Top of the Gorm

Hello children.

Let’s play a game, shall we?

Let’s see who we might like to elect as the North West’s leading gormless barmpot.

Burnley shoplifter caught applying for job at shop he stole from.

A COCAINE addict who went stealing in Colne Asda then went back there to apply for a job - but was recognised from CCTV footage .

I’m nominating this particular wheel-unbroken butterfly as Candidate Number One.

Burnley Crown Court heard how Simon Holden, 22, helped himself to some more lager from near the door as he left.

Holden, of Dall Street, Burnley, had also admitted theft and resisting police in breach of a suspended sentence after pinching muscle building powder worth £53 from Boots and then giving the police false details.

Fair’s fair. The police are busy people, and I’m sure that his story wasn’t something utterly unbelievable like ‘I’m a half white guy (who is probably) from a full State of the Union and a willing collaborator of crooks, unrepentant terrorists and Marxist agitators who willingly sought out and joined themost corrupt party machine in any city anywhere in North America, but you can call me Abraham Lincoln and I’m going to make the penicillin run on time and it’ll be cheaper and delivered more fairly and responsively to customer needs just like the US Mail and the IRS do…’ It was probably something fiendishly clever, such as ‘ I am Kevin Smith, of 112A Colne Road, and you can find it on the Observer’s Book Of Addresses Whose Inhabitants Can’t Be Checked On The Police National Computer For Any Previous When, For Example, Apprehended For Suspected Allegations Of Potentially Being A Shoplifter. Honest Guv. So let me go.’

And they did. Another victory for commonsense and community policing and I think a sure-fire team nomination for Candidate Number Two for the selfsame county constabulary that closed down Nightjack. *

Holden, who also asked for a theft offence to be considered, won his freedom - but got a ticking off from a judge who told him he had wasted his youth.

Recorder David Williams told the defendant, who may inherit a property through bereavement he was in a better position than lads of his age coming out of university with debts of £20,000 or "young lads of your age who are putting their lives at risk."

The judge told Holden, who had been on remand: "The choice is yours. You either waste your life or make something of it."

Cocaine addiction combined with having a sellable asset being proverbially linked to making something of one’s life. It’s right up there with other axiomatically probable eventualities as Steven Hawkins’ Tribute to Elvis CD and the straight-to-DVD cult classic Debbie Does Darwen.

The defendant was given 52 weeks in jail, suspended for two years.

Step forward, Recorder David Williams: Candidate Number Three.

The court was told Holden had been given the suspended term in September last year for house burglary committed last July on Castle Street, Nelson.

He had raided the home of an acquaintance and stolen his laptop. The defendant had previously been to the victim's house and knew the computer would be in the house during the day whilst the householder was out.

Letting your junkie pals into your home Mi casa, su case-style and showing them your IT gear is a great old Lancashire tradition like renaming Preston Polytechnic as a university and bobbing for ferrets.

So The Acquaintance wins a treasured slot alongside those other noted titanic intellects from the left-hand bit of England between the Wirral and the Solway Firth as Candidate Number Four, complete with a grab-bag of bonus goodies including a much-prized Crackerjack** pencil, a Blue Peter Badge, a Blankety-Blank cheque book and pen, and that legendary collector’s item: a man-size Nuclear Power No Thanks jock-strap.

He told police he needed to pay off a drugs debt.

As reasonable a plea in mitigation for a crime as any I’ve heard since the one alluded to here by DJ.

In April, Holden was given a community order. He had stolen twice from Asda.

The defendant had taken four boxes of lager worth £40, was caught on CCTV and three days later went back and filled in a job application. He was recognised by an employee and as he left took two more boxes of alcohol. The defendant had 41 previous convictions.

41.

We put up with this.

All the above were great contestants for such a prestigious award.

It was a hard choice to make, ladies and gentlemen; believe you me.

In the end and in all modesty and without the slightest sense of shame I was obliged to invest myself with the title of Northwest Barmpot Of The Year 2009.

