Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Monday, February 23, 2009

I think I've just had a little accident

oh for fucks fucking sake

which company did the fat one eyed unelected incontinent scottish cuntwaft say this of?

"The British taxpayer cannot be expected to pay for the company's losses,"

so... £30 milion to try and safeguard 6000 jobs (where the workers concerned HAVENT been pissing money up the wall and throwing good after bad) as opposed to god alone knows how much on the banks?? you really are a cunt, arent you Cyclops?

Saturday, February 21, 2009

how liberal are you?

You scored 60%

You are moderately liberal
If you wish to find out more about liberalism please visit To find out more about the Libertarian Party's policies, please see our manifesto. Also, you may wish to help us advertise this test with your very own blog badge, below.

We should raise taxes on the rich so we can redistribute wealth to the poor? Your answer was liberal
It is illiberal for people to be taxed at a different rate based on their income. Also rich people are the most mobile members of society. If they are over-taxed they will simply move themselves, their assets and capital offshore. Which will in turn decrease investment in the country.

We should get rid of the minimum wage? Your answer was illiberal
The minimum wage is an illiberal restriction on free trade. It also places an artificial value on the cost of labour which makes it more difficult for low skilled workers to find work, and therefore gain experience and training.

The state should bailout large corporations in financial distress? Your answer was liberal
This is an illiberal incursion on the free market — at the taxpayer's expense. No company should ever receive a taxpayer backed bailout. It encourages bad financial practices and corruption between the state, corporations and unions.

It should be illegal for members of the public to own guns? Your answer was liberal
In a liberal country people can protect themselves as they see fit. Remember if someone owns a gun it does not mean they will murder anyone. In addition it is very dangerous for a people to allow their state to have a monopoly over weaponry and therefore force.

People who hold racist or extreme views should be allowed to publicly express their ideas? Your answer was liberal
To not would be a gross and illiberal infringement on freedom of speech. And it sets a dangerous precedent for further reducing freedom of speech. It must be noted that defining things as extreme or dangerous is a purely subjective activity. Therefore the state will only define things as extreme if they pose a threat to it. But not necessarily to the people.

The state should make people change their behaviour to tackle climate change? Your answer was illiberal
In a liberal society the state will not force any law abiding person to behave in a certain way as this is an infringement on freedom of thought and action. This is an especially acute issue when you consider there is still great debate about whether climate change is caused directly by human action. People should note that the state have a lot to gain in terms of social control from climate change catastrophe. Along with large corporations who will find it easier to cope with environmental regulations than their smaller competitors.

It is wrong for the police to retain the DNA of anyone not serving a prison sentence? Your answer was illiberal
There is no reason why in a liberal society that the state should be allowed to steal the property of a person when they have not been convicted of any crime or are currently serving a prison sentence.

The state should ban people from watching violent pornography? Your answer was liberal
This is an illiberal incursion on freedom of thought. It is not the business of the state to involve itself in the sexual preferences of consenting adults.

It is wrong for democratic nations to overthrow foreign dictators? Your answer was illiberal
It is illiberal, and a sign of gross arrogance, for one state to impose their will on another in this way. These issues are for the people of said state to resolve themselves with their leader(s).

Free market capitalism should be forced on other nations to help create a better world? Your answer was liberal
It is illiberal for one state to impose their way of life on another. A liberal foreign policy involves free trade with all willing participants. It does not involve forcing states to behave in a certain way if they do not wish to.

Friday, February 20, 2009

hazel blears tells it like it is...

...or not. however, there are some superb comments on Guido regarding her leadership bid today... the choicest among them being

'Commendable contribution from a cabinet minister who stands head and shoulders below her colleagues.'

'Delusional does not quite cover the state they are in - is there another word for delusional with knobs on?'

''Our first loyalty is to the british people'Oh I love these lying filth.Yes please be loyal to me by destroying my pension, taxing the arse off me, filling the country with foreigners and then allowing them to reject integration.Please be loyal to me by theiving public funds by the wheel-barrow load.Please fiddle educational standards in order that illiterate kids get qualifications, forcing parents such as myself to fund private education.Please show your loyalty to me by invading sovereign nations which pose no threat to the UK, by way of lies and deception.If you are loyal to the people of this country please fuck off at the double Labour filth.'

but I think my favourite has to be Old Holborns contribution -

'Hazel Blears is a complete cunt, an escapee of a freak show, a demented power crazed dwarf.
She deserves to be kicked to death.'

as someone said - firm but fair.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009


you'll probably weasel out of it somehow, but for now I'm going to enjoy watching you squirm, you corrupt cow.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

honesty in a NuLabour drone?

the sign on Kerry Mccarthy's blog front page reads 'conform & obey'.

ah well... at least some of them are a *little* bit honest.

oh dear - who DO we believe?

hmmm. doesn't there come ANY point with these troughing, corrupt twats where either they or someone from the apparatchik says 'look, for everyone's sakes, go quietly. Now.'

evidently not...

hazel 'sex dwarf' blears

as she's so memorably described elsewhere in the blogosphere, is ripped into here - in the Grauniad of all places. Anyone who has the dubious honour of her misrepresentation (she was my local MP for a time when I was resident on manchester) will, no doubt, think it quite fair in its portrayal of her. I've encountered earthworms with more spine.

Thursday, February 12, 2009

one rule for me...

Labour peer Lord Ahmed, who expressed his concerns to the parliamentary authorities about Mr Wilders' visit, told the BBC: "This man doesn't have any respect for law. He's doing this for publicity and he's seeking that and getting that."

as much respect for the law as someone found guilty of dangerous driving where someone was killed as a result of it, eh? it also appears he has a peculiar idea of what should be allowed as free speech in a democracy and what he wants to be banned -

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

painting pictures with words...

'As Brown drives the British economy with all the skill and accuracy of a one-eyed mad Scotsman in the Indy 500...'

from Ambush Predator.

and another thing...

what the fucking fuck, pray tell, is 'chillaxing' exactly??? you fuckwits.

apartheid for the UK?

lee jasper seems to want it. OH, in the comments on his original post here - , links to the excellent 'to miss with love' piece related to this here -