The End is Nigh

I have a substantial post sitting in my drafts that I was planning to put up today, but it's a tad rambly, and sporadically on topic, so here's something (hopefully) a little more concise.

GET THE TORIES OUT!

Don't be fooled; Brexit is an element of this election, without question, but it is neither the most pressing concern, nor the reason this all happened in the first place.  Theresa May wants unfettered control, saw an opportunity to get rid of Labour once and for all, and took it.

And in her arrogance, she's barely been coy about what will come as a result of a Tory win tomorrow: the NHS will continue to stagnate and crumble, until it can be sold off at a pittance; police cuts will continue to put all of our lives at risk - something she now plans to offset, not by putting more bobbies on the beat, but stripping away our human rights!

The burden of austerity will continue to be heaped upon those who can't bare it, while the best off in this country will continue to reap the rewards.

No, Theresa, there are not 'any number of reasons' why nurses use food-banks.  Nurses use food-banks because they can't afford food!

Nurses!

Where once, paid-for care in your old age would leave you with at least your final £23,000 of savings - not including your house - the cap will be raised to £100,000, including your house.  In other words, if your house is worth more than £100,000, you'll be left with nothing but a roof over your head by the time your care's paid for, and that roof then goes to the government once you croak.

Free, healthy lunches will be taken from infants, and replaced (in part) with 7p breakfasts.

If the Brexit negotiations don't go her way (and given the rag-tag team of Brexiteers she's put together to handle the negotiations, they won't), then she's promised to just 'walk away'.

"No deal is better than a bad deal."

Bullshit.  The only thing worse than a bad deal, is no deal.

'Strong and stable'?  She's a coward!  While Corbyn was facing down six of his opponents (well, five and a sub), she was in a factory with (pre-vetted) Joe Public, while a woman who'd lost her father that week got laughed at in her stead.

"I've debated him every week at PMQs."

No you haven't.  You've avoided every question he's ever asked, instead spouting soundbites and taking swipes at New Labour, who haven't been in power for almost a decade, and haven't existed (outside of a few misguided and failed rebellions) since Corbyn took over.

And regardless of what happens, she'll be bending us all over in front of Trump (assuming he's still there by the end of the week) in a desperate bid to secure at least one trade deal that isn't too much worse than the one we have already.

"But never mind all that: the Sun, Mail and Express are all running (long ago disproved) headlines about Corbyn being a terrorist sympathiser, and coming from them it must be true...!"

I'm not saying everyone should vote Labour tomorrow, but if they've got the best chance of beating the Tory in your constituancy, then do!  If it's the Lib Dems, vote Lib Dem.  SNP.  Greens.  Whoever it is who will take a seat from May!

Because that's what's important this election: putting an end to this regime, that started with Cameron, and has descended into deepening despair with May.  She claims this election was about a stronger footing at the negotiating table, and if the Tories are down just one seat when the count is done, she will, by her own measure, have weakened the country for the sake of her ego.

Just one seat, and the weak, wobbly, detrimental, arrogant, egotistical, homophobic, greedy, self-righteous...person (fought so hard against typing something else), will be out come the end of the Brexit negotiations, if not sooner.

...

That was considerably longer and ramblier than I intended... Sorry.

Coalition of Common Sense

One of the Tories' myriad stock phrases on the General Election campaign trail has been a warning against a 'coalition of chaos' arising should they not win a significant majority.

With the Greens' Caroline Lucas urging candidates not to stand against the best anti-Tory hopes, Vince Cable suggesting similar, and Labour activists backing a non-Labour rival to Jeremy C- um, Hunt, there certainly seems to be a lot of cross-party cooperation on the cards.

But is this a bad thing?

Tim Farron and Jeremy Corbyn certainly want us to think they're against it; with one seaming to believe they can take the mantel as the new opposition, and the other suggesting they can actually win this election.

The thing is, unless your name's Donald Trump, delusion does not win elections.  When it comes to a three party race (which is currently the best the Lib Dems can hope for (sorry Tim)), the Conservatives have this in the bag.  Their blinkered, bludgeoning, bungling approach to Brexit, demolition of the NHS, disenfranchisement of the poor and needy, and bending over forwards to please the world's rich and unbalanced is apparently nothing next to how un-Prime Ministerial Corbyn and Farron appear in the eyes of the electorate.

