Various Philosophies of Cynicism

Why not let them filibuster?

It seems an innocuous question, but one I have looked at, because, as a mere mortal, the one simple thing that flowed very freely through my mind was – just let them get on with it and see how long they can talk without a piss.

Then, I watched Jon Stewart tonight and on his show his guest made the same remark, let them do it and see how much of a jerk they would look.

But it isn’t that easy …

In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes needed to invoke cloture to three-fifths (60) of Senate membership. At the same time, they made the filibuster “invisible” by requiring only that 41 Senators state that they intend to filibuster; critics say this makes the modern filibuster “painless.”

Link

So I ask again, why not only let them, but make them? You will have to have 41 get on their feet and jointly make themselves look like complete tools. Proving that once and for all that the GOP is the party of “No!”. Which, as so many of us know is the case.

But what else is available for those Dem’s who have the balls for a fight and those who, as it also seems are not ready to fight their corner, those who want to stay out of the lime-light and roll over and die in the current cause of allowing the GOP to rule through minority?

1. The Senate moves to vote on a controversial nominee.
2. At least 41 Senators call for filibuster.
3. The Senate Majority Leader raises a point of order, saying debate has gone on long enough and that a vote must be taken within a certain time frame. (Current Senate rules requires a cloture vote at this point.)
4. The Vice President — acting as presiding officer — sustains the point of order.
5. A Democratic Senator appeals the decision.
6. A Republican Senator moves to table the motion on the floor (the appeal).
7. This vote – to table the appeal – is procedural and cannot be subjected to a filibuster; it requires only a majority vote (in case of a tie, the Vice President casts the tie-breaking vote).
8. With debate ended, the Senate would vote on the issue at hand; this vote requires only a majority of those voting. The filibuster has effectively been closed with a majority vote instead of a three-fifths vote.

Though you would not have the 67 votes to change the filibuster rule, you do have the ‘Nuclear Option’ (not the weapons sense).

So why don’t the Dem’s use this?

At some point the Dem’s have to look in the mirror and say to themselves that they are a massive majority, Obama has to slap some faces, and they have to get the job done! That is what the majority of the American people elected them for – so get on with it by hook or by crook.

Get ‘er done!

2010: 01/29
CATEGORY: Blah!
Comment
Democracy
Personal Opinion
Politics
Republicans
United States of America
World
1 comment

Fabian, New Labour and BIG government

I am far from the right-side of the political spectrum – but to make an argument for big government in reaction to snow clearing; kinda gets me to thinking, again, what I want from a left-wing government.

And that, surprisingly, is what I want from any government.

I do not want the over-bloated government(s) we have today – I want them to get on with what we elected them for and not much else. But Sunder over at LibCon feels differently.

I want the government to make sure hospitals are open, nurses and doctors are employed. Schools are giving our kids a good/great education, running the economy to the benefit of all including plenty of forward planning. I want the government to be spectacular at what they do and certainly not mediocre in trying to poke their noses into every aspect of our lives. As they do now.

As for the snow clearing situation – the UK, and most, if not all, of Europe has been hit with a snow/ice storm of a magnitude you see once in a generation. So someone is going to get caught out. That being the case ‘Pager’ bring a great point into the mix – one of the local council being sued for providing an essential service at the time of need:

In guidance to its members, who advise businesses throughout the country the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health said: “When clearing snow and ice, it is probably worth stopping at the boundaries of the property under your control.”

Clearing a public path “can lead to an action for damages against the company, e.g. if members of the public, assuming that the area is still clear of ice and thus safe to walk on, slip and injure themselves”.

I want a government that will tell those lawyers not to be so bloody stupid!

People walk on footpaths – or they stay at home, up to them really. Why should someone slipping on a cleared path be able to sue? I can understand if a company had made an ice-rink outside of their shop doorway to video them falling over to add to Youtube – but because a local government employee clears and salts/grits so the public have access they are fearful of a law suit? The mind boggles!

That isn’t an argument for big government – it shows how a society has become a society of idiotic lawsuits! And while this is the case are in fear of providing what is actually needed!

Alisdair Cameron:

Whoa, Sunder. Roads,power supplies,transport etc are infrastructure. Not incompatible with smaller govt at all. Govt should do more of the basics competently (and devolved down to the most local level:even the Fabians agree with that for the future). What should be avoided are the huge, non-infrastructure, intrusive vanity projects that have given rise to the calls for end ‘big’ govt.Furthermore, those calling fro smaller govt aren’t all right-wing-nuts, but include many of those on the left disappointed and dismayed with remote centralised monoliths who seem to love ‘mission creep’ and seek to impose rather than serve (eg ID cards,surveillance and database society, the ISA fiasco etc etc)

… and Shatterface:

Nobody wants to pay gritters to sit around for 10 months waiting for something to do – but they will pay them to do a vital service when needed. Far from making a case for Big Government you’ve made a case for adequate pre-planning and flexible employment contracts.

Maybe those employed snooping on citizens should only be brought in when absolutely necessary rather than attempt to justify their jobs by finding new areas of our lives to stick their beaks in?

