Tag Archives: politics

Summary of the year two thousand and sixteen

Posted on by

We the hyperboreans! We the followers of David Icke. I can begin with the summary that 2016 was all about architecture. When Russian agents created the European parliament they employed a man who had dedicated his life to helping insomniacs. He did this by designing an unnational parliament that was so boring to watch that no animal could look at it for more than around 15 seconds without falling asleep. After ten seconds of stock footage to be played over any news story the camera man would slumber, the camera would dip to the floor and the lizards could remove their human costumes and begin their horrific reproduction ritual of which one byproduct was law. There were at least ten byproducts and the product was caviar. However, one day another Russian, this time a dissident; Ronald McDonald, invented the ‘tripod’ and it was just a matter of time before Britain voted to leave the union.

<Reader questions my position>

Light beech benches in the round. Cheap expensive suits in monotonous foreign mangled overly good English with perfect grammar and no idioms. A parliament designed by Ikea. Don’t worry, I will maintain some ironic distance to help you swallow the bitter pill. The prose is scattered nonsense lacking structure, which has been acknowledged and therefore cannot be criticised; blithering. A vulgar room in a vulgar building that asks for our love or disinterest. No, no, yes. Location, location, education. Minds untouched by the King James. A codified genre.

Where was I?

<in hell>

<logic>
David Cameron therefore* asked us whether the UK government should drop a nuclear bomb on us all. Should choose a policy without a government. Should heal the Conservative party. Should be racist. Should say fuck off. Should x. This was a masterstroke of long term strategy of which we are merely witnessing the first stage. The end game involves George Osborne becoming King of the Jews and completing his long term economic plan in 3000CE when we will run a surplus of 1p. When we were asked whether the world was round, he unfortunately told us that he would be upset to the point of crying in his wife’s arms, which his children would see; forever losing respect for him, if we said it were flat. And out of sheer spite I wanted his children to share our disappointment with our parents. I wanted disciplinarians and they turned out to be liberals. A yearning for authority. But there were lies on both sides. 350 is approximately 200 to a statistician. We call them the same ‘order of magnitude’. For instance the average density of the universe is around 0.000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 01 kilograms per cubic metre which is a different order of magnitude to the density of air which is about 350 000 000 pounds per week when hot. We are a stain on the vacuum. So it was a lie of size 7/4. Compare that to the lie the goodies told that the density of the universe was roughly the density of air. It was a bigger lie, but then again if two liars tell you two lies what does that reveal about the truth? this is part of the grand metaphysical debate begat by Rumsfeld who famously forgot to mention the things that you know but you don’t know that you know. For me that is that I know I don’t understand numbers above a thousand but I don’t know that I know it.
</logic>

world.history.help()

“ ‘Take back control’ has the character of the death wish. We know we have to die, but we want to die on our own terms.’ – some yank red. Memento vitae.

britain.finishJobOfLuftwaffe()

I met someone who thought a vote for X was an endorsement of X. How would you like to be humiliated?

self.cry('conformism that doesn\'t know it is conformism is just a further stupidity')

A slight mental smell seemed to be hinting at a coherent idea but never quite settled.

And the left destroyed the leftist Sanders and want a new war with Russia for some reason. It was Amy Schumer wot won it.

And apparently the sixties was actually shit.

And the introduction of the tritone into compositions was shatteringly brutal and radical. It took the genius of the oppressed to make such an incredible theoretical divergence from the past. But it was a victory of the intellect over order. Ugliness became an ingredient for beauty.

$latex R_{\mu \nu} – {1 \over 2}g_{\mu \nu}\,R + g_{\mu \nu} \Lambda =
{8 \pi G \over c^4} T_{\mu \nu}$,

where $latex R$ is the experiment being conducted on our minds by the Chinese called the internet; $latex g$ is the fake clash of civilisations narrative; $latex \Lambda$ is the true clash of civilisations narrative; and $latex T$ is Nigel Farage.

