Lead by donkeys

Having watched our Dear Leader just now on the Andrew Marr show, I think we can home in on more specific body parts from that animal (which oddly suggests an alternative name immediately).

As I wrote to them:

Well, that was... er... vague.

Might one suggest that when a politician answers a question they don't fancy with 'The real question that needs to be asked is...' and rambles off on self-serving waffle ending with yet more 'looking at this', a big hook comes in from stage left and hoiks 'em off? And presuming to know 'what people want' should mean open season with the rotten fruit and veg from the stalls.

Any system that has operated so disastrously for over a decade really has little credibility left to be allowed to 'sort it out' or, worse, turning their dead hands to 'getting on with the job', 'dealing with the issues at hand'... and especially on the 'big issues'.

If Mr. Brown thinks he is the answer, then I dare not imagine the question.

I am not sure that even a cross in a ballot once every few years is now enough.

Telegraph - Brown alive, appears in public, nation breathes sigh of relief

Ask not what...

What a price a job? £700 says MBA graduate

"British man, 26, Oxford graduate, now with added MBA...looking for interesting work anywhere..,"

Good luck to Daniel. I think he has a fine future in PR at least, if the coverage gained on £700 is anything to go by.

Sadly, in the section of media I operate two words rule above all others: end benefit. And to be clear, that is to the customer, as opposed to for the sales person or, in this case, applicant.

Sadly nothing in the pitch above exactly helps me as a potential employer assess what advantage I'd gain from the hire.

But then again, looking at how the current establishment works (sic), I guess it might not matter.

SOSO... what?

What depresses, but does not surprise, is the collection of 'moving on' attempts I am now seeing.

Slightly more surprising is the motley collection of individuals who see themselves, and whose party evidently sees as being the best embodiment of this culture.

Er, no.

It minds me of a comedy skit (I wish I could remember which), where a confused punter is confronted by an ever-rotating collection of service representatives at the counter, who are in fact always clearly the same person. And saying the same, nonsensical thing over and over, if in different ways, as if that will satisfy.

What is worst in all this, are how many in the MSM now seem to feel this is fine, as the circus simply moves on.

I watched on SKY as the genuineness of the PM's smirk was shuttled too and fro in the edit suite several times to assess, and his 'performance', and that of others, rated by a self-satisfied collection of WUVI's, as if what they saw and now think has any bearing on what the rest of us can see and still think.

High on my list is that actions count, and a lot more from the past will need even more from the future, and changing the drapes in a house of ill repute doesn't make the professional practices within any different.

Try again guys. It ain't washing in Worcester yet.

Addendum:

Anrew Marr Show - Not featured. I suspect that it does not equate to their Plan B scenario,

Charles Kennedy 'hopes' there is is nothing in his expenses file that might be embarrassing, at best. After all that has gone down, if such as an ex-leader of a party doesn't know by now, the competency of the House members to judge much of anything be a worry.

I am still intrigued, bearing all that has gone before, that the overseer of MPs would still get chosen by them, and only them, as if the much touted secret ballot makes much difference.

Speaking of which, as it is evidently a role more important than I had before appreciated, I rather fancy now having more of a say, as the connect, or lack of, between the House of 'don't get its' and the public they are meant to serve, is so vast.

Still smells to me

I must say if our new political classless are 'getting it' at last, they have a darn funny way of articulating it.

Just watched a Minister pay homage to ex-Speaker Martin, 'who showed just what a person he was by his noble deeds for the sake of the country', or some such horse manure.

I don't think his tongue was in his cheek.

Which part of presiding over a decade of abuses, trying to cover everything up and clinging on by his fingertips until prized loose by his equally tush-concerned mate Gordon, all in trying to score one last, wafer-thin £130k, factored into this quaint notion?

I also find this latest 'gentleman's club' thing rather clever... for a politician of a certain hue, if not for any in theory objective media that go along with it.

Beyond being merely interested in what the actual balance of 'toffs' across all parties might be, as I have found some sport in whispering in the ear of Aunty's sisterhood, another might be to ask whether there are no female public schools (or at least that churn out anyone with a serious career), as this is the impression that seems to be created... with help from their male counterparts at almost every turn.

And I have yet to have explained how 'voting' in the next overseer, albeit in 'secret', by the very clowns who have a vested interest in who oversees them, is something that the public needs not to be troubled with.

Other than funding it, of course.

Again.

What price 'respect'

Around £130k, it would seem.