Partisanship is not going to unseat the Tories, or grant any one opposition party a significant voice.  In the current climate, it is vital to have all parties working together.

And not only in opposition to a Tory party fumbling in the dark since Cameron's unceremonious departure, but with the Tories when it comes to negotiating our way out of the EU.

Unfortunately, the Lib Dems can promise a second referendum all they want; it isn't going to happen.  But by the same merit, nor will a Tory majority grant Theresa May a 'strong and stable' hand in the negotiating process.  Brexit was and is a divisive issue, and the backing of one third of whatever percentage of the electorate bothers to vote does not mean you have the support of the nation.  The EU knows this, and will demolish a May-led negotiation if it relies on 'a Tory majority' as a sign of national unity and strength.

The EU cannot, and will not, allow abandoning the union to be a positive move.  And one party - regardless of its perceived mandate from whatever narrow portion of the nation supports them (as is the best any party can achieve under our current electoral system) - cannot stand up to 27 unified nations with a unified goal.

Only a coalition of all parties, representing all areas of the UK, will give us any kind of strength during negotiations.  The only way to force May to accept this is to reduce her majority, and our best hope for doing that is for all opposition parties to work together.

Feverishly Elective: The Feckoning

Well, here we go again.

After spending the best part of a year assuring the Great British public that now was not the right time for an election - that the nation had to come together behind Brexit, rather than be pulled apart by another vote - Theresa may has called for another vote.

*sigh*

I'm still running the ins and outs of this through my head, and struggling to find where I stand on it, but I'm currently leaning slightly towards the positive.

Let's start with what will happen on the 8th of June: the Tories will win, May will (erroneously) claim a mandate from the people, and Jeremy Corbyn will be out of a job.  All of which, of course, is why she's done it.

While I started out with a (relatively) high opinion of Corbyn, that has flagged of late.  It's a rare thing to find a principled politician these days, and rarer still to find one who'll stick to those principles, but that's not enough.  Shallow as it may sound, a leader must have some presence; some charisma.  They must be able to convince others of their way of thinking, and that's not Jeremy Corbyn.

That said, it would have helped to have had his MPs show him even a modicum of backing, rather than plotting against him from the moment their own supporters gave him the position.  While Corbyn may not be a great leader, responsibility for the current state of the party rests firmly with those MPs who'd rather cling to D:reams of the glory days of the late 90s, than deal with the present, and acknowledge a need to move on.

I don't believe Corbyn could have ever won an election, but had his MPs not been so focused on castrating their own party, they may have at least closed the gap on May and the Tories.

That said, the Conservative Party's footing isn't nearly as stable as May thinks it is.  Yes, they've comfortably won a couple of local elections recently, but those were in constituencies that voted heavily for Brexit, and are no doubt enamoured by her all-or-nothing approach (as self-destructive as that is).  National opinion, however, has shifted somewhat since the referendum, with people becoming aware of what Brexit actually means, and the impact it is having and will have.

Not only is the pound clinging desperately to the u-bend, having been dropped in the crapper by the result, but our desperate need for trade-deals will keep it there until it can either clamber up the huge pile of excrement we're finally able to negotiate, or it's flushed into the sewer with nothing but America's meagre droppings to sustain it.

Speaking of the good ol' US of Aw crap, what's he's done now?!, that particular 'special relationship' is also likely to cause May an issue or two on the campaign trail.  Fearing our being cast adrift from the EU and its myriad trading partners, dear Theresa has taken every opportunity since November to plant her tongue firmly in the wigged tangerine's rectum in a display of such hurl-inducing fawning, even George W's prize poodle Blair looks restrained by comparison.

Add to that a crumbling NHS, a widely criticised obsession with Grammar Schools, repeated attacks on the poor and disabled, and telling the Scots that she knows better than them what they want, and any illusions of a free ride look increasingly delusional.

Unfortunately, the party and its leader's demonstrable ineptitude doesn't change the fact there's currently no one to challenge them.  Aside from Labour's obsession with marrying bullets to feet, the Lib Dems are still rebuilding after giving David Cameron carte blanche with a sledgehammer to their foundations, UKIP have achieved what they set out to achieve, and are now struggling to convince anyone they're still relevant, the Greens are enjoying 1980s levels of popularity, and despite being, for all intents and purposes, the Tories' only functioning opposition, geographical restrictions mean there's only so much the SNP can do.