Seems bloody good advice to me!

2010: 01/11
CATEGORY: Bias
Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Blogs
Comment
I shit you not
New Labour
Political correctness
1 comment

That, was the decade, that was

I remember 1970 – it was just after 1969. That shows you how old I really am, I was 9 at the time. Long time ago and a lot of memories, too many methinks.

But, I only mention 1970 because that was a decade start that I remember so well because it was, indeed, new. The New Year has always, from that start, had a great appeal to me. I love New Year’s Eve, I think it should have the same reverence that Christmas day does. A day to celebrate what was, what was gone, what is to come. Maybe I am eccentric.

Though to those who were alive and kicking around that time, they looked forward, because they could see it on the event horizon, the millennium. It was so near, yet so far away. I read many-a-book depicting how we would be living in the 2000’s, how the world would be a place of hope, of dreams, of something that had never transpired before – all new, all better, all greater that we, as a spices, could not even really dream of.

Then on a great day it dawned. January 1st 2000 – a day when so many felt that the electricity grid would fail. We were told that we would have to support ourselves for at least 72 hours because the water would not run through our taps. No money would dispense from the ATM – there would be civil and moral panic.

As we look at history we know that as the computers clicked by, and some of us watched, nothing happened, just one second followed another and we knew that today would be as yesterday. The fireworks rang out in a mirage of luminescence high in the sky and the noughties were born. Now they have died – and I look back and think of that 1970 year – nothing has changed and all has stayed the same.

Not with technology. How could even the greatest of SF writer know what we know, see what we have seen and achieved so much and so little all at the same time?

The noughties gone, and will be written about in historical terms, some good, some bad. Yet we still can live in hope that we do not re-enact our past and take lessons from it and learn. We can, with hope in our hearts move forward to a better year, a better decade where we can say it was worth living through the last ten years.

Though, and I must add this, it will not be because of those we now call politicians – it will be because of us – all of us. A decade that has seen so much fear, promotion of fear and the credible evidence is there for us all to see – we, we are the ones who must now look upon each other; not as enemies to be de-humanised and detested, but to come together as brother and sister in and as one race.

Will the dawn of a new decade mean that? I have no idea – I want it to, though there are those who want a status quo that has hurt us all so much to continue.

01/01/10 has a ring to it. Lest we forget who we are and that we have the ability to communicate in more ways today than any other time in our history – and we cannot, still, let those who rule understand what we want.

I do not end this blog post with ‘Happy New Year’ – I end it with “Happy New Decade”. Let us hope that it will be a great one – and that we can let the last one slowly die off only to prove that out of the ashes great things can come about.

I wish you well, no matter what your political leanings – and I wish more than that we can all see a brighter future for us all.

2010: 01/02
CATEGORY: Christianity
Comment
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Sci/Fi
UK
United States of America
World
2 comments

Return of the Bastard Child …

I am not, nor ever will be, a tourism information officer – and I thank the Lord for that one. But one thing I can say is that if you ever should visit the UK, never, ever call anyone a bastard. It evokes an anger that I have never seen any other word present. It is a hated word – and, oddly, a word that is used in North America as if it means nought. So much so that the word ‘fuck’ cannot be said on TV – but bastard is as acceptable as ice-cream.

What we are now seeing in their move to stigmatise all who are not married in the UK is that their ideas of branding children as bastards is the way forward in Tory eyes.

Not just this, but that working-class fathers are too thick to be around children – to love them as their mothers do, and that those mothers may well be as stupid as the fathers because it will be up to granddad and grandma who will, eventually, have to bring up the kids.

“The aspiration of marriage is becoming harder to achieve. Instead of it becoming just what you do in your 20s, it has become like scaling Mount Everest, a sort of great moral endeavour – and something that requires a lot of time and money. We think we need to ease some of the pressures,” he said.

“There is quite a lot of evidence coming from America about how we are in danger of heading towards a society where middle-class people get married and people on low and erratic incomes don’t get married, and that in turn leads to a divergence of a whole host of other outcomes.

Odd that. It was the Tories who almost destroyed the manufacturing sector in the UK – a policy carried forward by New Labour – and that baton will be taken up once again by the Tories if they return to power.

One explanation for the middle-class bias towards marriage in the US, Willetts said, was the fact that there were fewer eligible working-class males, owing to deskilling of societies.

A Middle-Class ideal won’t cross over into the working-class if there are no jobs to sustain a family – it really is as simple as that. Though Willetts and his other Middle-Class think-tank buddies will not entertain that idea.

So the policy of outcasting will begin in earnest once the Tories return. Stay married, get married, only have children within marriage. There will be briefings by some bureaucrat before a civil marriage: The green paper will propose home nurse visits for new families with greater emphasis on help for the father, and relationship guidance at the time of a civil marriage similar to that given by a vicar.

Current evidence suggested that people divorced too readily, but Willetts admitted that his party could find no way to make divorce more difficult in law.

At least he did admit that they looked at ways to do it.