Why ever else am I not out there in the streets of Castle City right now, clad only in Mrs. Northwester’s skateboarding knee elbow pads, my Original Series Star Trek pixie boots and an Asda beret: simultaneously mooning and semaphoring at the neighbours and pelting their double glazed windows with shrink-wrapped Sharon fruits and screaming ‘We’re all mad! We’re all bloody mad, do you hear me?’

* See here.

** Crackerjack!

Paint it black

A little touch of Harry in the night.


I’m in debt once more to Cherry Pie who sent me to this site where I could quiz myself about politics and see if I scored any better on the conservatism front than I’d done here.
At the danger of seeming like an ungrateful Right-wing bastard rather than an appreciative Right-wing bastard, I’m going to comment about this new questionnaire which tells us much of what we need to know about how we are actually governed.
There’s a funny bit at the end, sort of.

This quiz too had lots of questions: the first few of which were ambivalent or misleading or worse; limiting.
That’s what worried me: the narrowness of vision and scope that the questions imply, and how similar they are to what our rulers present us with. I’ve not done the test yet, and plan to do so only after finishing this post.

Look at question number one.
“If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.”
Now, a definition of economic globalisation might have helped here – is it freer trade thanks to low or no-tariff treaties and the economic liberalisation of a number of Asian countries, for example, or is it merely a name for ever-growing international economies of scale and productivity and capital movements, transportation and communications? The difference to the definition might make a difference to the answer.
Also the idea of inevitability begs questions; what are the supposed forces that make it inevitable? Surely not the inevitable consequences of human society being obliged to change according to the relationships between individuals and the means of production and exchange in a capitalist society? That’s just pure Marxism. There’s a world of difference between believing that attractive business or employment opportunities will receive private and some measure of public support in most countries – and believing that it is somehow inescapable and that no amount of political control can prevent investment, production, and sales across international borders. North Korea and Syria and Hamas’ Gaza seem to be pretty good at preventing the free flow of labour, capital and goods and there’s no reason by other similarly worthless governments couldn’t do the same or worse.
Or does international trade not somehow ‘serve humanity?’ Who else trades than human beings? There’s a wealth of supposition about globalisation being bad for humanity in there – too much for me to go into now, and why bother? You’ve probably done it already, dear reader…
And as for trans-national corporations...

So there’s all that up-front ideological baggage. But look at what the answer ‘choices’ are that might lead you to an ideological assessment of yourself.
So to the have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife-yet question: ‘I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong’ what answering options do we have?
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree.
Oh dear.
Let’s try Option One, shall we?
‘I would strongly disagree that I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.’
Now, does this mean that I’d never support my country, or that I disagree with the notion of my country ever being right (or wrong), or that I’d only agree with it if it was right, or that I disagree with the whole stupid question because it contains false opposites or because I might distinguish between supporting the constitution, institutions, morals and the welfare of the people of Britain from any actions its government might follow? Are we talking about foreign policy here or domestic matters such as taxation, spending and law and order? And would my support consist of unspoken acceptance, or of publishing angry posts and sending furious emails to the editor of The Telegraph if they criticised flash Gordon (King of the Impossible )? or running out into the street waving my six-foot Union Flag in joy at the signature of some other fatuous EU ‘agreement’? And what is my country? England? The UK? Yurrup? Is it my country’s troops abroad or only its sports teams or trade treaty negotiators? And if I don’t approve of a particular party in power and it does something I don’t like, do I let the paid officials who carry out that policy die for want of, say, my taxes and my support for their lawful if mis-led actions?

I think that, taken with the suppositions within the questions, ultimately most answers to this question if you think about it a will leave you pretty much the choice of coming across as a uber-chauvinist or as an internationalist hippy. Some choice.

Okay, okay; so the multiple choice format is inherently simplistic and can be misleading compared with interviews or writing essays – it goes with this particular research technique’s territory. But that’s how we vote and answer opinion polls and ultimately come down to deciding whom to marry, for example; by winnowing down many complex knowns and unknowns and balancing pros and cons and finally making a decision. But we are also allowed to think of celibacy, and just shaking up, or polymory or casual relationships.