So what's the point of even voting?

The point is that is exactly the question May wants us all asking.  If we're too busy lamenting the lack of a viable opposition to bother voting for any of them, then that will become the reality.  That's not to say everyone should vote Labour just for the sake of it, because that's the flip side of the same problem: if they don't like one, they vote for the other, and regardless of which wins, we're left with a self-indulgent ruling party, and a self-destructive opposition.

The problem with our political system isn't the number of supporters for one or the other, but the number of people who support neither, but see only the two options.

If everyone voted, and everyone voted based on policies, rather than old ideologies or attempting to back a winner, then we'd see a significant shake-up of the political landscape.  And while that might not solve any of our problems, it will at least put us on a path to solving them by showing all parties that if they're not good enough, we'll vote for someone else.

That might seem obvious, but the Tories have gutted our industry, crippled our NHS, demolished our education system, disenfranchised the poor and needy, are jumping into bed with a schizophrenic nuclear-weaponised five year-old engaged in a pissing context with a schizophrenic nuclear-weaponised ten year-old, all-but destroyed our economy and only ever help those who can already comfortably help themselves, and they're set to win a third general election!

May might get everything she thinks she wants out of this election, but that doesn't mean we can't lessen her standing, and make this a challenging few years.  Then we can finally look forward to a decent fight in 2022.

We just have to take the opportunity.

Orange is the New White (Supremacist)

It has been a struggle writing this entry, not just because every other day has brought fresh insanity from Trump and his team of twisted, totalitarian turd wombles, currently driving the US headlong towards the 19th century, but also because that is just one branch of the ugly tree slapping our species around the face as we tumble towards its roots.

Whether it be extremists in the East butchering their fellow man and kidnapping children to sell as sex slaves, or wealthy scumbags in the West praying on the ignorance and fears of the unwashed masses to secure themselves a bit more power and a lot more cash, at the expense of the very people raising them to their thrones, it's all too easy to look at the current state of the world and despair.

The Trump age of Twattishness began before he'd even taken office, as he seemed to be back-tracking on a number of pre-election promises regarding the arrest of Hilary Clinton, the abolition of the Affordable Care Act - or 'Obamacare', for those seemingly unaware they're the same thing - his totally-not-a-Muslim-ban and his border wall.  While this apparent softening was reassuring to those panicked by his impending presidency, it did not sit well with the Kla- sorry, clans of ignorant hick halfwits who'd voted for him on the back of those pledges.

But fear not, blinkered bigots of backwater America!  No sooner was his little hand off the Bible than it was clamped to the pussy of Lady Liberty, as he spewed forth such isolationist rhetoric that had not been heard since a greasy little mono-bollocked Charlie Chaplin impersonator had waxed lyrical on the benefits of inbreeding.

And then, without even pausing for the weekend, he was off with his pen, scrawling over hastily compiled, clumsily written, insulting, ill-thought-out and downright childish literature, like Stephanie Meyer at a book signing.

Yes, all that hateful crap he said he'd do, then sorta acted like maybe he'd put a bit more thought into, he went ahead and did anyway.

Except for the Hilary thing, of course.  Pre-election, Trump's idea of high treason was using an unsecured email account.  Post-election, it's questioning the legality and constitutionality of a targeted immigration ban.

Not that it is a Muslim ban!

All it is is a temporary restriction on people from certain (predominantly Muslim) countries 

(that Trump doesn't have business investments in), with a...softer focus on those who are...

not of those countries' predominant (Muslim) faith...

See?  Totally not a Muslim ban!

The big overarching reason behind all of this nonsense appears to be his chosen sources of information, but that in itself brings up a question: does Trump genuinely believe this crap (as his ever-more beleaguered press secretary suggests), or is he looking to those for excuses for everything he's doing?

Part of me wishes it was the latter because, whatever his endgame is - how ever nefarious and self-serving - at least he'd be in some kind of control.

Unfortunately, I suspect the former is far more likely: that the President of the United States is an ignorant, unstable, small-minded halfwit believing everything Steven Bannon whispers in his ear between thrusts.

Meanwhile, a few miles due east, our own woefully under-qualified and un-democratically elected head of government was continuing the age-old tradition of the Tory leader skirting difficult questions by repeating the same empty, noncommittal rhetoric until the questioner gets bored and moves on.