Welcome to the new conservatives.

2009: 12/23
CATEGORY: Bias
Blah!
Civil Liberties
Comment
Conservatives
Personal Opinion
Politics
Twattery
UK
Write comment

Conservatives fuelling terrorism?

The world has changed – a pretty bold statement, but it has, yet we see so much neo-conservatism around, you can add to that, neo-liberalism, but what are the effects of this ‘new’ conservatism?

As I say, and, I believe that I am in the majority, the world has certainly changed – for me it is a more liberal world now with conservatives fighting for the imagined 1950s Hollywood world that never really existed in the first place. Hollywood has a lot to answer for, but it is those who believe the celluloid as fact, rather than fiction, that are to blame. Not us who live in a world of reality – certainly not us who fight at every opportunity against neo-conservatism, or, indeed, conservatism, itself.

I add this link because I think it is pertinent to the argument about what disillusioned conservatives are, and feel.

The ‘War on Terror’ was and still is an extension on the war on drugs. We see now that the US is fighting on all fronts – whether it be Latino’s, al-Qaeda or anyone who is involved in the drugs trade – a trade that is as lucrative today as it has always been – and will still be as long as conservatives harp on about how evil drugs are.

The addiction to drugs is the real failure, we also have to say that those who are the real victims to those addictions – the crime that comes about because of it, and that terrorist benefit from it, because it is illegal, because conservatives will not admit anything other than what their favourite mantra is ‘ban it!’ money flows to these organisations – by the millions.

We look at abstinence – an abject failure. We look at “just say, No!” Failure once again.

Though I believe conservatives have a heart somewhere – it is not in the right place. It is not the sole of the being, it is a politically motivated power-cycle that they cannot rid themselves of, to look at the world as it really is, and more-so, accept that the world is very different from their favourite Hollywood movie of the ’50s.

Rational thought, as a stand alone, says that if the Bin-Laden gang, Columbian warlords, Afghan farmers, Mexican boss of bosses can make billions from delivering misery to thousands across the world – because conservatives stand by their ignorant views – shouldn’t questions be asked?

I suppose that al-Qaeda have grow up in one sense. They now know it is a matter of raw cash they need to prolong their evil fight, as it is always in such cases. And we have to look at who and whom are allowing it – it is those who want to outlaw just about anything that is pleasurable to the majority because of small-mindedness.

Those of small-mind are both neo and old conservative. This world is getting worse, not because of liberal views but because of outdated, incoherent, nonsensical views of a vocal minority. And way too many listen with the view that wrapping some in chains will free them more.

2009: 12/19
CATEGORY: Bias
Blah!
Christianity
Comment
Conservatives
Democracy
Personal Opinion
Politics
Republicans
Write comment

Tories re-writing their own history?

I’m always at odds with myself when I think about the Tories and what they say – and what they do – when in government. In fact, they are better at producing bullshit than New Labour – and that is really hard to do.

Yet, dopey-Dave is on with his ‘Marriage is great we will give you tax breaks to stay married’ skit, again:

Rewarding married couples and civil partnerships in the tax system has long been Conservative Party policy, as has the commitment to end what the Tory leader calls the “couple penalty” that pays people to live apart rather than together.

Specific proposals by Mr Cameron’s predecessor, Iain Duncan Smith, to allow married couples to combine their tax allowances – which would have cost nearly £5bn – have never been adopted as party policy.

The thing is, I dislike Ed Balls with a passion, but in this case he is right:

Mr Balls has hit back, saying the Tory policy is to judge marriage as first class and any other relationship as second class. That, he claimed, was not in the interests of children.

A child’s welfare was best protected though stable and lasting relationships between parents.

Political arguments over family policy often end in tears.

Though Balls and his ilk have decimated civil liberties through their ‘But think of the children’ policies – at this point in the argument whether marriage is the right thing or not for the benefit of kids, OK.

We have to look back to the point in history where the marriage tax allowance was abolished – you would be correct in thinking that it was a Labour governments idea. After all – everything that has gone wrong in policy has been New Labour’s fault since 1543 – according to the Tories, but it was a Thatcher government and Ken Clarke was the Chancellor who abolished this tax allowance. Will Dave and IDS apologise to the British people for that policy? That would, of course, be a no.

Ken Clarke is sticking by his guns, though – there you have to be somewhat joyed that at least one Tory is sticking to the blue ribbon. The rest are following Dave down the path of “Anyone but New Labour”.

You see – the Tories have one blindingly obvious problem. New Labour are, to all intents and purposes, Tories! They, by Blair’s own admission, followed Thatcher policy – so Dave has to go further to the right or, as is happening, re-write Tory recent history or (which will happen when hell freezes over) go to a left-wing stance.

This bullshit about giving tax breaks to keep people married, and mum or dad to stay at home while the other slaves away for a low wage just won’t happen. They, the Tories of all hues of blue, have called for massive cuts in public spending – a tax break to married couple will cost somewhere in the region of 5 billion quid. They have to raise that somewhere else or their pledge is dead in the water.