And this is precisely how we are governed and how we are likely to be governed in the near future: through an expertly-chosen and narrow range of ‘alternatives’ that don’t differ from each other very much, and whose presentation to us voters leave whole realms and dimensions of consideration and policies ignored and never offered.

So comparing along the totally bogus ‘Left to Right’ order that’s the only one the political class ever allows to be used on for example BBC election night programmes, let’s look if we must at the three ‘nationwide’ parties’ policies, shall we?
Just for laughs.

Defence.

Labour.
We don’t have any particular enemy in mind, but Labour really, really believes that soldiers are super and we’ve made great strides in providing them with really, really thick body armour that stops most munitions - and soon, we plan them to buy another set - so that when they are blown into mincemeat or blinded or something then our very generous compensation scheme will kick in and make them all better for a consequently rather smaller number of survivors..

Liberal Democrats.
Actually we’re very, very different in tone and emphasis from all the others as we’re pretty sure that all the lousy weather we’ve been having lately and Britain’s possession of nuclear submarines are making all kinds of foreigners grumpy, so instead of squandering money on armour and such we want to make sure our money goes to the peace-loving Gazan government and that all the returning soldiers have somewhere nice to sit and listen to the radio reports of our peace negotiations (or the negotiations of whichever international body we decide to put in charge of our country’s defence and international relations decision-making) whilst they draw their dole. There’s no real enemy worth mentioning; except possibly Russia last year. And Tony Blair apparently.

Conservatives.
We don’t have any particular enemy in mind either, but unlike Labour we really, really believe that soldiers are super and we’ve made truly great strides in providing them with really, really long lists of key factors to introduce as adjectives in any weapons procurement procedures that we might very differently institute, but it’s a safe bet that thickness is probably going to be involved somewhere along the line, and also somewhere nicer to live whilst they’re waiting for us to buy, send, re-equip, test, repair, refurbish with the right size holes and electricity for British use more of the Eurofighters, Royal Navy destroyers and actually brown-coloured rucksacks which are so essential for use in, er, some dusty places. Actually, we consider ourselves to be rather a lot like Tony Blair and so we’re going to leave him out of things thank you so very much, okay?

The Economy.


Labour.
Labour intends to go on presiding over a huge public sector delivering services, and supporting businesses through a website with advice, some targetted taxes that are lower than North Korea’s and, obviously staying inside the European Union which has proved so good for our economy all along.

Liberal Democrats.
We plan to support a huge public sector delivering services, and supporting businesses through being greener fairer and cleaner (those being what business needs to much), and some targetted taxes lower than those of at least one of our Scandinavian partner’s tax rates, and obviously staying inside the European Union without which universal cannibalism would ensue within weeks if not days.


Conservatives.
We plan to go on presiding over a huge public sector delivering services, supporting businesses through tiny targeted tax cuts and supporting families with likewise tiny targeted tax cuts; some of which might compensate for a tiny part of the massive loss of purchasing power that all the inflation we’re expecting (but not talking about) tsunamis down on Britain. Plus obviously staying inside the European Union which has kept the Goths, Vandals and Gepids away since we signed the Treaty of Rome to the great benefit of our agriculture and manufacturing, to name but two, or something.

Immigration.

Labour.
Some immigration is good, and some immigration is bad and we’re going to make sure that only the good sort gets done: especially for the possibly bad ones from outside, you know, Europe.

Liberal Democrats.
Immigration? What kind of cake is ‘immigration?’
My auntie made me a fruitcake one. It was nice.

Conservatives.
Some immigration is good, and some immigration is bad and we’re going to make jolly well sure that only the good sort gets done: especially for the possibly bad ones from outside, you know, Europe.

Say, is there a pattern developing here?

Europe.