That is the hostage to fortune of our country vs. what I thought was a largely ceremonial but now realise is yet another hugely over-powerful unelected (by us) position: The Speaker of the House.

This is the amount this petty little man will 'lose' if he stands down now, rather than clinging onto the wreckage that is the credibility of our nation's Parliament to maximise his gilded retirement.

It is ironic that it all still boils down to money in a grubby individual, public 'servant's' pocket.

And as the attempts to make it just about him, and his office, continue, and fail to distract the public disgust at the whole rotten system, egged on by too many in the privileged media classes jockeying for position and favour in the new Westminster order, I am also struck by the disconnect of the way this little lot behave vs. the way they have required the rest of us to, often with ever more draconian laws and penalties.

What private organisation would be allowed to function for so long with rampant bullying? Even Mr. Martin's few supporters, eerily reminiscent of Mr. Brown's, seem to concede that while he can be affable, he has a vile temper and is not to be crossed.

Our country seems to be suffering from a culture of thugees who got to the top by truly awful behaviour and practices, and in their (inevitable - fear can command power, but respect is the foundation of true leadership) falls are more interested in dragging us all down with them for minor personal gains.

As I hear of the Tamil Tiger leader fighting to his last youthful acolyte before topping himself in yet another deluded Downfall remake, I wonder how often we are to be cursed by history repeating itself?

Addendum:

Quite proud of this one:

As to the hapless Mr. Martin and those who surround him (with the best and worst of interests at heart), to mangle another of Stephen Fry's inspirational heroes, maybe a case of 'The unspeakable selecting the next un-Speaker able'?

Couldn't think of a nicer bunch to watch at work.

Addendum:

I stumble somewhat over what I have just read in a newspaper report: 'one thing MPs should remember in making their choice is that the next Speaker will have more power than any of his predecessors.'

Until very recently, I thought it was some old geezer who dresses funny and says 'Order, order' a lot. Hey, whatever floats their yachts.

However, it has now been made quite clear that there is great power here but, unlike Spiderman, pretty much zippy by way of accountability. Especially to folk like me. You know; the public. Voters. Guys who foot the bill and shoulder the consequences.

So.... with the great job that has served the country so well so far in recent mind, the intention is to hand the choice of the next one... again... to our current 600+ 'government of all the talents' (including in all from all parties under that glorious misnomer).

'Because that is the way it has always been done'.

I. do. not. blooming. well. think. so.

Responsibility and accountability

Watching the Andrew Marr Show, with various new mea-culpa'd types putting out their stalls.

Other than Mariella Frostrup, rather missing the mood making a point on missing the public mood referring to an eco-issue by when she was diving in Honduras.

And it allowed me to distill a few thoughts about the sheer rottenness of 'the system'.

Labour MP Kate Hoey made a heck of a lot of sense and resonated with my views... mostly.

As did Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg.

However, while the former spoke to me, and indeed for me on MP expenses, the EU and the Taliban, I have never heard such tripe about the UN and the situation on Sri Lanka. Talk about naive, with a misplaced faith in an entity that makes the EU seems well-run. A blissfully glossed over fact which rather put the previous common sense comments on Parliamentary reform in another context.

Who do I vote for, when mandates are claimed when I patently don't agree with some pretty major aspects. Will I also have to comprise and prioritise just to afford my proxy to someone.

ps: on The Speaker, while the next, secret vote selection is a step forward might be 'better', in light of events as a voting individual I am not convinced, as it is obvious that even the most egregious abuses still see the perpetrators changing their own system. Not good enough.

Speaking of 'Not getting it'

Ann Widdecombe: Who else was going to cut my lawn? The cat?

I have two homes.

One for my immediate family.

The other, nearby, for my Mother, who has dementia, and for whom I also care (as she has more than £20k 'saved', sod all interest, or help, from anyone, save the attendance allowance, which goes on the ladies who help with bathing, etc, daily).

I have a full time job. Self-employed, home-working, 6am 'til 7 on average.

I also cut my own grass in my spare time, and that of my Mum's cottage.

Labour has damned themselves many times over already in my eyes. You, Madam, have just done the same for the Conservatives with this ill-conceived effort.

That's three adults come June, and whenever the General Election is called.

I'd the day job is looking iffy. And if the performance on HIGNFY was any measure, that's a non-starter.

Hope you have a Plan C.

Addendum:

A few more 'explanations' and 'we could be hurting the country exposing its leaders foibles' 'scares' are still getting trotted out.

