The Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, or Kevin Dudd (depending I guess on whether you like him or not) seems to have upset a few people.
It is reported that he is proposing to change the national coat of arms and the suggested new emblem is shown below.
Apparently, the thinking behind this is that it more accurately reflects the government’s political stance…
A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks and gives you a sense of security while you’re actually being screwed!
However, the Americans say they have more right to it than Australia, claiming it is far more appropriate to their style of politics and the colours are right too.
The Brits also considered a similar process, but eventually, after several U-turns, decided against it since the UK didn’t want to upset the Americans, didn’t understand a word that the Australians were saying and in any event felt that the whole issue was unPC, although they were unsure why, but probably because it demonstrates a sense of national identity, which is officially only regarded as truly OK when applied to people other than the British.
In spite of all that, in an effort to economise, Britain has come up with it’s own new coat of arms that will be cheaper to reproduce than the old one.
According to Government statistics, it is understood and equated with the political process by 99% of the population from all ethnic backgrounds…
This is an all American affair in all senses of the expression, but it could equally have happened in any Western country, indeed, probably almost anywhere in the world.
The Governor of South Carolina, Mark Sanford, has just admitted yet another extramarital affair. Some say that temptation will always be there for powerful politicians because they are per se attractive to women, or rather that their power is a heady aphrodisiac for some women. In fact, if that were not true, you’d undoubtedly frequently find yourself asking, “What the hell does she see in him?” However, the other side of the coin is that, in all probability, the vast majority of such men (and we are mostly talking about men here, though I’m not sure why) are going to have a predilection for sexual dalliance if they are the type of person who has what it takes to succeed in politics. Whether they act on that or not is, of course, another question.
Frank Farley, a Temple University psychologist, apparently terms such people as “Type T personalities”. The “T” supposedly stands for thrill-seeker, which portrays the kind of person drawn to a career that, by its very nature, requires a willingness to step out of ordinary life and take risks. That all too often describes high flying politicians to a “T”, if you’ll forgive the pun.
Politicians need to have drive and ambition and it’s essential they have the ability to think quickly on their feet and frequently to “interpret” the rules in the most convenient way at the time. The better ones are often intelligent, extrovert and look at everything in a “live now pay later” light, because that’s the way the system works. In modern “sound bite” politics, no time is wasted thinking things through. What seems right in the moment is the way they are going to go. Later, of course, they are stuck with the decision, but u-turns due to “changed circumstances” are commonplace these days.
Dare I suggest that many politicians probably even choose a life partner based at least partly on political expediency and what it will do for their “image”? So, the net result is often, although obviously not always, that they are likely to screw around, if they’re any good at their job – that’s the job of being a politician, not the bit about representing you, a citizen.
Still, it’s darn good fodder for the voyeur in all of us, isn’t it?
Farrah Fawcett was not only a beautiful woman, an icon of the 1970’s and one that I have no difficulty admitting that I, like millions of other men around the world, fanaticised about for many years during that era, but she was also a very talented actress and artist, who would not accept the short term fame that came as a sex symbol from Charlie’s Angels as all that life had in store for her.
As a result of her tenacity and ability, Farrah went on to play some serious roles that won her nominations for some of the entertainment industry’s most prestigious awards. In recent years she once again displayed her courage when she allowed the cameras into her life during her fight against cancer – a battle she ultimately lost on the 25th of June 2009.
Michael Jackson a musician and showman extraordinaire
Michael Jackson, like Farrah Fawcett, was a huge talent and, also like her, he died on 25th June, 2009.
Particularly in later years, Whacko Jacko, as he was dubbed, can certainly be described as something of an oddball. That, however, should do nothing at all to detract from his outstanding talent as a musician and showman.
He was acquitted of all the awful allegations made against him in 2005. They pretty much broke him financially, but what some people might not have heard is that, on the same day that the indictment against Michael Jackson was unsealed in Santa Barbara County, another and apparently far less public event also occurred. Santa Barbara law enforcement and the DA’s office, including District Attorney Tom Sneddon were reportedly accused of conspiring in a pattern of abuses designed to convict guilty or innocent people they felt were “undesirable”. Those allegations were made by a local dentist who claimed to have been present when such matters were discussed.