All is change and all stays the same. Especially when the leader of the Tories is sniffing the seat where Brown currently sits on the green benches.

Beware a Tory bringing good news!

2009: 12/09
CATEGORY: Blah!
Comment
Conservatives
New Labour
Politics
Twattery
UK
Write comment

Shakes head and Head-desk

Though I love politics – and openly state that I detest politicians – there is a time when you really, really have to wonder where those in power get their ideas from.

I could understand it if it were a matter that they believed in an alien invasion, the world coming to an end in 2012 or something that would should they had some form of mental deficiency – but this is not the case.

From the link:

The Senior Salaries Review Body review followed claims some peers abuse the £174-a-night overnight allowance.

It says overnight claims should be cut to £140 but daily allowances for office costs and food, worth up to £161.50, be replaced by the £200 attendance fee.

So – if I am not mistaken – if you have abused the expenses system, and as a rebuke, you get a 60 quid a day raise!?

And they, those parasites in power oft ask why people will not vote for them or understand that the “Upper” chamber is loathed and detested even more.

Can they not understand that it is because of moves like this? It is, as always – taking the piss and passing it off and reform.

Peers who attend the House of Lords every day it sits – an average of 150 days a year – could receive up to about £30,000 a year if they claimed the maximum attendance allowance.

When, oh when are we going to get some leaders – or just your average MPs with some balls who can see, and do something about this abuse? Managerial politics is killing the very art, and I know many-a-person who are getting very, very pissed off at what is going on within the walls of parliament.

2009: 11/27
CATEGORY: Blah!
Comment
Democracy
I shit you not
Politics
Twattery
Write comment

If miracles are to happen …

… and New Labour were to pull off an election victory – they would appoint Mandelson as Minister of Propaganda.

Lord Mandelson is being tipped as a possible “minister for information” under a shake-up of the way Downing Street holds its media briefings announced today.

It is a position that would suit him well, after all he would not need to fight an election, he is an appointed “Lord”. Even though he has had to resign several times from other positions in government he is sticking this term out – no matter what.

But why would the country want a minister of information?

The first thing you have to look at is that Mandelson was a very good spin-doctor for a certain T. Blair, ‘member him? As MoI he would have the press eating out of his hands, something he likes. He would simply hold a press conference each week to tell the country what was happening within the government – yet, as the Guardian says, he would keep his title of business secretary…

Has Mandelson the high idea that he will be the president of the UK? I can see that idea appealing to him, too. After all, as many know the open secret, Mandelson is the de facto PM even now – but I could be wrong.

2009: 11/11
CATEGORY: Blah!
New Labour
Politics
Twattery
UK
Write comment

How do MPs calm public anger?

By accepting a report that is taking the piss!

The BBC has reported that MP will no longer have the luxury of claiming mortgage interest on their second homes – but will be able to claim rent. Who will they rent from and how much rent will they be allowed to claim?

These new proposals will take effect over a five year term – how lovely for those poor under-aid MPs. It would be good if they treated the general public with as much concern. On benefits, get a job, your payments stop or you are fined or worse, banged up. Yet, I don’t know of any MP that has even been charged with anything. Though, as it is in parliament-speak – they were all doing this within the rules, or so close to them no action will be taken.

Also in the report it is said to contain some sentiment about not being able to employ your family members – but this has brought anger from some who claim that you cannot tear up contracts. That would be a legal dispute.

Putting thousands of public service workers and Royal Mail staff on the dole is just fine, though!

One Tory wife who works for her husband and has done for a number of years points to the expenses scandal as a public misconception and that she, as well as others, work really hard for their crust from the public purse. I am sure she does – yet that isn’t what this whole thing was all about – or was it?

It was about fleecing the trough, that is what people were, and still are, angry about. See your Lawyers, take action in the courts – all that will do is show the public that you are willing to fight in the law courts to keep your hands on that public money – and that is whether it be Union lawyers of personal ones who take legal action.

Will you then wonder why people will turn their backs when Unions need public support? Don’t bet on it.

In my opinion the report does not go far enough and get nearly enough money back from MPs. Nor are these recommendation about to be brought in fast enough. I am not sure whether my opinion is in the majority – I just hope it is.

That money belongs to the tax payer – and should be paid back!

2009: 10/27
CATEGORY: Personal Opinion
Politics
Twattery
Write comment

So Mr Smith, how many bedrooms do you have and who sleeps here?

At first I thought it was a joke – but no, it isn’t, it really, really isn’t.

Why would anyone who wanted to know the make up and the amount of people who lived in a country actually be asking who slept over the weekend at you home?

As if that made a blind bit of difference? All this is being asked of the British people come the next census in 2011. Odd don’t you think?

No so much the government:

For the first time, people will be asked to provide details of the number of bedrooms they have as well as the names, sex and birth dates of any overnight guests in their homes.

Other new questions include how well people can speak English, the date overseas nationals entered the UK, how people define their national identity and whether they are in civil partnerships.

Those who do not complete the census risk being prosecuted while those giving false answers face being fined.