If you are an honest, hard-working MP, then in all this you have nothing to fear and all to gain (though being part of a 'party interest first' system ruled by whips rather than constituent wishes will rather hinder you).

Otherwise being ignorant, especially of the law... IS NO BLOOMING EXCUSE!

I intend to revisit 'The Fugitive', especially when the 'hero' is confronted at the dam outlet and makes his case.

These troughers are anything but innocent, so it is all the more delicious to savour the reply of implacable law: 'I DON'T CARE'. The next bit is fun in context, too.

In honour

I merely wish to note, in agreement, with this: 'The image of a lone man standing in front of a row of tanks remains an enduring image of the incident. So is the image of the tank driver who with compassion and humanity refused to run him over.' LINK

The rest, from all, merely serves to show how far all sides have come.

Better Late...?

I found it...interesting... that today we at last had through the letterbox our Swine Flu advice leaflet.

Maybe we should read it, but it's hard to imagine what it can tell us we don't already know.

And what the money it cost could have been used for.

BBC - NEW - Human noses too cold for bird flu - 'May' it not, indeed?

Too many in the media, with too much money, trying to fill too much time, with not enough skill or sensible oversight being deployed at almost any level. IMHO.

Yet the whole silly charade grinds on, getting ratings pumping up, and then shooting down the very thing they have stirred.

QUOTES OF THE DAY - Some are more...

Both from the Telegraph letters page...

'In the words of the great Homer Simpson: "Honestly, Marge, I swear, I didn't think you would find out."

SIR – Have there been any instances of "mistakes" resulting in underpayments?

One law for them...

Putting aside violence, I'd presume that most times the law gets involved is when money ends up in pockets it shouldn't for reasons that are not acceptable.

Until now, I have not been aware that 'putting it back' was deemed a solution smiled upon by the authorities, or society, in the much-loved manner of 'putting it all behind us'.

I regret to inform the deluded ones that this will not 'regain my trust' in any way.

And trying to pool guilt ain't going to do it for me either, so apologists from all sides trotted out still trying to peddle the 'we need to change the system' as an attempted 'solution' to a stupid, spun distraction that is their preferred notion of the 'real problem' are merely tarring themselves with their more venal colleagues' brushes. It fools no one.

Apologies not enough. Actions not words. And MPs being dealt with in the same way as the public upon whom they have imposed, so poorly, for so long. End the hypocrisy.

Yet to discuss this on BBC Breakfast with the bouffant and brunette £XXXkgrand inquisitors ("Sorry, I misread what I was told to say") we get... Kevin Maguire? Again. And by way of 'balance'... Andrew Pierce. Again.

With great power comes great responsibility (hat tip: Stan Lee). And with those, above all, comes accountability. Why, at the moment, when one asks 'who is in charge here?' (and has been for over a decade -where's Al Haig when you need him?), do I suspect a sets of digits, and a few stumpy ones, will suddenly mutely point in every direction save one.

Campaign - Channel 4 staff attacked for "grossly excessive" pay

Market rate talent requiring public subsidy as the money model doesn't add up. Interesting.
And I do rather think that pointing wherever else possible in comparison in a 'two wrongs make a god given right' isn't working too well at the moment in the public domain

Telegraph - If it were you, could you get away with an 'oops!' and a cheque?

I like precedents.

When I accidentally cancel my TV licence DD and then forget to stump up the chekky, despite all those polite reminders, I'm guessing I can take it to the wire and then... ta-da!

Or, am I likely to be a tad less unique in the official sympathies to my funding arrangements than others?

Over to the £92-grand inquisitors at Aunty, who are asking all the tough questions on our behalves currently. Sometimes.

But at least there's new legal defence precedent for the land... 'Feeling terrible' about 'mistakes'. It has support in some media. And may gain ground. I await the next demand for payment for unique services rendered that I may get (even if they are not to a standard I find acceptable and indeed are contractually specified) from various 'suppliers'.

A capita idea?

Or... Report tax evasion

"Two Peers found to have abused their position"

I am a little intrigued that in the news broadcast during the Jeremy 'let's stir the country into a rabid froth over nothing by getting on two loons to discuss a stupid PR punt, and then let the dogs of the switchboard loose' Vine Show how the two Lord's punishment was viewed by the house and hence reported.

Let me get this straight... you take a bung to rig the law and you get suspended for 6 months... and then what? Welcome back to the House Partay! (on ex's no doubt).