In her defence, her focus was possibly elsewhere; most likely thinking of ways to suck up to little Donald while subtly staying out of groping range.

Her visit was as wretched as anyone could have predicted, with her not only avoiding any topic of conversation that might ruffle his hairpiece, but slavering over him like a cheerleader over a quarterback.

However, while May was keen to avoid any mention of immigration or torture (probably because they're not entirely at odds (at least when it come to the former)), the Beeb's Laura Kuenssberg was not so reticent.

Compare May's grovelling, too, to the responses of Angela Merkel, François Hollande and a number of other EU leaders, as well as Chinese State Media and even the Speaker of the House of Commons, and I'm left wondering - as I have before - is this really the best we can do?

A spineless, witless, clueless, feckless, directionless, blithering, flapping, vapid, hypocritical cretin on one side of the Atlantic, and a weak-willed, thin-skinned, perverted, angry, disrespectful, petty, greedy, small-minded, homophobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, hypocritical, cheap-wigged varnished turd on the other?

Xi Jinping must be laughing his knackers off at two of the biggest economies in the western hemisphere being led by a pair with less combined human worth than the stuff the slime at the bottom of the barrel scrapes off its brogues.

Sadly, when one looks at the opposition, the answer appears to be 'yes'.

When the Shadow Cabinet quit in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, I thought it was not only a pathetic and desperate ploy by a bunch of Blairites to return the party to the ideals of 10 years ago (that have seen them pummelled in two General Elections), but a disgusting betrayal of both their supporters who'd overwhelmingly put Corbyn there in the first place, and the British people as a whole by crippling any opposition to the government when we needed it most.

This time, however, I believe Corbyn is the one on the wrong side of the fence.  Despite the government's repeated claims that they're exercising the 'will of the people', who voted with their 'eyes wide open', the Leave campaign won by the narrowest of margins on the back of a torrent of lies.  How many now lament their vote (or lack thereof)?

Forcing your MPs to vote a certain way for fear of looking out of touch, or upsetting your base, is pathetic, divisive and destructive, and very much not the will of the people.

Not to mention pointless.  Despite all the talk of blocks and oversight and amendments, and after a fight in the courts to give Parliament a say on the bill, it was passed without a single change, opening the door for May to handle Brexit how ever she sees fit.

Good job, Jezza.

So where do we turn in this time of political strife, when the leaders of two of the most significant powers in the western world are as beneficial as diarrhoea at rush-hour?  Many look to this handsome devil:

The one on the left

And it's easy to see why: he's young, handsome and erudite; an advocate for women's and LGBTQ rights; outspoken on environmental issues and those affecting indigenous people...

Right?

Well, about that... Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Makes Major Decisions for Canadian Pipeline Approvals 

But let's look on the bright side... 

Um...

Ooh! The Lego Batman Movie was good!

Sticking (reluctantly) With Politics...

One of the aims of this blog was a repository for the vast amount of junk that swims around in my head on myriad subjects from film, to politics, to art, to astrophysics, to the nature of the 'self' and what it truly means to be a tomato (you're a fruit, but you're used in salad, and no-one wants you on a cake!).

Unfortunately, the western world is currently in a state of political upheaval, with conservatism under threat, and hitting back at anything and everyone it can paint as a target.

In the US, broadening social openness and awareness - which has led to improved civil rights for the LGBT community, closer cross-cultural integration, questioning of gun laws, distrust of those in power and the realisation that perhaps religion is not the sole source of morality in the world - has drastically reduced the number of 'enemies' conservatives can claim to be the nation's shield against.  As a result, they've gotten even more hard-line in their actions and rhetoric, ignoring increasing calls from all sides for stricter gun-control, denying (against all evidence) their unending issue with institutionalised racism and allowing state laws created specifically to restrict the rights of certain pockets of their citizenry.  They've even gone so far as to promote privileged, extremist halfwit  Donald "If I wave my tiny hands enough, people might mistake my ignorance for passion" Trump (nay, Drumpf) as leader of the GOP.

Then again, ineffectual and self-defeating as it may be, at least the US has a government.  Here in the UK, our PM risked our country's economic stability, generational prospects and global standing on a referendum he thought would secure his office, but managed to lose to a gibbering buffoon and his entourage of racists, sycophants and ignoramuses.

