Saturday, June 6, 2009

Er, not exactly

Liberal Vision proclaims;

Liberals 3 Socialists 1
Er, no, Mark. That should read 'Socialists for Volvo owners 3, Socialists 1'.

I do wish the SDP would stop pretending.

Friday, May 22, 2009

The curse of of Dale...

Mothers, do you have a daughter who is, or wants to be, an MP? Well, I need to warn you of a grave danger that lurks around Westminster ~ namely, Tory blogger Iain Dale.

Not a danger to her chastity, you understand, which I'm sure he would agree with, but to her very political existence. First, he befriended Ann Widdecombe, who promptly announced her retirement from the House. Then, he sang the praises of his little chipmunk, Hazel Blears, who appears to be slowly being executed by the Brown camp for apparent disloyalty. Lately, his sinister intentions turned to Nadine Dorris, who appears to be committing political suicide in a most cringe worthy fashion.

We can only hope that in the coming weeks he starts to see a nice side in our Home Secretary..


Thursday, May 14, 2009

Friday, May 8, 2009

Reefa madness

So, this stuff is legal, and it gets you battered, and the state is getting its knickers in a twist and is looking to ban it, by looking for any 'harmful effects'. So let us read on;

But the former head of the Forensic Science Service's drugs intelligence unit, Les King, yesterday told a European drugs conference in Lisbon: "Just a few months ago, it was found that a smoking mixture known as Spice was not the innocuous material it purported to be.


No, never? A legal high gets you high? How can that be? I was going to put it in my supper.

He said that the substance's real psychoactive constituents were synthetic additives, such as ones that mimic the effects of some of the more powerful active ingredients in cannabis.


Shocking!

Quick, let's ban it,that will make it go away. I mean, we can't have people choosing how to relax and forget about the appalling state of things, can we. I suggest you all concentrate on it's harmful effects, so that the Daily Mail will do a sort of 'spaced out zombies raped my cat, then dropped dead in agonising pain' story. Right, what are there harmful effects, then?

Oh, that appears to be lacking from the article. Still, you could always make some up, like they did with BZP.

According to party pill manufacturer Matt Bowden, over 20 million pills containing BZP have been consumed in New Zealand with no available record attributing deaths or lasting injuries to a single ingestion of BZP.[29] Additionally, a retrospective study carried out at an Auckland emergency department found that BZP presentations only made a minor contribution to their overdose database with most cases not producing any significant toxicity.[25] Several cases where BZP individually or combined with alcohol or other medicines or illicit drugs resulting in complications exist. One such example is the well publicised case of a combination of BZP and MDMA by a 23 year old from Greymouth, New Zealand. Ben Rodham, a DJ, ingested a combination of BZP and MDMA in February 2007, which nearly resulted in his death. Rodham was put into an induced coma in an effort to prevent him from dying. He later recovered.[30]

After many millions of doses consumed worldwide, two deaths have been officially recorded in correlation with the use of BZP, although no causal relationship has been proven.[31][32] In the first case in Zurich in 2001 a 23-year-old took two BZP tablets as well as ecstasy (MDMA) and drank more than 10 litres of water in a 15-hour period, subsequently dying of cerebral edema due to hyponatremia resulting from water intoxication.[31] In the second case a male 25 year old New Zealander ingested alcohol alongside BZP and MDMA.[32] The cause of death of this individual has not been released. It is uncertain what role the BZP may have had in these deaths; death from hyponatremia is a well known consequence of drinking too much fluid after consuming MDMA,[24][33] it is likely that the additional hyponatremic effects from the BZP may have increased the hyponatremic effects from the MDMA, to the point that death resulted.

Ah well, what does science know anyway? Let's just ban it anyway, that will make it go away.

Just like weed, coke, smack, crack, speed, etc etc etc etc etc. Gangsters, start your engines...

Reasons (not) to be (retrospectivly) chearful (about Thatcher)

Oh, how I laughed. Watching the 1980's conservative government trash the statist, bullying Unions was fun. The opening up of enterprise was welcome (until it was handed over to corporatist entities and quangos, bit by bit). But I don't look back kindly on the Thatcher years any more. John Redwood may have fond memories, but he appears to forgotten a few things.

So, to jog his memory, here are five reasons not to look back with a longing sigh;

1) It was Thatcher who started the ball rolling to disarm the population with the semi-automatic rifle ban. Apparently, we could be trusted to make sure our families wouldn't starve, but not to make sure they weren't robbed or raped in their own homes. Hell, we couldn't even be trusted to shoot at targets

2) Nationalisation of morality. Apparently, we couldn't even be trusted to send our kids to schools to learn moral values that were in tune with our own. Oh no. That must be nationalised. Section 28, anyone?

3) Daily Mail said drugs ate my hamster, aka the right to party. Horror of horrors, lots of young enterprising people started joining together in fields and warehouses and enjoying themselves. You can't be trusted to do that! Ban it! Ban it!

4) Enviromentalism. Yes, green-'o'-loonies. Lady T is your patron saint. Well done.

5) EU smoke and mirrors. Oh yeas, slamming handbags on the table, rebates, blaa blaa blaa. Nonsense. Thatcher started the ball rolling by signing various treaties that stole the hard won democratic rights of the people of the UK and handed them over to unelected EU officials. You see, you could be trusted to feed your own family, but not to vote correctly, etc etc.

Shall I go on?

On the rob

As the MP's expenses scandal romps on with the latest Torygraph revelations, most of the blogs are quite rightly cheesed off. However, as I have said before, this isn't a problem that can be solved by tinkering with the rules. We need to look at the source of the problem, which is members of parliament who have scant regard for what is moral, or even just fair, when dealing with taxpayers money.

I imagine that when you think nothing of walking into the lobby and voting for wasting billions of taxpayers money on some god forsaken scheme to erode the rights of the peoples of the UK while achieving nothing, claiming a few thousand pounds for nice trinkets for your houses must seem like small change.

You will not have moral M's until you have a moral system of government (or at the very least, those who wish that to be the case). As all of our present lot, with a couple of notable exceptions, are happy to vote for a large, overbearing and corrupt state that eroded the rights of others in full view of the public, you cannot be surprised when they act with similar disdain for you when your back is turned.