Yes there was an inappropriately forgetful Conservative couple, a distraught Labour ex-Cabinet Minister (certainly mentioned) as well, but two Lords a rigging don't even get fired on the spot????! Or the odd comment gets made on that odd discrepancy?

Mind you, on the Steve Wright Show it has just been mentioned someone bought Kevin Spacey a Lordship, so the exchange of cash in this arena is certainly thriving.

Why would anyone want to become an MP? - A voice from within laments. Sadly, I think, like many, by be too close, and too cerebral, he miss the mood, and a key point.

I couldn't agree more about the perils of mass tarring by broad brushes.

But...

Who got 'us' to a point where those who we give our proxy to govern are seen not as individuals, but merely, at best, drones in the hive?

I have no sense any more my MP does anything he was voted in to do through his own mind.

Hence it is little wonder that I might be tempted to include him, unfairly or not, with the actions of colleagues it seems he has at been woefully oblivious about until now.

I cannot tell a lie: it was them...er...us... but not me

It seems fairly well established that our in theory independently-minded political representatives pretty much do and/or say what they are told these days.

And those actions or words seem governed by systems of research and response based on surveys and polls and focus groups.

So we have a Parliament of clones controlled by robots.

I just saw Liam Fox on the BBC waffling on the various 'system is wrong', 'rules were not broken' mantras, instead of having a personal opinion and making clear he knows right from wrong, and that collective mea culpas do not erase individual accountability, so it's pretty cross-party. No idea where the Lib Dems are in all this. I guess they get their day in the sun tomorrow.

And I could also care less about apologies. Still, after trotting out a few for all the value they have, it's nice to see a green Mr. Cameron advocating reuse. Before leaping in his Prius this morning, he must have used President Obama's genius rallying cry 'Change' about twenty times. Of course, saying it doesn't mean it happens, or it ends up with anything better. But then, that is not the point these days , is it?

These are clear factual abuses, that for anyone else would lead to immediate legal process. Yet those geniuses at Labour see merit in telling their colleagues that they have done nothing wrong. Read the public mood doods!

And the solution I am now hearing about? Using vast amounts more of taxpayers money to bring in a commission or something to oversee the thing. Which, on past evidence, seems to be shorthand for public-funded cover-up. And already there seems to be mention that 'trivia' such as the damning details won't be in there in the new system.

My only concern is that if and when there are some resignations/sackings this will in fact be seen to clear the slate, which in essence it will.

That means the guilty will be allowed to quietly get away with their abuses. And those who step into their shoes will be unjustly punished for the predecessors actions.

Peter's Pixel Protest

Enough, is enough

Parliament's reputation brought low

I am sorry it is on this blog, discredited as it is, but it has the widest audience.

Just heard on The Andrew Marr comfy sofa show a nifty notion, and that was a quiet, dignified protest by the people of the country to show these venal sharks and their media WUVI-supporters just what we think of them.

All I ask is it is not decided to be some silly all-points descent on London, as this would be a public order nightmare, unfair on the capital and require a ton of folk to use cash and carbon to get there.

I’d suggest a minute of silence for our country’s kids’ lost futures, in designated local town squares nationwide at a suitable lunchtime period that does not interfere with trying to survive and play into the hands of funded extremists without jobs to worry about.

All coordinated online and with images in a patchwork quilt in some kind of Pixel Protest like those ad spaces, in the manner of a FaceBook group. I am sure even the local plod could provide halfway accurate crowd size estimates for once.

And if the numbers add up to what… more than half the voting population who turned out at the last election, then I think it would be valid that a new one be called forthwith.

I'd like to teach the world to sing...

... and they can now teach us:)

Other than being a rather dire piece of reporting as it says pretty much nothing of value, I found the whole tone of the set up a little clumsy.

Immigrant Song Contest

Nice. 'You' have scoured the country to arrive at at shortlist. How did that work? Perhaps in the same way as those headlines get generated in some quarters? So far, other than a ton on links on technology and rules I can find nothing that makes much on this story any the clearer. Who will the judges be? Musicians? Or Trevor Phillips?

I have a Singaporean Chinese wife who is an amazingly talented performer. Guessing she's too late to apply, but if we're in the room with her I am presuming the rest of our non-immigrant family may be allowed to at least watch?

It's not April 1st is it? Or has the joined-up team who organised Air Force One's New York community bonding flypast been put on the case here now?