So he quit.

The resultant leadership contest was set to be between Theresa May - a former equalities minister who changed her mind on gay adoption when it suited her career, supported the invasions of Iraq and Syria, backed Trident renewal, fox hunting, tuition fee increases, welfare caps and cuts to low-income households, a tax on households with 'extra' rooms (regardless of whether that room is for carers, or specialised equipment for the severely disabled) and scrapping the Human Rights Act, and voted against environmental controls for fracking (including a report to determine how harmful it might be) and exempting cancer sufferers from a rule that only allows the claiming of certain benefits for 365 days - and Boris Johnson; the aforementioned buffoon.

However, that contest never took place, and May instead had to fight off a delusional prat  - already sacked once for handing a mate tax-payer money for a job that didn't exist - who thought keeping out Johnny foreigner was more important than being a part of the single market (dumped when no-one voted for him), a homophobe who 'totally, totally' wasn't really (quit when no-one voted for him), whatever this is (quit, presumably, when he caught himself in a mirror), and some batty woman who apparently wasn't aware that, when you say something to a journalist, they're liable to share it with other people (quit when she found out).

Things are even worse across the aisle, with the Labour Parliamentary Party deciding it's more interested in tearing itself apart than mounting any kind of opposition.  A large bulk of the Labour front-bench quit in protest of a leader (elected by an overwhelming majority of party faithful) who voted against the invasions of Iraq and Syria, keeps his parliamentary spending to a minimum (I understand he once claimed for a sandwich) and believes there are better things to spend £200,000,000,000 on than a shiny new end-of-the-world delivery system.

If there's one thing that makes politicians nervous, it's one of their own having principles.

Standing against him is Angela Eagle.  In brief:

• Stood for Deputy PM under Gordon Brown (came 5th)
• For the invasion of Iraq
• For the increase in tuition fees
• For 90 day detentions without charge
• For Trident renewal
• For airstrikes on Syria
• Against the investigation into the Iraq war
• Abstained when the Tories proposed £12bn welfare cuts
• Abstained when the Tories proposed forcing the unemployed to do unpaid work

In other words, Theresa May without a spine.

Her leadership bid didn't exactly get off to a shining start when it was revealed her campaign manager had set-up her leadership website before the EU referendum, despite citing Corbyn's supposed inability to convince the Labour masses to vote Remain as her reason for quitting.

Things went downhill from there when, during the announcement of Eagle's leadership bid, Andrea Leadsom quit the Tory race, effectively making Theresa May the new PM.  By the time poor little Angela got to the Q&A section, any journalist that might've had a Q was hightailing it across London for quotes from someone who suddenly mattered.

Her cloudy day appeared to have a slight shimmer at the edges when reactions and comments went through the roof on her Twitter and Facebook posts, but a closer glance revealed the majority of those reactions were HAHA! accompanied by a slew of #VoteCorbyn.

As things stand, Corbyn's opponents are desperately trying to skew Labour's own rules to suggest he needs the backing of 50 MPs to challenge for the leadership - "Where there is no vacancy nominations may be sought by potential challengers... In this case any nomination must be supported by 20% of the combined Commons members of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] and members of the EPLP [European Parliamentary Labour Party]. Nominations not attaining this threshold shall be null and void." - not noticing, it seems, that the post is not vacant, Corbyn's still leader, and is therefore the challenged, not a challenger.

It also goes without saying that those party faithful who put Corbyn in there in the first place, aren't exactly overjoyed at attempts to oust him.

The most concerning thing about all this is - despite repeated assertions that bringing forward the General Election would just add to the uncertainty already rocking the country - the Tories are now perfectly poised to hold a snap election.  Not only would they effectively be running unopposed, May could claim the easy victory as confirmation of her Premiership, and a mandate to drag the UK kicking and screaming out of the EU how ever she sees fit.  Not to mention lumbering us with the Tories until at least 2022 (instead of 2020).

Great plan, PLP. Great plan...

Is This All We Have To Offer?

The names are in, the gloves are off, and we have our five contenders for the new leader of this supposedly once-great isle.

Lead candidate, Theresa May, is pro fox hunting and spying on the internet habits of every single UK citizen, and anti gay adoption (though changed her mind on the latter when it conflicted with a new job).  Not a great person to be leading the pack, but when considering her opposition...