Not that I am one to agree with the Tories on just about anything – but this is just a question(s) that is a true invasion of ones privacy.

Christ’s knows why they would want this information – and a nice “What the fuck has it got to do with you?” or “I have 12 elephants living in the loft!”

That would make them happy, no?

2009: 10/25
CATEGORY: Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Civil Liberties
I shit you not
Modern Liberty
New Labour
Personal Opinion
Politics
Twattery
UK
WTF! Moment
World
1 comment

Tories want to deregulate TV by regulating the BBC

Fucking genius that one!

The Tory government would ‘rip up’ the BBC Royal Charter and will do something to regulate what the BBC can add to its website – I think that is what they are saying, analogies from the Tories are obscure at best.

Offering an example, he said: “It might sound well and good for them to have, say, an angling website, but if it drove out of business every angling magazine in the country, you would have to question if it was the right sort of thing to do.”

But what does this really mean?

Well, firstly, it will mean that they are pandering to their new friend Rupe. That was in the bag once The Sun had turned its back on New Labour.

As far as I know, Independent Television in the UK doesn’t have a charter – the BBC does, as this is the case the BBC can’t be biased, or can it? According to many-a-Tory the BBC has a massive liberal bias. How that is the case I am not sure – do they mean in news reporting or as a corporation as a whole? If the latter should be the case what about certain independent corporations that have a massive right-wing agenda?

Not so much.

Tories demand bias rule in BBC charter

The BBC is facing demands from the Government (Tory at the time, Saturday, 29 July 1995) to insert a clause governing impartiality into its charter as part of the renewal process which is nearing completion.

As you can see, this isn’t exactly new – except that the Tories are always on the attack regarding the BBC. If the Beeb should come out and simply say they are going to give the Tories free reign to say and do anything on their channels – the Tories would back off. It is precisely because the Beeb doesn’t do that; that they are attacked so much.

Jeremy Hunt told the Financial Times that the corporation was “out of touch with the hard times the rest of the electorate is going through”.

Yet, of course, David (multi-millionaire) Cameron is? With all his Eton pals?

Give me a break!

2009: 10/19
CATEGORY: Bias
Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Civil Liberties
Comment
Conservatives
Democracy
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Twattery
UK
World
Write comment

Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize — Now Please Earn it! :Michael Moore

Dear President Obama,

How outstanding that you’ve been recognized today as a man of peace. Your swift, early pronouncements — you will close Guantanamo, you will bring the troops home from Iraq, you want a nuclear weapon-free world, you admitted to the Iranians that we overthrew their democratically-elected president in 1953, you made that great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo, you’ve eliminated that useless term “The War on Terror,” you’ve put an end to torture — these have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months you have done an about face and taken this country in a much more sane direction.

But…

The irony that you have been awarded this prize on the 2nd day of the ninth year of our War in Afghanistan is not lost on anyone. You are truly at a crossroads now. You can listen to the generals and expand the war (only to result in a far-too-predictable defeat) or you can declare Bush’s Wars over, and bring all the troops home. Now. That’s what a true man of peace would do.

There is nothing wrong with you doing what the last guy failed to do — capture the man or men responsible for the mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11. BUT YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITH TANKS AND TROOPS. You are pursuing a criminal, not an army. You do not use a stick of dynamite to get rid of a mouse.

The Taliban is another matter. That is a problem for the people of Afghanistan to resolve — just as we did in 1776, the French did in 1789, the Cubans did in 1959, the Nicaraguans did in 1979 and the people of East Berlin did in 1989. One thing is certain through all revolutions by people who wish to be free — they ultimately have to bring about that freedom themselves. Others can be supportive, but freedom can not be delivered from the front seat of someone else’s Humvee.

You have to end our involvement in Afghanistan now. If you don’t, you’ll have no choice but to return the prize to Oslo.

Yours,

Michael Moore

MichaelMoore.com

P.S. Your opposition has spent the morning attacking you for bringing such good will to this country. Why do they hate America so much? I get the feeling that if you found the cure for cancer this afternoon they’d be denouncing you for destroying free enterprise because cancer centers would have to close. There are those who say you’ve done nothing yet to deserve this award. As far as I’m concerned, the very fact that you’ve offered to walk into the minefield of hate and try to undo the irreparable damage the last president did is not only appreciated by me and millions of others, it is also an act of true bravery. That’s why you got the prize. The whole world is depending on the U.S. — and you — to literally save this planet. Let’s not let them down.

2009: 10/09
CATEGORY: Comment
Democracy
Media
Politics
United States of America
World
TAGS: Michael Moore
Nobel Peace Prize
3 comments

Now this is a job to have!

Hourly

Now that is recession proof pay!

2009: 10/06
CATEGORY: Blah!
Comment
Economy
Media
Money
WTF! Moment
3 comments

£600m windfall for private firms

Nice pick up that.

How do these firms qualify for a piece of a £600m pie? Make sure that those who are on incapacity benefit get back to work or that they qualify for a cut of 25 quid a week.