Other than wondering if such a thing is really what the BBC's premier news programme needs to be getting into, the way it is being handled, and indeed billed, seems a little shy on a few things, including common sense.

At the moment no link appears to explain the teaser copy any further, and simply saying tune in later is really not enough here.

I am sure it will all have sounded simply super in the group hug editorial meeting that came up with it, but I will be interested in how it plays outside the bubble worlds that are reading public mood so well elsewhere these days.

Addendum:

Copped a wee bit of flak for this and a follow up(mainly because I was annoyed that yet agin they changed the site following a critique, but did not acknowledge it, this making any subsequent reader think you are wrong), but am sticking to my guns, from freedom of speech to idiotic, counter-productive PC-meddling to plain rubbish organisation...

My comments pertained to a few things, but I obviously did not realise that for one to apply it had to conform to a consistent set of rules across all... set by such as your good self. Any more than I think an MP’s misdeeds can be claimed to be negated by the manner of their exposure (to pop in a topical news analogy onto what used to be a news blog – hope that’s ‘on topic’ mods:).

And yes, this is a blog. Where you share opinions. Often, by invitation: Throughout the week we want you to help our judges out by telling us what you think..

Though often this can result in an unfortunate reaction when the ‘sell’ is more than a little ‘over’: this is the week the country is captivated'/’the cream of immigrant musical talentvia ’a shared love of cheesy [covers] music’. If some say so. Now, where did you have in mind for me to add my ‘other thoughts’?

But yes, I offered some personal feedback on what has been offered up. You, however, seem more concerned with personal feedback on what I wrote. Fair enough, it’s a free country. Hardly on topic, mind. And, IMHO, rather weakens some pretty good points you are making, ironically, rather in keeping with those I share. Though I do note that you have no opinion as to the standard of musicianship being presented.

I suspect we are both are a little intrigued as to how this effort serves the cause of multi-cultural harmony, or what it’s doing on the main news section of a political news programme and blog, but have perhaps chosen different ways to express ourselves.

Suffice to say that I consider this to have been poorly judged editorially and not exactly slickly reported thus far.

But as it is out there, and there has been a call for comment, plus I have an interest in things political, media, musical and the conduct of competitions in general, I do think I’ll continue to exercise my right to free speech here and not ‘a different post’, ta very much. With luck, you’ll get further distracted by the contribution from BoaMan now?

On reflection it was a mistake to use the missus’ situation simply to make a point, especially without first asking her what she thought. Which was pretty much that she didn’t feel the association with such an ‘exclusive’ initiative would be worthwhile, no matter what the ‘any publicity is..’ benefits might be. She’s a performer, who just happens now to be in the UK. Complementing thousands of others, from all demographics, irrespective of anything beyond the music and talent. Though to be sure there is also competition, and via awards, and these often can help. Especially when the PR value of national broadcast can be very useful, when the talent gets exposure and if, hopefully, for the all right reasons.

But let’s not forget that this competition has been created by the UK’s national broadcaster, representative of one and all. And as one with more than passing experience in the pr and promo surrounding such things, as well as one who takes an interest in many of Aunty’s blogs, I am still keen to find out how it has been and will be conducted. The BBC, you may recall, has had ‘difficulties’ when it comes to such things in the recent past.

Sadly, I can recall no mention of the mechanisms leading up to this final anywhere, and certainly not on the Newsnight blog, before we arrive, with less than a week’s notice, at a series of semi-finals with selected entrants already in place. This I feel at best fails to serve the interests of the participants and eventual winners as much as anything else.

And again not, IMHO, too served well in complement by such as this: ‘The judges will read your comments and take them into account, but they will have the final say in selecting a winner and they will decide based on a wide range of criteria consistent with the BBC Code of Conduct on Competitions and Voting., which, as far as I can judge (sorry:), seems to apply almost exclusively, and irrelevantly to contests inviting a public vote.

I still have no real sense of who these judges are, either. ‘An unusual collection tonight’, we are promised...why 1/3 through?). Any more than I did/have the criteria for selection, etc. It has all just ’appeared’. But as a national broadcaster I think the public has a right to know what processes and thoughts have lain behind all that has got us to this point. If only not to ‘undermine public trust in the BBC and ensure the public will be treated with respect, honesty and fairness, confident that all [interactive] competitions and votes are handled with rigorous care and integrity’.