Michael Gove (now out) has failed dismally at every office he’s held under Cameron, rode Boris Johnson’s coat-tails throughout the Brexit referendum, and used his new status as a ‘winner’ to piss on the blonde bollock’s leadership ambitions.  He’s also being supported by Nicky “any suggestion I’m not in complete control of my department is sexist, and all schools should totally be academies, regardless of what experts say...what’s that, David? Sorry, my mistake, I’ve decided we’re not doing that after all” Morgan.

Stephen Crabb (now out) voted against same-sex marriage, and sponsored - and employed interns from - an organisation that claims homosexuality is a curable disease, but - like May - now that he’s after a better job, he “totally, totally” didn't mean it, and supports gay marriage, and any suggestion otherwise is a “falsehood” (regardless of historical evidence).

Andrea Leadsom is a befuddled non-entity still regurgitating all of the Brexit rhetoric from the referendum build-up that even the head Brexit campaigners went back on the day after they won.  She’s also received the possibly poisoned chalice that is BJ’s backing.

And Liam Fox  (now out) - who once housed and employed (with tax-payer money) one his mates as an undeclared aid, just so he could jet about drumming up some business - has placed himself as racist pond-scum's candidate, declaring leaving the single market is a price worth paying to ‘regain control of our borders’ ("But that’s fine because the US isn’t a member of the single market, and they can trade with it, so we’d be totally fine, because we can be like the US, and afford all the same tariffs and contributions, and totally stop anyone else coming into the country ever again, ever").

In other words, he’s a delusional prat.

Additionally, every candidate is pro-Trident renewal, because hey, when it comes down to a choice between feeding the poor and sheltering the homeless, and being ready to efficiently ignite a million people to the surface temperature of the Sun, an apocalyptic fireworks display wins every time.

Whatever happens, in a mere two months' time, one of these people will be the new British Prime Minister...how ever much is left of Britain by then.

Yes, the UK may not be quite so U for much longer.

And on the off-chance Scotland does remain united to the kingdom, the SNP - currently the third largest party in the nation, but with the most sitting MPs - may soon be deciding between a coalition with the Labour Parliamentary Party, or the Labour Union Party.

So that's the state of British politics today: our ruling party is leaderless, and choosing our next PM from a puddle of unsuitable cretins, our opposition is tearing itself apart because a pack of Blairites are uncomfortable with being so different from their more successful Tory counterparts, and the closest thing we currently have to a genuine opposition may be ruling their own independent nation long before we have anything even approaching a suitable working parliament.

I don't suppose Canada is accepting immigrants...?

**UPDATE**

With three down and two to go, the one shock we've had of this leadership election is the rise of someone less well known, but seemingly even more sickeningly clueless than Michael "I drink a glass of water like a goldfish giving a blowjob" Gove.

In the brief time anyone outside of the parliamentary Tory party has been aware of Andrea Leadsom, she's gone from befuddled outsider, to right-wing Christian homophobe, to militant matriarch.

However, some context is required for these latter two.

"I didn't like gay marriage law because it hurts Christians..." was the direct quote taken from Leadsom that the Independent ran with as a headline, thus painting her as a devout, anti-gay dip-shit.  And while she did say that in an interview with ITV - and while it is a monumentally stupid thing to say - it is nevertheless worth noting that, in the very same interview, she clarified that she did not agree that marriage should be a strictly Christian service between a man and a woman, and that she 'positively abstained' from the vote (actively voted both for and against).

Personally, I feel that makes her pathetically mimsy over the subject - she's all for it, unless it insults a bunch of religious homophobes - but that doesn't justify running a headline that paints her in a very particular light, and I'm disappointed in the Independent for stooping to Daily Mail levels of gutter-press shenanigans.

On the subject of 'gutter press', The Sunday Times recently ran with the headline: "Being a mother gives me an edge on May - Leadsom"

This one is not a direct quote, and Leadsom and her campaign team have been eager to stress that she has been taken wildly out of context on this one.

Except, she wasn't.

While she may have been careful not to utter the words, "I'll be a better leader because I'm a mother", she did say that two of her advantages over May were "economic competence and family".