Labour.
Is the European Union good or what? I mean is it merely utterly, utterly essential to the continued existence of multicellular life on this planet and also so lovely to feed us and clothe us and house us and cure the old folks’ illnesses and protect the poor little match girls, or is it the sure and certain proof of the existence of a Divine and Benevolent Being in the universe?


Liberal Democrats.
Now it just so happened that I was skateboarding backwards in the showers and adopting a bent-backed stance when quite by chance I passed through a cloud of randomly-flung globules of Kilo Yankee that someone was tossing about and who should I bump into but the equally-naked but erect President of the European Commission himself - José Manuel Durão Barroso!

Conservatives.
Senor Barroso, I just want you to know that I breathe through a blow-hole and possess a non-functioning gag reflex.


So there you have it, dear reader: any high-spending, high-taxing maximal state you like which approaches immigration as being right up there as important as animal welfare and subsidizing sports, and whose defence policy seems not to recognize an organized, well-funded, and determined series of wars against this country and it allies on many fronts. And all pretty much circumscribed by the famously efficient, flexible, democratic European Union. All you have to do is choose whether it's in raspberry, butterscotch or blueberry flavour.

Henry Ford would be delighted.

And we’re having a go at the Jews.
Go, Henry.

Commercial break

Lenin boasted that capitalists would sell the communists the very rope with which the Reds would hang them.

Libertarians proclaim that the market can meet almost any demands if left alone by government.

They’re both right, and it’s almost impossible to parody. Er…
It does look, however, as if some very specialist businesses have been helping the pols put the boot in on our country all over the shop…

Are you the Leader Of The Opposition?

Is the governing party abject and in disarray at your feet and on its way out? Are you looking forward to a happy life in office: the interview with the Queen; the house; the flashy cars; the armed policeman standing at the door?

But do you still worry about underarm ideology?

Did you know that only B/O can keep you from office?

Are you aware that a last-minute accusation of political belief/opinion might steal that reward for your lifetime spent climbing the greasy pole and keep you out of Downing Street? B/O is bad because everyone knows that only bad people raise their arms; bad people and housepainters. And even some house painters were bad. Don’t be tarred with their brush.

Richard and Judy can protect you from accusations of controversial (or indeed any) ideas. The bland leading the blonde have interviewed over 1000 mediocre politicians in all the major parties and the top fifty interchangeable mainstream media pundits, and we think that under controlled conditions, no-one will be able to tell you apart from them either.

Let our middle-of-the-road gang give you a nonentity makeover and polish your image so brightly that it becomes the perfect mirror of the undifferentiated who govern Britain.

Don’t delay; call Richard and Judy on the freephone number or visit our website at www.richardardandjudy.co.uk

Richard and Judy: politics without punch for 20 years.

Are you dyslexic?

Take our easy test and discover the truth.

Which of the following is the correct spelling:-

A. Targetting women and children.

B. Going out of your way to avoid innocent deaths up to and including informing non-combatants well in advance about the targets of planned air attacks.

A. Militants.

B. Terrorists who deliberately attack civilian homes and businesses to cause the maximum death and injury by suicide bombings.

A. Pro-democracy demonstrators.

B. Nepalese Communist Party.

A. Independent watchdog.

B. Left-wing pressure group now given devolved legislative power by Parliament.

If you chose any ‘B’ at all, then you are dyslexic.

Let BBC English help you.

Once renowned worldwide for its stolidly impartial broadcasting and its high standards of spoken English, the BBC has diversified into learning support and can help you with your vocabulary issues. Let us expand your nomenclature and gild your perceptions with our 24/7 online English tutorials, and soon you’ll know exactly why it’s the correct thing to refer to all of the following: Soviet reactionaries opposed to democracy in Russia; ultra-purist Islamic theologians in revolutionary Iran and last-ditch Afrikaner proponents of apartheid as ‘conservatives,’ and why members of the British Conservative Party must always be called ‘Tories’.

BBC English: be the biased.

Work For Life.

It’s time for you to get on in life and get busy.You deserve a cosy little starter home of your own with its two or three bedrooms, a shower for cleaning the sick off and a nice big living room to keep your 50 inch Panasonic and unwrap your tea in.