All this, of course, in the time when jobs in the UK are – let’s say – a little sparse. Yet, that means nothing to both New Labour or the Conservatives. It means getting the benefit scroungers off the higher paying incapacity benefit and you can pay a company to provide training and evidence that those damned scroungers should be getting as much money.

This, in the face of giving the top percentage – in the guise of promoting saving – a gift of increasing the tax threshold on inheritance tax. This is by Dave Cameron’s “caring Conservatives”.

He, and the Tories, could care less for those who are poor – or sick for that matter. He was born into a family who could send him to Eton – why should he care? You can bet that the private company that get those off incapacity benefit will be a Conservative Party donater.

The idea is for private training firms to be employed to prepare the unemployed for work and also to assess all 2.6m people on incapacity benefit to see what work they might be able to do.

The initial start-up cost of the change would be £600m, the Tory leader said.

The Tories say they would cover the cost of the scheme by transferring more people from incapacity benefits to Jobseekers’ Allowance.

Yep, it does mean that D-Cam is looking out for the vulnerable in UK society – as much as New Labour have. Is this, then, any wonder that there is so many who distrust D-Cam and his minions? Is it any wonder that people do believe that having a Conservative government will be nothing more than ‘more of the same’ or worse?

We will see, or in my opinion, we won’t – what the Tories are going to offer policy-wise in the up and coming general election campaign. It will not be as effective in overturning the illiberal policies that New Labour have brought to bare. It will be repackaged New Labour policies.

2009: 10/04
CATEGORY: Bias
Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Civil Liberties
Comment
Conservatives
Democracy
Media
Modern Liberty
New Labour
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Twattery
UK
World
Write comment

What will Murdoch want in exchange?

The Sun tabloid has changed sides – though that seems a little dubious because New Labour and the Conservatives are joined at the hip. The Sun has backed New Labour for the last 12 years of government and now they are going to endorse the Tories – no real surprise there.

But because of this – we have to start asking what will Murdoch Inc expect in return?

It is almost nailed on that the BBC will come under more fire so I can see – as this is a love/hate relationship – the BBC will be one of the first places for decimation when – and if – the Tories come to power.

They are still odds on favourites to take the government benches.

Of course The Sun will now begin its attacks on New Labour and Gordon Brown in particular. Though this will mean New Labour will have to really start to fight, I can’t see them getting another tabloid in place to get across their message – yet, with that, I have to ask if this is a bad thing.

New Labour has to die a complete and utter death. Only then will the Tories be seen for who they are and a new left party can come into being. “Old” Labour would have been chomping at the bit to have a go at New Labour and her Tory sister. And that will need to happen in the future.

Where will that “new” left come from? That I have no idea about at the moment. But, as was tabled today – a party that will be setting aside group homes for young mothers to be Matroned needs not to be a part of British society.

I do detest New Labour and all that it currently stands for – that little snippet and the fact that New Labour will still carry forward its illiberal policies has sealed the deal for me. And I hope for millions of UK voters. I do still stand by the LibDems – I do feel that it is about time that people really did give them a chance. Even if only for one term so they can bring back a lot of the liberties lost and a real electoral voting change.

New Labour and the Tories have crippled the UK over the last 30 years – now really is a time for change. It is up to the LibDems to get out and fight not for themselves – but for the British people and the British soul.

2009: 09/29
CATEGORY: Bias
Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Civil Liberties
Comment
Conservatives
Democracy
Economy
I shit you not
Labour
Liberal Democrats
Media
Modern Liberty
Money
New Democrat Party
New Labour
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Socialism
Twattery
UK
World
Write comment

Want to stop your son becoming gay?

I do read some interesting stuff – oft I will watch a bit of it, too.

But – one thing the family values people are saying is – to say the least – very, very interesting indeed!

What you do to stop your son looking at the old dirty pictures is tell him that it will make you gay! Simple, done, dusted!

I bet you can guess that Sen Pawlenty (Plenty), if chosen to run against Obama come 2012 will be using as much of that Reagan stuff as possible. The GOPers – and the affiliated nut-cases – will hark back to the good (read really, really bad) old days when Reagan waltzed into the White House – and even today the world is feeling the ramifications of that one – and became US president.

Let’s hope that Americans will see the benefit of having Obama as president and therefore elect him with a greater majority.

2009: 09/22
CATEGORY: Blah!
Christianity
Comment
Conservatives
I shit you not
LOL
Media
Modern Liberty
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Republicans
Sociology
Twattery
United States of America
WTF! Moment
World
Write comment

When Republicans say…

… that the American people are better off – economically – under a Republican administration, they are off on that planet Barney Frank talked about, because it is simply not the case.

How do we know this?

Well, as simply put as possible – you just have to look at the figures.

Here.

And here.

Not convinced? Well why not? Those are official figures – they are showing that GDP grows more under a Democrat administration, taxes come down, social programs are better paid for and – and this is the kicker – deficit comes down.

Take the woeful president Reagan: He raised the deficit and then it was raised again by the next Republican. No new taxes, indeed! It was only when Clinton came into office – or left it we should say, did the US actually have accounts in the black!