In fact, if you saw the TV footage at the time, then I suspect that your impression of Tom Sneddon in particular, whether he was guilty of the charges made against him or not, might well have been the same as mine – that of a “redneck” with no comprehension whatsoever of a world where there are normal, decent people who don’t actually think exactly the same as he does about everything. It’s pretty much the same attitude that became so sadly prevalent amongst the loonier elements of the right wing supporters of the Republican Party during the recent presidential election of Barack Obama.
It’s all part of life’s rich pattern I suppose and even the jerks must add something to the spectrum of our experience – just keep on telling yourself that, you might eventually start to believe it! Nevertheless, isn’t it amazing what some people spend their time doing on the Internet?
Spam, of course, is a real pain for most of us, but you can at least understand it, can’t you? It is, after all, so simple these days to simply think up an advertisement for a product or service and then, with a simple click of a mouse button, send it out to much of the world on the basis that, if you tell enough people, some of them will want it. More personal spam, though, absolutely amazes me. Men and women, both, seem to approach complete strangers electronically to suggest or offer sex, often without any idea of the recipient’s age, likes, dislikes, sexual orientation, or sometimes even gender.
I get several offers to “chat”, sometimes “adult chat” from young women most weeks. They almost all, of course, have a website and, from the few that I’ve bothered to check out, they appear to be very uninhibited young ladies indeed. However, except for what my credit card would provide, I can’t imagine what we’d have in common that would make them want to communicate with me at all, never mind “talk dirty”. Still, I guess it’s a service like any other and, if they’re good at it and I wanted that, then why not, I suppose?
Surprisingly, though, on the fringes of this category, there are also those that are not, apparently, selling themselves, or anything else that I can discover. Naturally, it’s not particularly a problem for me as it doesn’t bother me and they all go away with a polite, “No thanks,” but I do think it’s pretty sad that there are such lonely people out there often searching for nothing more than some impersonal and safe “no strings” contact with another human being.
More of a problem, though, to my mind (and I just know some women out there will accuse me of sexism for this) is when it happens to women, some of whom are unprepared for and are not able to cope too well with such graphic suggestions from strangers – and it’s more common than some people think. If you’re on Skype, Facebook, MySpace, Messenger, or whatever networking and communication system you prefer (even email), then at least some of your contact details are out there somewhere and you will get offers!
If you’re a woman and, for some strange reason, you haven’t thus far received any of these explicit offers, then just leave your details in comments and I’ll do what I can to help out.
Wandering around cyberspace in the wee small hours, you come across some odd blogs and websites. Some, of course, are amateurish and badly designed and/or executed, whilst others are very sophisticated indeed. Naturally, yet others are just the ravings of nutters – and there are a few of those out there, believe me. However, you’ve got to go and look, haven’t you? You’ve got to explore, investigate and discover what you can – it’s human nature.
So, it’s very rewarding when you come across something you like; something you find valuable, exciting, inspiring, splendid, thought provoking, or just plain beautiful.
This week, I’ve found two blogs that I find interesting, even intriguing for very different reasons and in very different ways…
The first is a factual site about climate change and the limited resources here on planet Earth. It’s called very simply Robert Kyriakides’s Weblog. I think I should point out that the writer has some kind of a personal interest in the subject since he works for or represents a supplier of solar panels. However, his articles and arguments appear well informed and not given to the usual hype one tends to expect from activists. Some of the points he makes are pretty “scientific” in nature, but that doesn’t result in huge lists of boring figures that most people find it hard to understand. Although I don’t entirely agree with some aspects of what he says, or indeed of the whole global warming/carbon footprint thing, it’s refreshing to come across reasoned arguments without the spin.
The second is a scarily haunting blog by a woman who, as I read it, has suffered a great deal as a girl and young teenager. The title is Remembering Paris and I have no idea whether Paris is her name, or she is recalling events in Paris, or what. Understanding the title is made more difficult because, thus far I haven’t found out anything much about her other than some of the tortured tales and comments she has included.The site is full of personal, even intimate, information about her past (I think), but little or nothing about her as she is now – except for her art, which is probably the principal subject of the blog. Take a look and see what you make of it. Read some of the articles, which may or may not be factual, but are clearly written from experience. Do, though, be prepared to find yourself emotionally stretched by some of what she reveals.
I hope you find these interesting. Please take a moment to comment and let me know if you do – or even if you don’t!
The editor at The Disability Website (uhad2bthere.co.uk) in reply to my post “Ass about Face” said this in his latest article (Ass About Face: A Response)…
“Do you know, to put it frankly, it’s not me that disables me – it’s my wheelchair!