You’ll need an independent income for up to three decades so you can grow (sometimes literally) as a unique and beautiful person and avoid becoming rigid and conformist in your thinking (if any). You’ll be provided with rent free accommodation (starting at the two bedroom rate of Local Housing Allowance when your career is just starting out but up to £2,100 per month when you really start to produce) and a tax-free income for the rest of your productive life, and then some.

So what are you waiting for?

Visit The Stork and Gooseberry Bush’s Under-16s Nite where we’ll provide you with cheap vodka shots and enough potent Alco pops to make our charming resident staff of Darrens, Lees and Kevs - whose surnames you’ll never need to know – potent and briefly acceptable to you down in front of your mum’s plasma screen on a bed of celebrity magazines and kebab wrappers.

Warning: sometimes the filth raid the place and card the punters so make sure you bring one of your sister’s Child Benefit books and remember to use her name. Join the mummy army and get work for life.
www.onyyourbacknotyourbike.co.uk

Small Ads.

In debt? Have you lost up to £1,340,000,000,000 down the back of the sofa but there’s a big nasty spider down there? Now you can refinance easily and get off scot-free by using www.britishtaxpayersthenexttwogenerations.gov.uk

Clothe yourself, your latest boyfriend and your five oldest children for less than a week’s Child Benefit at www.tracksuits4U.com

Do you suffer from too much blood in your veins? Have you too few body orifices? Do you dread seeing your family at Christmas? Well, worry no more! Just stay in uniform and Ministry of Defence Procurement will make sure that nothing stands between you and life in a better world.

If you can’t find enough time to clean your moat or sell your publicly-financed houses to relatives at a paper loss because dreary old things like Magna Carta, national self-government and scrutinizing legislation just take up too much time, then simply subcontract your work to the European Union and you can get on with life.

The European Union: making MP’s lives simpler at no cost to themselves since 1973.

I stopped worrying about the high cost of stair lifts, hip replacements and funeral payment plans, noisy neighbours and intimidating young thugs hanging around Booth’s car park. Ask me how, or visit www.nhswillendallyourworriesrealsoon.org.uk

Hot gazpacho! The crisis is over.

Praise the Lord! Darwin was wrong.

The world cretin shortage is over.

Just look at these headlines and post titles. Because I‘ve sworn to use my powers only for good I’m not going to make you read the articles themselves, but if you’re in the mood for bitter laughter with your chocolate…

English pupils shoot up international maths table.

What with: automatic rifles or hypodermics?

US trains green workers of the future

Kermit will be relieved. Oh, and just you see what they’re doing to the US economy.

Tax-funded NHS 'best'

An oldie but a goodie and just about believable if you weren’t too sick or sober in 2002.

The EU and the Middle East Peace Process

See also ‘The EU and farming efficiency’ and ‘The EU and free markets.’

Obama declares 'America is not at war with Islam'

See also ‘It takes one to tango’ and ‘Peace breaks out across the Middle East.’

Blair says Brown 'not to blame'. Gordon Brown is not to blame for Britain's economic woes, former prime minister Tony Blair has said.

‘Tony Blair has said’ being the universally accepted antidote to doubt.

… also followed by this hauntingly prophetic headline from Business Week:

Britain: If The Economy Ain't Broke...

And my personal favourite:

Tories are ready govern at a moment's notice, insists bullish Cameron

Pity about the slight misspelling of that penultimate word…

We are so saved.

Home.

Disraeli. Churchill. Thatcher. Um, er...

Well, there we have it.

Not content with eleven high taxing, high-spending years of putting large, untidy, uncircumcised dimples in the end of our economy’s gut-truffles, Mister Brown’s finally decided to shoot for the bull and get a full measure of relief from what he must hope are the really nice scratchy haemorrhoids in what all his fiscal fisting has left of our financial system.

And what is the Conservative and Unionist Party of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland going to do about it?

Why, they’re going to bring back that big old cuddly bear Kenneth Clarke the head chef of this country’s glorious John Major administration – that hot salty hors d'oeuvre that made the voters so keen to quench their thirst on sweet, cool draughts of Tony Blair and his pal Gordon.

Onwards, ever onwards…

Home

"I do so like these red and white striped ones with the foot rests David. They’re jolly comfortable but the smoke stack blocks my view of the common people playing quoits on the lower deck. Let’s take them forward by the lifeboats so we can watch the Irish lad kissing that silly gel way above his station.

I say! Is that land I can see on the Northern horizon? Oh, I do hope the captain sails closer so I can see the polar bears.

Oh, do ask him to, David, would you?

Do say that you will."

Death. Despair. Insanity. Ruin. My work here is done

Actually, my work, if not done, is surely outclassed and outnumbered and over here.

Dumb Jon has outdone himself this time in showing us just how deep it is. And wide. And thick.

He demonstrates with conscience-pricking, adrenalin-pumping fury and awful, grinding detail that our governors don't believe that a dog's breakfast is just for Christmas, but also that with a bit of work and no care at all, they mean to cock their legs over our lives throughout all of 2009. It's possible in some cases that our grandchildren will be footing the bill. Maybe paying by the gallon.

I'd love - just love - to send this stuff to our leaders to glimpse through and see if a clue sticks to any of the vast majority not already equipped with that rare parliamentary attribute: independent thought.



Nah.
But what's a grumpy conservative to do this week after this little lot?
Have I lost the will to hurt the jokers?


Home

And the first duty of government is...? Click image for clue

...completely absent form the Government's own website front page.


Now, about those soggy red paper flowers messing up the local park...
Home

Going Native : Defending Labour's recession.

Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley has apologised for remarks he made saying a recession could be "good for us" in many ways. That's the BBC, here.

And then the Telegraph. 'David Cameron, the Conservative leader, is understood to have given his health spokesman a severe dressing down for his remarks'...' "I've been reading up on the impact of previous economic downturns on our health. "Interestingly, on many counts, recession can be good for us. People tend to smoke less, drink less alcohol, eat less rich food and spend more time at home with their families.'

I can see - just - the electoral wisdom of pretending to be not-Thatcher in a country whose schoolchildren have been brought up to think that Tories eat mummies and daddies (remember him, Chanelle, the red-head with the Liverpool tats four boyfriends ago?) and want to cancel Christmas.
But.
It's just.
Possible to point the finger of blame towards, oh, I don't know, the present government? and its economic genius of a leader who maybe, just maybe, has some small responsibility for the current economic difficulties.
Even if you decide not to do that, it is stretching the Cameroonian fair-play and all-in-it-together/no time for petty partisan differences / nation before politics in Our Hour Of Need, to actually say nice things about - whisper it - Mister Brown's recession - in such a way that the party that planned, implemented, and ran the policies that have just bankrupted our economy can blame the Tories for being heartless.

They get to say this: "There is a clear choice for the British people," said James Purnell, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions "...Labour's approach will give real help now for families and businesses to help Britain come through these difficult times stronger and sooner. The Conservatives would sit back and watch as the recession became longer and deeper."

As Dumbjon points out here, it's not about electability.

Why would someone in opposition want to say, of the government's hurtful, expensive, and utterly avoidable mess; 'This might be good for you, kids. Leave poor Mister Brown alone. Why don't you give the chap a break.' ?

I'm going to have to labour the point, I'm so angry.

To sacrifice oneself; to give up one's most precious things in order to help others is the highest standard of virtue of our civilisation; being modelled as it is on the sacrifice on the Cross.
But to take up the mantle of the recession-creators themselves and in so doing directing the world's criticism inwards at the moment when the country so badly needs to bring the government to account...Why?
Just. Why?

I mean, is it physically possible to be this stupid?
Does the IQ scale go down so low that it can measure this kind of clulessness, or will they have to invent a new gauge for it, and if so, what would they call it? The DAF Scale? The TAPS gradient?

Home.