What happened then? G W Bush happened – and when he left office? You know that part of history.

The only people who get decidedly wealthier while a Republican is in office – the top 1 to 10%.

How then, is that better for the working-class or, indeed, the middle class?

Obama has, as one of his first actions as president, reduced taxes for 95% of the American workers/middle-class! Rather than shouting him down the Right should be singing his praise because he has already done what they want from a government.

What he also inherited, Obama that is, was an American economy that was tail-spinning into oblivion because of Reaganomic policies followed by G W Bush!

That has almost been turned around.

Does there need to be efficiencies? Of course – no one will argue that. But, and this is what irks me more than most things in debating economics – the Right keep telling ‘the people’ that the only way to cut deficits is to cut spending. If, and that is a BIG if, it was as easy as that there would never be a problem – for anyone. You cannot conduct a national economy the same way you balance your chequeing account!

If you did, the economy would be dead within a week!

We pay taxes for a lot of things – how we utilise that money is what counts. If there are not taxes there is no anything, no police, no schools, and no roads ad infinitum.

Middle-class and working-class republicans vote against themselves, their own self-interest – which, to me, doesn’t seem that much of Republicanism at all.

As for being fiscally conservative – there isn’t any evidence that this is the case either. Republican administrations spend what they don’t have – and then give away (spend government incomes) even more in tax cuts for the rich.

That is just nuts!

2009: 09/16
CATEGORY: Blah!
Blogs
Comment
Conservatives
Democrats
Economy
I shit you not
Media
Money
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Republicans
Socialism
Sociology
Twattery
United States of America
World
2 comments

Just saying sorry isn’t good enough

OK, you buy a car company for, say 10 quid, seems reasonable?

Though, while I thought about it – that isn’t the lead into a daft joke, it’s true. But buying the company for a tenner was supposed to be a way of saving the company and keeping the 6000 people employed who were later laid off because the car company failed.

But there’s more:

A report found the men pocketed an “unreasonable” £42m in pay and perks.
The Phoenix Four blame Labour for Rover’s collapse but Lord Mandelson said ministers had been “faultless”.

Read that again – £42 million pounds!

As for faultless – who sold the sodding company for a tenner, Mandy?

It isn’t that 6000 people lost their jobs, although that is bad enough, but Rover was supposed to pay its creditors, too. That is more people who could effectively be out of work because of four men lining their pockets.

Yet – what irks me the most – the serious fraud office (police) won’t be opening an investigation into this. They are away scott free!

How they did it.

In May 2000, the Phoenix consortium – John Towers, Nick Stephenson, Peter Beale and John Edwards – acquired the business for nothing (well, a nominal £10) from BMW. And because BMW wanted shot of this loss-making motor manufacturer, the German company endowed it with £75m (in lieu of warranties) and an interest free 49-year loan of £427m.

This is not a tale of industrial success. However, as I mentioned last night, Messrs Beale, Edwards, Stephenson and Towers each pocketed £9m (give or take a few thousand) between 2000 and 2005 and Mr Howe received £5.7m.

The inspectors describe the remuneration as “unreasonably large” for a whole host of reasons, such as:

(1) the financial performance of the business was lamentable;
(2) the executives risked only paltry sums of their own money;
(3) they had never in the past been paid anything like this for their alleged business skills.

How did they get the money out?

Well the loss-making operating company, MG Rover Group, which made the cars, was separate from the company that held the loan from BMW, Techtronic. Now, although the loan from BMW was interest-free, Techtronic charged interest on the loans it made to Rover.

Hey presto: Techtronic generated a profit, even though Rover was incurring losses.

And Techtronic paid dividends to another company, Phoenix Venture Holdings, which in turns rewarded Towers et al.

You can read the rest of the blog post here.

So, with all that evidence – they still walk away with vast sums of money and no one will do anything about it?

You have to begin to wonder why it is that business men and women this day and age feel they can do what they like with no consequence.

Mandleson believes they should say sorry. Well that’s going to put the fear of God into all those other businesses who are flipping the finger then isn’t it!

Twat!

2009: 09/11
CATEGORY: Big Brother Britain
Blah!
Blogs
Comment
Economy
I shit you not
Media
Money
New Labour
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Twattery
UK
WTF! Moment
Write comment

When do-gooding becomes lunacy!

I don’t care who you are – there are times when you read something and you just think ‘what the fuck were/are they thinking?’

This is one of those times.

Now, in the UK you may just get by with a smashed in face – in totally crazy places like the US – you will die!

Mock muggings should be staged across the UK to test the public’s willingness to aid victims and report crimes, a charity has said.

The group Witness Confident says it wants to challenge a “walk-on-by” culture to street crime.

It says the disengagement of the criminal justice systems makes it harder for communities to fight crime.

Mock or pretend muggings – just to see how people will react? Are you nuts!?

What will they advocate next – a pretend child abduction?

Guy Dehn, head of the charity, said it had come up with a dozen ways that people could quickly make a difference.

These include faking incidents in broad daylight to see how people react.

“Mock muggings can be a way of working with the police to test public reaction,” said Mr Dehn.

“Don’t be a have-a-go-hero unless you really know what you are doing. But if you are there and can take a photo safely, then that can make the difference.”

Sweet mother of Jesus!

Guy – I just hope upon hope you really don’t do this. At all. Ever.

2009: 09/09
CATEGORY: Blah!
Civil Liberties
Comment
I shit you not
LOL
Media
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Twattery
UK
WTF! Moment
World
2 comments

Socialism on a bus route

Is it capitalism or socialism when a company owned by another company who then states it will not provide a social necessity unless they are subsidised by the public purse?

It is often said here and elsewhere that capitalism should be allowed to run its course because that is the only way forward. There are those, either they don’t have a social bone in their body – don’t understand that not everyone can afford a car of their own (irony) – cannot drive a car because of a multitude of reasons – don’t understand economics – are indoctrinated – or they simply will not look at the world as it really is.

Greyhound Canada, which is a subsidiary of Dallas, Texas-based Greyhound Lines Inc., which in turn is owned by Cincinnati-based FirstGroup America, has given 30 days’ notice that it will halt service in Manitoba, and the 90 days that are required in Ontario.

As of Dec. 2, it will no longer offer service north of Sault Ste. Marie through to Saskatchewan, a spokeswoman for the bus line said.

Source: calgaryherald.com

When you get to Canada there is one overwhelming feeling – its vastness. Canada is beyond big, it is enormous! So, if you don’t have a car or any other vehicle how to you travel? You could, I suppose, get a horse and cart. But, as we all know, it would take days to travel between A and B.

Buses are something then that people need. Not want – need! And this is where we have a problem with Greyhound cancelling routes – they are doing this because they say that the routes are not profitable. That is capitalism at its bare, nakedness. In capitalism people don’t matter – and this is not a new phenomenon.

Published: September 22, 1985

New York will give Greyhound Lines Inc. $416,000 to continue service on 12 routes linking 100 upstate communities under an agreement intended to avert threatened cancellations, the state said.

State officials acted after the United States Interstate Commerce Commission gave Greyhound permission to drop routes if it was unable to work out a new subsidy arrangement with the state.

Greyhound, which has received a state subsidy on some routes since 1983, had sought permission to discontinue four routes affecting 28 upstate communities.

Source: nytimes.com

From this we can see that Greyhound has been receiving State subsidies for at least a quarter of a century. If States can fund bus routes – or at least subsidise them, then that isn’t your naked capitalism, free market thinking – only the free market can do what government can’t – and do it more efficiently and deliver a service with little waste and a profit.

That is borderline socialism – of private companies who cannot do it alone.

With a wild sweep across the board we then come to today’s current favourite – healthcare. If the States can support bus routes for people, why can they then not support a public option in healthcare? Albeit one that is, in fact, a non-profit company with those in that public option paying a premium to the company – so not really subsidised by the State, unlike a free market bus company.

Socialism is rife in the US and Canada, then – it must be with the evidence we are given – but not a socialism for the people to get the services they need – a socialism for corporations to get their hands on public money because their business model has failed.

Americans who are willing to pay their taxes for buses to run but not allow a company to form so that a need can be filled, a dire need, and this argument is shouted from the rooftops, literally.

You are willing to help those monoliths who cannot subsidise themselves but not willing to help the most needy of all your compatriots?

Why do I find something very wrong in that?

2009: 09/05
CATEGORY: Bias
Blah!
Canada
Civil Liberties
Comment
Conservatives
Democracy
Economy
I shit you not
Modern Liberty
Money
Personal Opinion
Personal philosophy
Politics
Republicans
Socialism
Twattery
United States of America
World
3 comments

	superlekker on NHS dental overcharge: I have …
	pied type on Why not let them filibust…
	Institution of Occup… on Fabian, New Labour and BIG…
	pied type on That, was the decade, that…
	thebeadden on That, was the decade, that…

English Cynic

Why not let them filibuster?

Fabian, New Labour and BIG government

That, was the decade, that was

Return of the Bastard Child …

Conservatives fuelling terrorism?

Tories re-writing their own history?

Shakes head and Head-desk

If miracles are to happen …

How do MPs calm public anger?

So Mr Smith, how many bedrooms do you have and who sleeps here?

Tories want to deregulate TV by regulating the BBC

Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize — Now Please Earn it! :Michael Moore

Now this is a job to have!

£600m windfall for private firms

What will Murdoch want in exchange?

Want to stop your son becoming gay?

When Republicans say…

Just saying sorry isn’t good enough

When do-gooding becomes lunacy!

Socialism on a bus route

EFF Bloggers rights

Email Subscription

Me

SocialVibe

Speak thee forth!

ShareNSave

FeedMENow

Blogroll

Civil Liberties

CynOLitics

Just Talking Points

Cyn*Mart

ACynIC

Twoo

Copyright Notice © 2007 – 2010