"So really carefully - because I am sure...she will be really really sad she doesn't have children so I don't want this to be 'Andrea has children, Theresa hasn't' because I think that would be really horrible - but genuinely I feel being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake.
"She possibly has nieces, nephews, lots of people, but I have children, who are going to have children, who will directly be a part of what happens next.
"So it really keeps you focused on 'what are you really saying?'. Because what it means is you don't want a downturn but 'never mind, let's look ahead to the ten years', hence it will all be fine. My children will be starting their lives in that next ten years so I have a real stake in the next year, the next two."

So, in context, Leadsom suggested May has less of a 'stake in the future' because she doesn't have kids.

Leadsom, of course, went bat-shit over the article being framed in this context, but I personally couldn't care less how often you use the qualifier 'I don't want this to be a thing, but...': When you raise a thing, you make it a thing.

Leadsom had the brass ones to suggest those of us who don't - or, in May's case, can't - have kids have less of a stake in the future than she does.


I am not a supporter of Theresa May - she has proven herself to be two-faced, conniving and untrustworthy, and I believe she'll be an awful leader for this country - but Andrea Leadsom is a moronic, blinkered, ignorant, self-serving scum-bag; a description I use only because I am endeavouring to keep swearing on this blog to a minimum.

Feverishly Elective: an update!

Well, who'd have thunk?!  A mere two months after announcing that all schools were being forced to become academies - after a mere two months of a feckless halfwit failing to convince people who know far better than her that, 'no, really, it's a great idea!' - the government has yanked up the handbrake and swung a 180 that would make Ken Block fill his helmet with yesterday's Frosties.

"This is about being a listening government..." says the twit in question.  "Better to have reforms than have none at all."

And what are those reforms?  "We absolutely support those strong local authorities where schools are good and outstanding - they can make the choice to convert," while those that are failing or can't be supported by the local authority will be 'compelled' to convert.

Soooo they're scrapping the whole idea and going back to Labour's plan.  Way to stamp your authority, Nick.

In other election news, bugger-all has changed.  Oh, everyone's claiming some kind of victory: the Tories are now top of the lowly pile being sniggered at from on high by the SNP; Labour have held on, despite everyone assuming they'd lose big; UKIP and the LibDems have actually made some gains; and Sadiq Khan looks set to become the new Boris, despite once spending a brief evening in the same building as someone with extremist views, clearly marking him out as a terrorist sympathiser (though, when Zac Goldsmith did exactly the same thing, it was meaningless).

However, to look at these 'victories' another way: it doesn't matter who has the most of the measly number of seats left open by the SNP--being the second party in Scotland right now is like being the biggest of five field mice arguing with the farm's angry tabby; given the shit the Tories have been pulling, and their deepening well of failures, Labour should be stomping on their bacon-smelling bollocks, not merely holding on; the LibDems have risen from the doldrums of insignificance to become a protest vote for people who can't bring themselves to be racist; and the best London can hope for from a new mayor is him talking slightly less gibberish than the last one.

 

Democracy.

Yay.

Feverishly Elective! (a political rant (sorry))

It's [Local] Election day!

*w00p*

And here in Cheltenham we have the democratic privilege of voting for our Police & Crime Commissioner (from a list of people I've never heard of and have no idea about) and our Ward Councillors (from a list of people I've never heard of and have no idea about).

Can you feel the excitement?  Taste the eagerness?  Smell the anticipatory sweat?

No?  How about sense the soul-numbing apathy?


Yup, that's more like it.

Twenty years ago, there was a genuine sense of excitement in the run-up to the General Election.  After a close run fight in '92, the Tories were flagging and Labour were in a position, for the first time since the '70s, to give them a good kicking.  They had a charismatic leader, a positive message of hope heading into the new millennium, a raft of aspirational policies, and even a catchy theme song:


(I didn't say it was a good theme song)

Sadly, as is the way with political parties, it was soon apparent that New Labour was little more than old Tory light, and '97's +70% voter turnout dropped below 60% by 2001.

Politicians on all sides blamed an apathetic generation, disinterested in politics, but from my point of view, the problem wasn't a lack of interest so much as a struggle to see the point: New Labour were two-faced, the Lib Dems were weak and the Conservatives were...well, Tories.

By the '05 election, it wasn't apathy keeping people away from the polls, it was wilful non-participation: Why vote if there's no-one worth voting for?