I have nothing personally against any of the bands or the individuals in them, but I am afraid that I remain very concerned professionally with the agenda behind this competition and the way it has been so far conducted, especially considering the sensitivity of the umbrella theme it has been created under. Having a bunch of folk sprung from nowhere, hyped up and shared on a niche, but significant national broadcast news programme... with clear invitations to comment.... seems to have been asking for some controversy. Great for ratings perhaps; not so good for harmony?

Yes, I did and do weaken my argument a tad by then being unable to resist offering two, very personal, highly subjective, 2 cents on what I have been presented with as a viewer musically, but then as performers you need to get to grips with the reality of audience feedback. And what can I do if the blog post has not been split between the immigration and pure performance issues.

I have found the Font (a very engaging group of young men) story intriguing, but as we’re on the theme of appropriateness in tying discordant issues, I think their experiences in Iran are not well served by the mood of this contest.

And how did they end up with Cliff Richard to cover, as it seems they were barely aware of him and his music? Were they, as a rock band, just ‘issued’ the poppy Congratulations (really banned in Iran? And heavily punished here too.. ha ha. Is that former at least a verified fact?) on a producer’s whim? Did they not choose? To walk in the footsteps of Radiohead? I’d have been more interested in their original work, which was only a tantalizing backing track and a few poor audio clips at best. Not helping the public assessment too well. Ya Freddy’s talents were better served, but not by much. Another engaging young, er, again, man (I am sure there will be some ladies in lead to come), with a sad story to tell. I fear I could get no sense from the piece of what he was capable. If it was about the music. So far this seems more about serving the producers’ agenda rather than the bands' musical careers as they are vying for glory.

Also it is worth noting that the clips via the dedicated hyperlink are heavily edited from the main programme slot including, for some bizarre reason, the actual song performance in question. That I had to find via iPlayer... and endure the whole darn ‘it’s a rotten system’ parade by our MPs first.

Maybe I have been too hasty in my initial critique, but it is my experience that teasers tantalise and invite audience return by sampling the best. Is that what has happened, musically, here so far?

But as some have put it, if a tad ironically considering the knee-jerk comments in ‘defens(iv)e’... Good luck to everyone, may the best man (Mann?) win.

At least the Asian Football Idol initiative, though I also feel poorly judged in the message it sends, as a competition has had clear publicity and will enjoy a long period of local heats up to the finals.

So.... the best use of the license fee in support of either original music, UK live performance talent or community harmony? I was, and still am not so sure.

And hence, by association, what does this tell us about our country, and the priorities and abilities of its national broadcaster?

Daily Mail (I know) - NEW - Newsnight accused of 'dumbing down' with a talent contest for immigrants - Well they could hardly have imagined they were going to be lauded for elevating the gravitas of one of the few political news programmes... or the cause of integration much, really. Could they?

My only regret is that complict media will escape

They always do...

This is about Parliament, not politics

It is interesting, if not edifying or indeed encouraging (for those who feel they are qualified to lead) that this sorry crew seem to feel the origins of a fact seems to somehow negate it still being one.

600+ parliamentary wrongs to not make a right. Oh, and to any apologists... too little... waaaaay too late.

Such excuses as I have witnessed so far seem more designed to merely ensure the noose is tight when the trapdoor falls.

Balls, venues, posts and other sporting metaphors

Now the EU wants to run the Internet

It is my experience that anything in the blogosphere that starts 'This is an utterly pathetic post...' is usually barely worth the electrons consumed in initiating it, much less reading on to find out if any coherent argument is going to be made beyond knee-jerk and/or ad hom.

As we're into mangling paraphrasing, it often seems, with some irony bearing in mind the topic, the 'First through to last refuges of the E-scoundrel'

Looking forward to the forthcoming elections, though still trying to figure out who best to vote for to kick those that deserve it, first for effect and then into touch.

QUOTE OF THE DAY - Freedom of the gougers

Or... why I really don't like lawyers...

Has he got news for you about privacy

Or where they have landed us.

"If you've got nothing to hide.... then you won't be issuing writs."

Cheap, but too good a shot to forgo

Watching the news this morning I note we have a new national 'hero'.

Beating tens of thousands of applicants, this plucky Brit has been named caretaker of a tropical paradise isle.

However, as the job description I heard was 'getting paid a small fortune and no rent for doing very little', I think it was no great surprise that this latest example of the UK's new system was the victor.

Actually, a very nice chap from what I could see, and good luck to him.

Blogging off

It's really rather odd.