And so it turned out that T.S. Eliot was wrong about April. It was June and even then not so much as November, less a month than a vacuum between two other gentler months. I think T.S. stands for That Slapper. For in November Hillary Duck was crowned oldest loser in history. Septegenocracy is a new evil for the world. A slow evil. A weary evil. A evil with urinary difficulties. Daffy Clinton will now have have a special bingo wing added to the Special Fancy House for special bingo times. This all poses some troubling conundrums for Jonny Muslim. And we should remember that just because they think the world was made by a male fairy type thing which is difficult to describe they are still terrorists. Just like you and me. And the advertisers have been first to champion empowered religious women. Ann Summers released a Christmas burqa with extra slits at the nipple and crutch to help empowered religious women feel sexy while honouring the prophet (PBUH) by covering their modesty. It had the full veil of ignorance allowing objective analysis of political theory. And I have started covering my hair with a ‘baseball cap’ for fear of arousing women with my brown mop out of pure respect for dignity. I have long been worried that I would tempt females away from austere piety and make blood flow to their secondary sexual organs by running a hand across my head provocatively. Seemingly unaware that I am being watched. But I know what I am doing. It says #MAGA. And we must concentrate on what we have in common. For instance us atheists share the Islamic view that Mary must have had sex to have that kid and probably told Joseph that it was God that raped her in her dream in a panicked explanation in the heat of the moment that she couldn’t believe he believed to the point where she was forced to question his intellect. Either that or Joseph ejaculated on her and I don’t need to go into vulgar details but you get the picture (his semen somehow made its way ‘down there’, ‘down south’, or raised eyebrows (I’m talking about Mary’s vagina and uterus)). But of course I feign a symmetry where an asymmetry lies. Four points on an identity space.

     

                                          a)                                                                                           b)
Figure 1: Graph of my ignorance against religion a) shows Shiantanism and b) shows Sunnitholicism. Time for the daily trip to BBC article on the difference between Sunni and Shia.

I ask myself of what topics I dare not speak. I don’t think the holocaust is a fair example.

Intentional disregard for Michael Gove’s and Steven Pinker’s contradictory rules for good prose style.

‘When I was seventeen, it was a very good year’ is a lyric that today’s seventeen year olds will never be able to sing. Except ironically if they still have that. I don’t know, I remember when a telephone was still two plastic cups and a bit of string, which lets face it: it still is. I wish I was seventeen, and it is our duty to ruin things for them so we don’t feel so jealous. Like really humiliating until it’s like literally ‘thank god I’m not seventeen’. Twenty Seventeen. Seventeen feels like a cute diminutive for seven. The seven blasphemies of modernity: the Shard, the Gherkin, the Walkie Talkie, the Lloyds building, Canary Wharf, the Olympics and Mary Berry. The bland international city state which mocks the sublime modesty of a small Norman church. They holiday in Tuscany while English winter sunsets mock the base vulgarity of Mediterranean heat on paid leave. A dream that our star will replace carbon through pure commercial supremacy.

The bland international city state cries a liberal tear. The pseudo leftists weep. Is it a coincidence that the principle image of our global warming is a biblical flood? The salary of crying. The cinematic aspect of the scientific theory is its essential appeal.

I am grateful to be alive (stars, life etc).

My main prediction is that since Jonny Chinese is a more effective capitalist than Jonny Yank we will see the Cold War in reverse in the twenty first century. Peace Hot. We are at peace but we all kill each other. The yanks will be the commie bastards. Elections and liberty will be opposites. The world is upfide down.

What is your preferred binary? Old-young? Educated-uneducated? bigoted-liberal. My preferences are rural-metropolitan and pessimist-optimist.


Figure 2: Bisections of a plane.

The glass is not half empty, it embodies dread.

Some old ideas as a front for something or other.

Merry Summery across gorgeous rolling green hills to a blood orange horizon,

* No causal relation permitted.

Why I am a terrorist sympathiser

Posted on by

I am a terrorist sympathiser because I don’t sympathise with terrorists.

I woke up yesterday morning to find my prime minister, an elected MP whose job is to defend my interests, had privately but in effect publicly described me as a terrorist sypathiser.

I am a hard-core Dawkinsian athiest. I am not only anti-Islamist like David Cameron but I am actually anti-Islam as I am anti-theist in general; a much more stringent position than Cameron’s. I also believe someone when they tell me they have based their murderous ideology on the Qur’an and would never endorse a statement such as ‘it has nothing to do with Islam’. You can hopefully understand then, why I find it deeply irritating for my prime minister to use this terminology to describe me.

I am not a pacifist. I don’t think a credible prime minister can be a pacifist. I have had a lifelong respect for armed forces personnel, and believe they must always be supported financially and otherwise regardless of the wisdom of the politicians who give them their orders. I supported all the military campaigns of the last fifteen years. I believe in meeting NATO’s 2 percent target (I am actually in favour of raising it further). I believe in the wisdom of military action in Syria. Since we are responsible for deployment in that area in recent history we have a duty to help control the area and prevent it from remaining an ungoverned space. At a push I would even say I accept a reduction in civil liberties in order to aid domestic security forces. Now lets analyse exactly what I have done to be described as a terrorist sympathiser.

What I am against is a bombing campaign without a coherent plan for ground forces. I am against entering into a theatre of war without agreements publicly in place with our direct and indirect allies. That is, there must be a coherent strategy which is acceptable to Russia as well as our closest allies. And crucially, it must be presented to the British people. There may be a plan but I have not been shown it. We literally don’t know what the current government position on the Assad regime is for instance.

I understand that I may be ignorant of the issues. I have read the Foreign Affairs Committee report, and that is as far as my understanding goes. I realise that David Cameron is privy to information that I do not have. However, I strongly believe that in a democracy the government should demonstrate to me why action is required and why the action is of the form in which it is presented. I feel that that has not happened in this case. I am concerned about the fact that after a previous vote in 2013 which didn’t pass, RAF jets were involved in allied campaigns anyway. Finally, I find the logical connection between attacks in Paris and this action tenuous. The positions described in this and the previous paragraph are the totality of reasons for which I was called a terrorist sympathiser.

Obviously, I accept that I may be wrong and that a bombing campaign without any troops may turn out to be the wisest approach to defeating IS and that history will prove it thus. I would have no problem with being described as foolish or incorrect or naive or stupid or even evil. But I don’t believe it is acceptable or correct to describe me as a terrorist sympathiser.

It has a quite peculiar psychological effect to be described as a terrorist sympathiser by a senior politician. I am in no danger of being radicalised. As you will understand from the first two paragraphs I am no liberal. I don’t like David Cameron’s and the majority of elected MP’s wet approach to language. I think a religion must always be defined in terms of its political appropriation. I believe a book which says ‘you should kill people who don’t agree with this book’ probably means that and that metaphorical interpretations are dubious and not to be taken for granted. Despite all those things I find myself to be attacked philosophically by a man who frankly hasn’t done the reading. Fundamentally, I would sum up the effect it had on me as alienating. If I, as a privileged white male middle class university educated illiberal pro-military anti-Islamist feels like that how will it make other less mainstream thinkers feel? And what effect might it have on their worldview and actions?

It also gives legitimacy to people who do sympathise with terrorists. Since I can so longer call them terrorist sympathisers I am forced into an alliance with people I consider as evil. It is a syntactical muddle which is as bizarre as it is insulting.

It was a dangerous piece of slander aimed at a large portion of the population and it is an outrage that there has been no apology.

Please accept my apologies for the earnestness and lack of humour,

Raph Shirley, terrorist sympathiser.

US enters new era of post election US

Posted on by

Something very remarkable happened to me last Saturday. I was going about my business like any Saturday. Except it wasn’t Saturday and it wasn’t happening to me but the USA. It was 2008 and they’d just elected their first Hawaiian president. You may have heard of him. A man called… Barack was it? No. Because we are conducting an outrageous thought experiment where America had voted for John McClane. Yippee kay ay mother… no, just mother? You guessed it, it’s election time again, the jolly democratic carnival is back in town, and this time the outcome depends on the voters… again. It. Where Americans everywhere and especially in America go into a little box to place their plops and drips in a pool of water before heading out to vote, but sometimes they get it the wrong way round, something Tony Blair benefited from in 97. It is often said that up to 95% of Labour votes that year were actually accidental toilet-roll/voting-slip mishananigans, but the true figure may be much higher. And John McClane was from Hawaii.

I’ve been spending the last two weeks gauging emotions, and not to mention political temperatures, after mentioning it that one time, in the streets, and roads, and cul-de-sacs, and carparks of the people of this great place of Hemel Hempstead.


Figure 1. Militant? As in you take up arms?

I’ve spoken to the fishmonger who smells so bad that she can’t get a job since November. ‘Who will you be voting for?’ I ask with clothes peg nasality. ‘I don’t have a vote’ she says, as if entirely aware of the gross inequality facing gross fishmongers every second in every way just because of their Britality. I’ve spoken to the schoolteacher who smells so bad she can’t remember the one times table. I’ve spoken to my brother who smells so bad that I realised the smell was coming from me.


Figure 2. A display of my disdain for the actor Daniel Radcliffe. He is seriously pissed off about this.

“One man is a president. The other has a magic hat” – Ricky Gervais, on Letterman. Yeah, but Obama supposedly believes in the virgin birth.

But when it comes down to it, there’s only one poll that matters. There’s only one poll every four years that matters. There’s only one poll every four or two that matters the most, more than the polls which gauge opinion and are not true indicators given the small sample sizes, but there’s only one poll that matters because I know about politics and important things in the world.

But one way or another, we’ll have a new world leader come Wednesday. It is important. It will have a profound influence on you because you don’t understand it like I do. Perhaps that fishmonger will be able to sell her fish for a few extra dollars, but come Romney, or Obama, or a strange hybrid monster of the two, or a total surprise like it was all a dream, politics will be important. Have you ever eaten a meal? Politics. Have you ever seen a tree? Politics. Have you ever fought in a war? Politics affects every aspect of your life except your ear size. Accept your ear size! Listen to what democracy is telling you.

Your man in Hemel,

A proposal concerning a change of use for Buckingham Palace

Posted on by

Due to a freedom of information request I have come into possession of this letter from government records. It seems to be a memo from George Osborne to David Cameron. I decided to risk libel action for publishing it, for ethical/heroic reasons.

To The Rt Hon David Cameron MP Prime Minister,

As you know, the Royal Family is currently enjoying a period of unparalleled public adoration, similar to, for instance, the initial popularity of Adolf Hitler. We, the people, collectively recognise that it offers significant value for money in terms of increased tourism revenue and national branding. All the proposals contained herein, stem from these facts, which I hold to be self evident truths. I hope that you will implement my recommendations in time for the forthcoming Olympics festival of sport and the crowd-pleasing Jubilee rally, so that we can profit from the unique set of current circumstances and use them to maintain our position on the global stage (that of spotlight operator).

Therefore/thus even the most earnest misanthropic republican will agree that it follows naturally that we should do everything in our power to promote, expand, and capitalise on this important asset. I am of course suggesting that Buckingham Palace be converted into a brothel. Up to 90% of American visitors to London, are attracted to the Theatre district and are most likely perverts driven more by the sordid honey of Soho. The Queen herself would be a highly sell-able commodity to these tourists and the prices we could charge, along with substantial gains from auctioning off the lower level staff would more than cover the losses made due to lower sales of Jubilee memorial coins by elderly people who will doubtless be against these proposals, along with everything else, as per usual. The over sixties are after all the last prim generation, and these important modernising steps will be shunned by them in the same way that they can not and will not understand the internet.


Figure 1. Possible flyer design.

Kate Middleton’s sexual attractiveness accounts for eight tenths of tabloid interest in the new couple (a canny pairing Hague! You showed a lot of foresight, mate). With her and William doing two shows an hour at one thousand pounds per ticket and an audience of three hundred, we could write off our debts, which were handed down to us by the last Labour government, in a couple of years, probably.

However, adult entertainment is not the only obvious use for the Royal Family. I suggest the bulk of the grounds be sold to Disney, who have a better record than HM government for producing trashy, cliché driven tourist attractions and aggressively engineering sinister global brands. It might also be sensible to use the smaller buildings on the palace grounds for manufacture and distribution of narcotics, again a very profitable enterprise and a valid inference from the argument from increased tourist revenue. If so, it is important to maintain the current practice (in line with Disney policy anyway) of only having one Queen visible at any point (the actors, or “Queenettes”, will be paid minimum wage).

I have one further possible suggestion, admittedly not so mild as the inevitable changes I highlight above. Working on the conservative assumption that the queen human can operate at 50% the efficiency of a queen ant (100 eggs/hour) she could share the burden of propagation and save the humiliation and cost of child rearing for a generation of young couples. The ordinary people are not capable of asexual parthenogenesis and can only produce 2 or 3 a decade at best under modern financial and social constraints. Perhaps everyone reaching thirty years of age could be sent an egg from the queen to put in a plant pot and then it turns into a baby clone of the Queen for them to cherish forever. I also recommend building a boat.

I finish with an ode to our queen that I suggest we sing at the opening of Disney BrothelTM.

The queen human lays an egg a minute
She puts her perfect genes in it
May her reign be infinite
And this metaphor hold out for two more stanzas

Her nest is as big as any other
May I make food for our mother?
Or should I say lover?
No, that’s too much

Bottle her jelly!
Ebay her welly
Sell every inch of her belly
To Network South East or First Capital Connect.

Yours sincerely,

The Dishonourable Gideon Osborne.

Thanks for watching,

.

Stefan Graves rambles incoherently

Posted on by

Stefan looked at a picture of Ed Milliband and Ed Balls queing to buy a Cornish Pasty and forced his mind to yield to his instruction that it was an image of two men at ease in their natural environment. Despite being of a socio-economic group that traditionally consumed healthy quantities of said snack (fifth to 75th percentile), Stefan didn’t really like them. In principle though he did like them. He remembers very well the last one he had. He felt obliged to buy it from an empty bakery on holiday, which he’d spent too much time in to leave without buying something. The anger at that wasteful purchase mingled with a general sense of having had an unfortunate life and built to a shaking red faced rage.

The sight of two competent and fortunate men was then all that was required to send him on his way to a breakdown. He had decided to obey the governments suggestion to buy fuel despite realising the inevitable consequences because he wanted to have the wasted time and inconvenience as a weapon against the winner of England’s 2011 best person competition. Is was the ultimate act of self defeating passive aggression since the resulting arsenal could only be used within the confines of his own head. This is because Stefan can not talk in sentences. He prefers to utter opposites in a sort of free association heavily relying on the word posh and garbled references to his own upbringing.

That’s when I enter the Hungry Horse pub opposite the Travelodge I’m staying in as part of my national tour marketing software for solar panel manufacturers. The barman sees his chance and (genuinely) runs away. Stefan now has me in his eyes and we both know that the only way I could turn and leave would be to openly admit that I’m terryfied by what I am about to recieve, and also run.

I sit down next to him and am surprised by the instantaneous start of his barage to the point of almost (genuinely) falling off my stool. Despite aggreeing with the man it takes a huge effort on my part to appear to agree. I leave the pub full of burger and impresseed by the man in two ways. Firstly, by the scope of his discourse, which casually takes in the eastward shift of global power, a general discussion of inequality throughout human history, and science’s usurping of large swathes of meta-physics. Secondly, I’m impressed by his ability to accurately represent the bizzare and insane corners of his brain instead of taking the usual approach of distorting them into dishonest rational arguments.

D’y’ know what I mean tho’?

Possible solutions to the global energy problem

Posted on by

It is a little known fact that over 99.999% of the world’s energy is currently consumed by other people. It is also true that over half of all other people are in an other country. That’s why I’m arguing that we need to expend a lot more effort reducing other countries’ energy demands and less reducing our insignificant own. This must be achieved through a number of schemes and we have to get away from the notion that it can be done purely through total war.

While all against all may be able to account for perhaps 80% reductions in consumption/population, the last 20% could be significantly harder to eradicate. And the remainder will not be solved through serial killers. They make significant contributions to the problem of global warming yes, but they can never take off on a grand scale. The Toyota Prius has often boasted that it is ‘almost as much good as one percent of one percent of one percent of Jack the Ripper’, but the truth is he could have done so much more if it weren’t for the petty legislation handed down to us by Whitehall. It stifles murderers and it harms the environment.

Nuclear holocaust has been a controversial solution and I’d rather not get bogged down in the arguments for and against it here. It is a red herring. Really, what we need is the forced abstinence of other people. That is why I’m asking for an outright ban on opposite sex marriage. Is it not unnatural that up and down the country, people continue to produce further people or what I call ‘carbon multipliers’?

Consider suicide.

Your children’s inheritance will be a cleaner, greener planet if other people’s children aren’t there to ruin it for them. With a little perseverance and a lot of camp we can make this the last human generation and leave a perfect world for all posterity.

Am I too moderate? We must seek to reduce not just the impact of human life but of all life. Our brothers and sisters the deer and the snail, and our fathers and mothers the oak and the pine; all shall be curbed! And then we shall leave a perfect sphere with all its mould and moss forever destroyed.

Yours in earnest,

A fair system for toilet use

Posted on by

My mother, Sharon Shirley, recently made the unreasonable demand that I put the seat down after using the toilet. Here is my response.

Allow me to neglect poo-poo for the purposes of a thought experiment.

Imagine there are two social groups A and B who require the toilet to be in states A and B respectively, for wee wees. There is some effort incurred in changing the state one way, EA-B, which is essentially equal to the effort incurred in changing the state the other way, EB-A.

What system of use would be fair and proper? Is it the current system, where state A is considered to be philosophically superior to state B and that group B have to change the state to their required state pre-toilet and then change it to the opposite state post-toilet to spare group A the indignity of changing the toilet state? Pompous group A pricks.


Figure 1 A hypothetical, perfectly fair toilet for which equal effort is required of all genders and creeds.

I put it to you that group A’s position is entirely bogus, and I will no longer change the toilet state for them. There will be net lower indignity if this mode of operation is adopted worldwide. Moreover, there will be equal distribution of indignity between the two groups.

And what is a lid even for? Can we please get rid of that? Also, we are out of toilet paper and duck.

Now I will consider the impact of number 2s.

Of course, groups A and B agree on the toilet state for number 2s. This complicates matters slightly because some of group B will be saved effort by other group B members changing the state for them post number 1. However, you will see that net effort is still lower if my system is adopted because only necessary state changes occur.

I apologise for discussing this delicate matter with you. I feel the situation has come to a crisis point requiring brave men like myself to come forward and speak up against prejudice and hypocrisy.

I rest my case,

p.s. mum, could you give me a lift to the pub tonight around 7.04pm? and not Chicken Tonight tonight again please. I do not feel like Chicken Tonight tonight. I might be persuaded by Sausages Tonight…

… tonight.

Is it possible…

Posted on by

… to be into politics and talk about it without being a total dick?

No. Probably not. But that’s not what I’m talking about today. Today, as you probably know, there is a waning gibbous moon. But that’s not what I’m talking about today (when it’s in a waning gibbous phase, the moon rises some hours after sunset and glows like a full moon when it’s near the horizon. But the shape of this moon is less than full).

No. What really makes today the day of all days is that today I will once and for all put to rest the issue of the meaning of life. I wont solve it, just put it to rest for a bit. Are you still here? If so you have just put up with three false starts. Either you really have very little to be getting on with or you have a misplaced hope that something mildly amusing may be on the horizon.

Nothing.

More blogging on the way soon,

Internet satirists create hoax news story

Posted on by

Students yesterday produced a fake news item about the recent burqa banning debacle. The twenty year old at the centre of the shocking parody seemed to be showing a gross lack of respect for all parties concerned. News of the blog post went straight to the PM and reverberations have since been felt in the UN and NATO.

Speaking at a meeting set up to debate the full meaning of the piece, David Cameron spoke of being troubled by the author’s ‘deep irony’. This, mixed with an ill-considered liberal viewpoint, made the stinging criticisms in the article particularly potent.

‘We just wanted to really get to the heart of the matter by exposing the idiocy of the media storm’ – Jon, 23. Equivalent French students had responded to a similar debate in earnest. ‘That’s just not the way we do things in England, we like to avoid embarrassment by applying irony so liberally the reader gets lost in a nonsensical whirlwind’. Ambitious.

Reporting live from the internet,

Church synod allows Jewish bishops

Posted on by

The Church of England’s ruling synod has decided that all bishops must be at least 20% Jew, but there are further steps to take before they can be ordained.

Despite criticisms that this was ‘almost as stupid as Christianity itself’ mad churchey types everywhere agreed that the current system was anti-Semitic.

Rowan Williams remarked ‘if it’s good enough for Jesus it’s good enough for bishop[s]’, to which newly bishopped Aaron Adelstein replied ‘Jesus? That tawdry street performer?’.

Since the Catholic church allowed a non-celibate Muslim, ‘Randy’ Rawahah, to be The Pope last yeah the Church of England has been under increasing pressure from pressure group’s such as Steven Spielberg’s ‘The Church of Hitler more like’. This follows Spielberg’s recent revelation that the Ralph Fiennes character in Schindler’s List was actually a subtle allegory of The Church of England.

But while this flippant parody fizzles out it is important to stress that there are arguments on both sides… of the argument:

If The Church of England can’t be racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semite, idiotic,… etc, who can be?

I’m satired of this shit,

The Labour leadership

Posted on by

Hello Labourites,

It has been well documented of late that Labour did not win the last election. The Labour Party (oxymoron), is now looking for a new leader. I shall be giving a low down on those seeking to lead.

David Milliband
This man is actually a slug moulded into the shape of a man and controlled by a small bee in the toe shaped region of the slug. That is not true but it may as well be because as we all know, slugs might make good grub in survival situations but they are no politicians. Milliband gave me a kiss once but I didn’t want to take it any further because he made me puke over himself. Vote Milliband!

Ed Milliband
This brother is one thousandth of The Beatles. That was a lame pun but this guy is lamer still. He believes in capital punishment. You have to spend an hour talking on msn LIKE THIS!

Ed Balls
Despite the popular misconception, Ed Balls actually doesn’t have a silly name. He does have a silly head and body though and should not be trusted around children or adults.

Diane Abbott
This one is fucking mental. Seriously. On the plus side she is both black, and female, and an MP, and someone who’s name is Diane. A rare combination indeed. Will her novelty features allow her to avoid embarrassing questions about her loony sensibilities?

UPDATE – Andy Burnham – UPDATE
Oops, Andy didn’t make the original list. This is categorically not due to the sloppy management of a sloopy blog. It was definitely an intentional and subtle allusion to his lack of presence in the campaign. I am convinced he is a robot and that he will kill us all if elected or if not. UPDATE 2: just realised I did one of those shit jokes where you go I’m not doing something I’m evidently doing. Sorry about that. It won’t happen again.

Who should I vote for? I’m thinking Abbott. That seems like the most sarcastic vote.

Thoughts?