: why don’t you go and beef up your scrawny little brain?
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again:
Jerk.
Christopher Hitchens on (Not Literally) Sarah Palin.
October 30, 2008
Contrary to many a rumour out there, I don’t always agree with Old Hitch. But in this recent article for Slate, he takes the Republican Party’s vice presidential candidate and very ably shows her for what we all already knew her to be:
“With Palin, however, the contempt for science may be something a little more sinister than the bluff, empty-headed plain-man’s philistinism of McCain. We never get a chance to ask her in detail about these things, but she is known to favor the teaching of creationism in schools (smuggling this crazy idea through customs in the innocent disguise of “teaching the argument,” as if there was an argument), and so it is at least probable that she believes all creatures from humans to fruit flies were created just as they are now. This would make DNA or any other kind of research pointless, whether conducted in Paris or not. Projects such as sequencing the DNA of the flu virus, the better to inoculate against it, would not need to be funded. We could all expire happily in the name of God. Gov. Palin also says that she doesn’t think humans are responsible for global warming; again, one would like to ask her whether, like some of her co-religionists, she is a “premillenial dispensationalist”—in other words, someone who believes that there is no point in protecting and preserving the natural world, since the end of days will soon be upon us.”
As a Brit, there is very little I can do directly to prevent her and McCain from gaining office. And yet the choices that you, my American friends and readers, will soon make will have consequences on a global scale. This impacts on us all. As imperfect a political specimen as Obama might be, he’s far superior to McCain and Little Miss Full of Shit. So please, use your vote wisely.
Don’t give these inbred arseholes the opportunity to, amongst other things, possibly make the End of Days prophecy a reality.
Clothes Maketh the Candidate.
October 26, 2008
Whilst amusing myself by watching this “explanation” by Sarah Palin of the $150,000 wardrobe issue (I’m tempted to say at this point that maybe she should have gone to IKEA, but that really isn’t very funny, now is it?), I found myself scratching my head. Admittedly, I don’t know a great deal about how the RNC allocates its funds, but when she says…
“[...] they are not my property [...]“
… is that really the point? The fact of the matter is, the money was spent by the RNC — probably in an attempt to make this proud hockey mom look less of a hockey mom, or maybe to wreck the Saturday Night Live budget — to improve her image. Okay, if it had all gone according to plan, they all would have benefited, but the bottom line is, she got to dress up and she loved every minute of it.
$150,000. And to think they could have improved her image at no cost whatsoever, and to greater effect… by simply telling her to keep her bloody mouth shut.
Sheesh. These guys could really do with a thrifty Yorkshireman on their team. If anyone from the RNC is reading this and wishes me to share my expertise with them, by all means email me. It goes against the grain, politically, of course, but… let’s call it $150,000 — I’m anyone’s for $150,000.