Jump to 2010 and we had a dull, unrelatable, unelected Prime Minister going up against a resurgent Tory party under their first leader since Thatcher with genuine balls; and the Tories still failed to secure a majority.  Of course, this was in part due to a Liberal Democrat leader who, unlike his opposition, could engage with people from behind a lectern.  It wasn't enough to make the Lib Dems a genuine 3rd contender, but it did make the country indecisive enough to result in the ConDem coalition.

However, engaging leader or not, the Dems proved as weak as ever, and a more apt. name amalgamation there has never been.

So here we are with a Tory majority* back in the saddle and back to trying to put everything in the hands of their business chums, albeit with slightly more subtlety than their straight-forward privatisation of the '80s.  This time around, they've put a pair of expendable imbeciles in charge of Education and the NHS, each with an aggressive simpleton's approach to 'improving' their respective areas.

*Quick side-note: Cameron, please stop using the phrase 'mandate from the people'.  You secured just over a third of votes from the electorate that bothered to turn up.  Of the 30.7 million people who voted, 19.4 million voted against you.  More people cast their vote in the bin than cast it for you.  Until we have a truly representative voting system, no party - whatever their majority - can claim a 'mandate from the people'.

Nicky Morgan has looked at the way a few schools have improved since becoming academies, and decided that ALL schools should do the same (because, obviously, every non-academy school is exactly the same).

Jeremy Hunt was handed a bunch of numbers he was told indicated some hospitals were a bit iffy at the weekend, and decided it was down to all junior doctors not working hard enough.

As far as the party's concerned, their moronic ideas are ideal, given that they are so staggeringly unpopular among the professionals who know better that they will lead to crippling strike action by the unions, denigrating each service to such a degree that they can be snapped up for a pittance by grateful Tory donors.

Just like the coal mines.

Then, come 2019, both proven failures can be put out to pasture (to deflect all the public backlash from the party as a whole), the Tories can put some seemingly competent people in charge of the sales, and claim, in the run-up to the election, that by replacing the 'old guard' with experienced business folks, they're in the best position to ensure the fallout is as beneficial as possible to the whole of the UK.

So what of our local elections?  Well, Cheltenham is currently in the hands of Alex Chalk; a typical Tory drone who supported cuts to child tax credits and disability benefits, and rejected the condemnation of VAT on women's sanitary products, because that was the party line, and he's so lacking in will, spine and individual thought, he couldn't possibly do something sensible without a line of blue-tied bureaucrats telling him which box to tick.

Unfortunately, his position isn't up for grabs, and so our only recourse is to surround him with enemies.

You see, my outlook has changed somewhat since those 'apathetic' days of the mid-noughties.  Everyone should vote, regardless of how samey, useless or vapid every candidate might be.  If there's no-one decent to put in place, the second best option is to remove the cretin already there.  Part of the problem with UK politics stems from the majority settling for the familiar, not because they're the best people for the job, but because the other lot don't appear to be any better.

If, however, incumbents were constantly under threat of losing their seat, they'd be forced to put the effort in, listen to the people and not be arseholes.  And the only way to light that fire under them is to show that, if they don't do a good job, they'll be replaced faster than a shit-stained toothbrush.

A Brief Re-Re-Introduction

Blimey, it's been a while.

Do people still do these things, or are they just for us camera-shy lot?

Oh well, here we are, and here I go...

Hello!

Let's see, the last time I tried this, Labour were losing their grip under the leadership of Gordon Brown, Obama was America's big hope, everyone was questioning whether Marvel could actually pull off their crazy Avengers idea, Facebook was still in competition with MySpace, Twitter was the eager newbie trying to get a foothold, and YouTube was predominantly the domain of the musical kitten.

Now we have a majority Tory government trying to privatise the entire country, the US is set to elect an unqualified twit from the world of showbiz as their Commander in Chief, there are wars in the Middle East, a big debate about our European membership, union strikes, a resurgent Communist power, Prince dominating the charts and Star Wars dominating the box office.

WELCOME TO THE 1980s!

For my own part, I was working through my first year at university in Cheltenham and still dreaming, starry eyed, of becoming a writer.

I've since graduated with a 2:1, returned to Sunderland, failed to find work, returned to Cheltenham, found a job, lost a job, found another job, found another job, and done precious little writing in between.

Will leave it there for now as 'tis a busy day.  More to follow...

In the mean time, check this out for a slightly more extensive catch up: