UKIP-Nutjob Alert

When I first heard Tories proclaiming that a vote for UKIP would let Miliband and Labour in I wondered if that was the best they could do. But UKIP do have a habit of proving that they are truly on the lunatic fringe. Well, look at Nigel Farage for starters. Somebody who tries so hard to be 'a character' only proves himself to be a completely mad, egocentric, attention seeking berk.

Now UKIP councillors in Norfolk have proved that this problem is apparent throughout the party. The nutters UKIP councillors on Norfolk County Council have gone into alliance with Labour, the Greens and the Lib Dems and a Labour leader has been installed. The Tories are the largest group on Norfolk County Council.

Forgive me but I am not aware that supporting that motley crew of statist misfits is very libertarian, which UKIP claim to be. Did the people of Norfolk who voted UKIP really expect to find their county council led by a Labour councillor because of the support of UKIP councillors? I doubt it.

Furthermore, on Twitter I saw a UKIP member asked what the party's position was on the legalisation of marijuana. The UKIP member replied that the party would hold a referendum to find out what the populace wanted. Oh right, so would they hold a referendum to find out if 51% of the population wanted murder legalised? What a cop out to avoid answering a question on a controversial issue. Again, if UKIP was truly a libertarian party it would support the legalisation of marijuana, and be honest about that.

Like wanting out of the EU but wallowing on the gravy train, UKIP are just proving themselves to be the most cynical of the political parties rather than an alternative. Making the right noises to attract protest votes on a range of issues, but offering nothing of any substance. Their policy of massively increasing state expenditure, but cutting taxes, would bankrupt the country faster than you could say Gordon Brown. They aren't bright and I would warn anybody to look beneath the surface if you think these nutjobs are a credible alternative to the LibLabCon.

Woolwich-Proving The World Has Gone Mad!

I wasn't going to say much about the brutal murder of a squaddie yesterday in Woolwich by a couple of barbarians, and I still won't. But I will make a couple of observations on the reaction to events.

It seems that many people can only condemn the murderers if they also condemn the 150 or so demonstrators who turned up in Woolwich last night.

Leading on from that people seem to be drawing parallels between the EDL and islamic nutters. I know little about the EDL but am not aware that they have killed thousands of people throughout the world in assorted terrorist attacks.

For saying what I have just said above about the EDL I am likely to be attacked for being at best an EDL supporter, at worst a raging fascist/racist/xenophobe/islamophobe.

I've seen one idiot's response on the internet that effectively said that we shouldn't condemn muslims because last night he had a good muslim in a takeaway cook his nan bread just how he likes it, slightly burnt around the edges. Muslims should also be excused anything because said muslim even offered to cook him another if it was too burnt. That makes it alright then.

One nutjob on the internet has already claimed that Cameron organised last night's murder so he could react like a strong man and shore up his plummeting poll ratings.

I saw a screen shot (I think that's what it's called) of the EDF Energy Twitter account. They had to constantly deny that they were demonstrating in Woolwich last night and that it was in fact the EDL.

I also saw an internet forum where EDL supporters were demanding that the Brighton Pavilion be demolished and be rebuilt in Saudi Arabia. I suppose from a certain angle, just about at dusk, if you squint a little and use your imagination it does look a tiny bit like a mosque.

But don't despair. David Cameron's in charge and he's chaired a Cobra meeting this morning. We'll be OK.

Don't Blame UKIP-Blame Cameron!

The Tory Party is in denial, and UKIP is their convenient scapegoat. But let's be perfectly blunt, the reason they are heading for defeat is David Cameron. The man is a totally unprincipled, clueless, uncharismatic chancer who has blown his opportunity. So the Tories blame Farage, a totally unprincipled, clueless chancer who at least has a little charisma, but ultimately is a con man who will be exposed by the glare of publicity heading his way.

Cameron and the Tories claim that they must occupy the centre ground. But all that seems to mean is 'let's piss everybody off, not just the wet pinko liberals'. Ultimately it means trying to be all things to all men and it just doesn't work. Tory activists who try to defend this government increasingly sound like occupants of a certain Berlin bunker in April 1945, or Comical Ali as US troops marched into Baghdad. 'Swivel eyed loons' maybe?