Two of my frequent blog visits, and even sometime posts, at rather opposing ends of the media spectrum - BBC's Newsnight (all editors) and BBC is Biased - have both recently been 'improved' in design, navigation, posting systems, etc.

And both, as far as my experience goes, have been total disasters.

Loyal followings lost, rampant trolling almost encouraged and the loss of worthwhile avenues of free speech.

The BBC I can understand, if not applaud. They really seemed to be having no fun at the hands of independent thinkers and despite the best, or worst, efforts of their moderating policy are getting hung out to dry daily.

What better way to deal with the quality posters than drowning them in trolls and various 'ists'.

BBBC is harder to understand. They exist to debate, and though the name speaks of a clear agenda (I am on record as being more concerned with sloppy reporting as much, if not more than editorial agenda) the appeal lies in having a venue for worthy debate.

Now it is a zoo, with 'Anons' up the wazzoo dictating what is going on, or simply messing it up. A pity.

At least the latter I do not have to pay for. As to Aunty, well, I can only hope we get another outlet, and a better designed one, soon, to keep her on her toes.

We're heading for a world where more honesty and facts, and less spin and 'opinion', will be key to sensible decision-making, especially at the voting booth.

The internet is a powerful weapon, but like all such, it needs to be well directed to inflict blows on those it targets, and not blow up in the face of those wielding it.

Their lips are moving

I think 'we' could do with 'them' getting a reality check...

This shambolic blame game is set to pull Labour apart

'Let's start with one curious and well-made point from Alan Johnson today. He observed that when it came to the big issues, Gordon Brown's government hadn't done so badly.'

A few have already cranked an eyebrow at that one, as much for the person who tried to make it stick as the one trying to stop in sliding down the wall.

There does seem to be an interesting breed of clearly delusional Emperors with New Clothes and sycophantic fashion critics in the politico-media establishment these days, operating on a 'Not My Fawltyesque' 'I think I may have got away with it' by dint of only listening to those who tell them what they want to hear.

Watching Mr. Marr amble along with Mr. Johnson yesterday, and Steven Pound just now on SKY, with both trying to tell us what Hazel meant when she said 'YouTurn if you want to' was really highly supportive, was worth it indeed.

But I really am getting a tad tested with certain folk from this same discredited cabal telling me what I think and am really concerned with, when... they haven't a clue.

Indy - NEW - It's almost heartbreaking – these people are so clueless - Not a usual hat-tip, but this one is tellingly spot on.

It is a source of some irritation to me that in my county Old/Nu/Whatever hue Lab doesn't even bother putting up a candidate. Because, whatever else I do in the election, I want the whole sorry crew to know what I think of them.

And I want it to be so crushing, so humiliating, that even the promise of dodgy pay systems and unwarranted pensions and unethical non-exec directorships won't be enough to make it worth it in compo.

But also so that whichever of the remaining venal bunch that I get presented with as alternatives grasp that my 'mandate' is a precious thing, and I am getting a tad tetchy with it being totally abused by dishonest incompetents, much less idiotically claimed as such from a poor % of an even poorer turn out.

Could have fooled me

But not others, apparently.

Blears denies criticism of Brown

"Promote your message via YouTube if you want to. But it is no substitute for knocking on doors or setting up a stall in the town centre," she wrote. So, a ringing endorsement in fact, as suggested by Alan Johnson on the Andrew Marr show, revealing a grasp of reality in the Cabinet that is truly unique.

I say, I say, I say

BBC's HYS is one of the more discredited 'we're listening' outposts of the government/MSM establishment.

And that is saying something

It goes up, and down, with monotonous regularity, but always rather suspiciously when the narrative seems to be erring on curiously inconvenient emerging truths...

Fixing the Have Your Say fault

'...for the BBC it is a highly valued way to listen to what matters to our audience and to find out what they are thinking about key stories, which we then feed into our journalism.

...we will still offer an opportunity for you to Have Your Say on one or two of the big stories of the day. You'll be able to email in your views and experiences on those subjects and the HYS moderators will publish a selection of them.... But we hope that it will provide you with a least a flavour of what everyone is thinking...

Bless. I'll have to add 'a flavour of what everyone is thinking' to 'enhancing the narrative', 'interpreting events' and other gems.

dotconnect wrote: Have your engineers considered the possibility that an overdose of bile had clogged up the system?

That'll be it.

Also worth checking the one way/non return valves.

Feel the love. Only.