What the Tory Party leadership has done, is what the party has been doing for decades, it has driven solid hard working supporters into the arms of a party whose leadership, not just its membership, consists primarily of swivel eyed loons. Attacking and vilifying defectors from your own party is hardly going to tempt them back. What the Tory Party needs to do is to stop being so arrogant and aloof and look at the real reasons, reasons far deeper than the mere existence of loonies like Farage and UKIP.

It is evident to most people that the desire to be free of the shackles of the EU, and the need to control immigration, are two positions that are based on common sense. A majority in this country clearly have deep concerns about these issues, they therefore represent the centre ground. The more Cameron and company cling to their nice cosy idea of their own peculier centre ground then the more activists and volunteer branch officers will walk away. Cameron seems happier pissing off his party activists than pissing off the political elite in London's trendy bars and tearooms.

You only have to look at the set of daydreams that UKIP call policies to see that apart from leaving the EU, they still have no credible philosophy or practical policies. Indeed, it makes a dedicated anti-EU campaigner like me wonder if membership of the EU would actually be preferable to an independent Britain under UKIP rule. Their policies are every bit as barking mad as those of the EU, Farage and his MEPs have learnt well during their time on the gravy train.

With two years to go there may just be a chance of the Tories changing and taking a common sense approach but that would mean ditching Dave. Even then it would be a tall order, but at least there would be the chance to install a leader who could use common sense and start rebuilding after the defeat in 2015 that looks increasingly inevitable.

Let's face it, Cameron couldn't win the 2010 general election when Brown was the loathed, ridiculed and generally despised successor to Blair. What chance against Miliband in 2015 when you have driven a sizeable proportion of your natural supporters out of the party?  Sitting on the sidelines, playing nicely with Clegg and Cable while blaming UKIP is patently absurd and lazy. It's Dave stupid!

Graduate Social Workers-Oh Shit!

I nearly choked on my Weetabix this morning when I read about graduates being fast tracked into social work here. What a waste of a degree that. Three years studying to end up screwing up peoples' lives as a social worker.

Now, if this government wasn't such a wet, pinko gang of misfits they could help reduce the deficit by abolishing social workers, not fast tracking bloody graduates into becoming mithering do gooders.

Then they could abolish swathes of degree courses, starting with the ones that are so useless you are only fit to go into social work when you graduate.

George Galloway MP

Just in case you ever start taking the sick bastard seriously, above is a reminder. He's the one on the left, naturally.

Yesterday Was Europe Day!

Here's how Europeans marked the European Union and its flag:

 

 

Jimmy Savile, Stuart Hall and Barbara Hewson

Barbara Hewson has been pilloried this week for an article she wrote for Spiked Online.

The gist of her well reasoned argument was that accusations of relatively mild sexual misbehaviour by stars years ago, stars who are now elderly, are being used in a wave of puritanical vengeance by police forces and pressure groups.

She quite reasonably argues that certain investigations in this climate of moral outrage go against the most fundamental principles of our judicial system. The complainant automatically becomes the victim and the presumption of innocence, in cases of alleged paedophilia and other cases of sexual assault, is being abandoned.

The point she makes that caused wild headlines and huge media interest was at the very end when she suggested lowering the age of consent to 13. I recommend reading the article in full and have provided a link below.

The full article can be read here.

Libertarian v Fabian

If a Libertarian doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
If a Fabian doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a Libertarian is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
If a Fabian is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a Libertarian sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A Fabian wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a Libertarian is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Fabian is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a black person is Libertarian, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their Fabian counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a Libertarian is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A Fabian demands someone take care of him.

If a Libertarian doesn’t like a TV programme, he changes channels.
Fabians demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a Libertarian is an atheist, he doesn’t go to church.
A Fabian non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!)

If a Libertarian decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A Fabian demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a Libertarian slips and falls over, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a Fabian slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labour and then sues.

If a Libertarian reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A Fabian will delete it because he’s “offended”.

The Centre Ground. What is it?

Modern politicians are grey, bland nonentities. That's not a mind blowing statement, it's actually pretty much a given. The pitiful mess that was the election of Police and Crime Commissioners last year, and the poor turnout at last week's county council elections, wonderfully underline that point. People no longer trust our politicians, and the more disliked they become the more they cry about staying 'on the centre ground'. But what is this sacred 'centre ground'?

The centre ground seems to be a political euphemism for doing very little that anybody could actually disagree with. It is the ultimate in political correctness, don't upset, offend or disagree with anybody. Those on the centre ground are basing their political careers on not rocking the boat by having a firm belief that somebody else may oppose. European Union? We know it's not working so we'll renegotiate. Immigration? We can't do anything about that because of the EU, but we'll pass some minor tinkering legislation that sounds good. Sick of murderers and other serious criminals being released early, often to reoffend? We'll clamp down on criminals, we'll take their tellies off them. And so it goes on. It pisses everybody off.

Increasingly when I see Clegg and Cameron, looking like bland genetically modified versions of Blair, I feel like throwing a heavy object at the telly. They are patronising zombies with about as much passion as a pair of beached jellyfish. If they represent the centre ground it's time we rocked the boat and dumped them overboard.

I have never known a time when politicos despaired quite so much about the mainstream parties in England. I don't include the Lib Dems in that, they have never really been more than political whores prepared top sell their grannies to get a town councillor elected, they epitomise the centre ground, so they don't count. By mainstream I mean Labour and Conservative. Few socialists I'm acquainted with regard the Labour Party as a party they can actively support. Few conservatives I know regard the Conservative Party as a party they can actively support.

John Major garnered 13m votes in 1992, then the Tory Party moved to the centre ground. In 2010, despite being up against a generally loathed and ridiculed Gordon Brown, Cameron's Tory Party could barely muster 10m votes. Welcome to the centre ground Dave. You stay there while the rest of the country looks for something else. Problem is, while you sit on the centre ground the ever growing vacuum you create will be filled by some potentially very dangerous opportunists.   

The Problem with Protest Votes

More and more people seem to be becoming ever more disillusioned with political parties. They seem to trust politicians less and less which is hardly surprising looking at the ever increasing number of broken promises and scandals such as the expenses farago and the Chris Huhne fiasco. But is a protest vote the answer or is abstention the better option? Personally I prefer spoiling the ballot paper, at least you show that you have bothered to turn up and spoilt ballot papers are counted. Not turning up could be seen as not caring or being just too lazy.

In the run up to the elections tomorrow I have seriously pondered abstention but have been told, by several people, that I have a duty to vote, that people fought wars for my right to vote. No they didn't. They fought to protect our national interest, to defend us from invaders and yes, to save our democracy. But that democracy includes the right to vote, it does not mean I have to vote. True democracy means that you have choice. I have the right to stand for election, but choose not to. I have the right do lots of things but choose not too. It is not democratic to merely go into a polling booth and vote for a person or party you do not support just because it is the lesser of several evils, especially because you are forced to or expected to. If I have no candidate I feel able to vote for why vote just for the sake of it?

If we choose not to vote for a mainstream candidate why vote for a fringe/protest candidate we don't know or necessarily agree with? The risk of electing a nutter is far too great. This last fortnight we have seen a stream of nutty candidates exposed, mainly UKIP candidates, but the leader of the Green Party was on the BBC last week and struck me as being seriously unhinged. Indeed I have seen Green Party and UKIP activists at close quarters and the prospect of either running my city or county council is quite terrifying. I prefer not to even contemplate either party actually forming a government.

The problem with minor parties is that they tend to attract either single interest eccentrics, or serious obsessives. Numerous fringe candidates have been exposed this last fortnight and been disowned by their party, mostly too late to be removed  from ballot papers, meaning there is a danger that a disowned fruitcake could still be elected. But if a handful of fruitcakes have been exposed standing for fringe parties, out of several thousand candidates in total, how many loonies have not been outed and could be elected? UKIP have accepted they have not vetted their candidates. Is potentially inflicting a loony on the electorate a sensible form of protest? Is it even true democracy? I don't think so.

Unless you have spent a relatively short amount of time doing a little research I would suggest a protest vote is far more dangerous than abstention or spoiling your ballot paper. Then again, if you can't be bothered spending a few hours researching the people who may spend the next five years representing you, then maybe you get what you deserve.