In the previous article (http://editor-disabilityarticles.blogspot.com/2009/05/ass-about-face.html) Chris is right when he suggests there is a fundamental flaw in the whole thinking process behind ‘access for the disabled.’ Because after all ramps and automatic doors are not there to accommodate my needs but the needs of me in a wheelchair.”
On a personal level, I feel that my view was kind of vindicated by his agreement. More importantly though, he makes some significant points and the main example he uses is the British Museum. Why on earth would we want to take a beautiful, majestic piece of architecture like that and screw it up by adding ugly ramps, dropped kerbs and God knows what else when we could simply redesign what those with special needs require to give them (currently annoyingly limited) access to such places?
Let’s just stop all this PC nonsense right now – it’s almost entirely window dressing anyway! Get rid of short-termism and nominal annual budgets and stop wasting money too on daft schemes mostly designed by people who have no concept of the problems they’re trying to solve and start doing things right for a change – for everyone and for all our sakes!
Most (though not all) of the UK’s MPs seem to have been pretty “creative”, to be polite about it, when claiming their expenses. So, how do we sort the bad from the good, or the not so bad at least? Well, in my opinion, the first thing to do is to look at how this sorry situation came about in the first place.
Successive governments in the UK, both Tory and Labour, have been lily livered about MPs’ pay and what we have now is the result. MPs in general have mostly been unprepared to simply accept that, when the economy’s crap, they have to suffer along with everyone else. Consequently, governments who were in power at the time have tried to head off public criticism by “hiding” increases in pay for politicians by jacking up their expenses entitlement and even encouraging at least some bending of the rules, whilst keeping pay increases apparently “modest” and therefore more publicly acceptable.
If one cannot forgive them for that, it is at least understandable. But, when our economy has been doing better, they have simply got used to the status quo and shied away from the bold steps needed to reform the system into something more decent and transparent. Tony Blair came to power on a promise to end sleaze in government, but allowed Gordon Brown to preside over the biggest cons we’ve any of us seen in a long time. Forget greedy bankers and financiers, they are profit motivated and, much as I despise them, I’m neither surprised, not particularly angry at their behaviour – what else would you expect from such a load of fat cat greedy bastards?
MPs though are in a different category. I don’t give a damn who’s sleeping with whom. I’m not interested in who they screw – as long as it’s not us! Nor am I much concerned if they occasionally inadvertently make the odd unPC remark and say what they truly think, rather than what is politically expedient at the time – diplomacy is after all really just another word for disingenuousness. What I do care about is that they should be honest and efficient when it comes to their political duties, as they have promised the public they will be and I care that they will be able to do their job well and without bias. On top of that, I want them to be brave and stand up and be counted in favour of what is right, even against the party line if necessary and in the public interest!
Furthermore, I can well understand that politicians of all shades use accountants, secretaries, bookkeepers and others to manage their financial affairs (it would be a criminal waste of their time to do otherwise) and so mistakes can on occasion be entirely innocently made. What I can’t forgive is that Tony Blair and most importantly Gordon Brown must have known this situation existed and they both had the power and opportunity to change things (with a huge Labour majority) – BUT THEY DIDN’T!
Gordon Brown in particular was in a perfect position, as an all powerful and almost unassailable Chancellor of The Exchequer, to get to grips with this, but he was too stuck on his pet social engineering schemes that required all the money he could lay his hands on (our money, that is) and he was in any event totally into the idea of ripping off the public by stealth. Mark my words, he would have done nothing whatsoever about this if the newspapers and other media hadn’t brought this all to light and kept it in the public eye!
For God’s sake GO, Gordon! And take the secretive, authoritarian attitude and shabby behaviour in general of much of the Labour Party with you!
People say, “I’m on the Internet,” but what does that actually mean? Literally, of course, they usually mean they’re connected to the Internet. However, what that amounts to is that they are in cyberspace – they are viewing words, pictures, diagrams, whatever on another computer - somewhere.
Where, though, is somewhere? In fact, you could be on lots of computers – thousands or even millions of them – or at least some part of you might be because, every time anyone views a page or a picture, it’s stored at the very least temporarily on the reader’s computer.
So, just remember this when you upload pictures and other items onto Facebook, MySpace, a blog, or wherever, that it’s probably going to go around the world and, perhaps more important, also consider what others might do with that data!
If you’re a celebrity, I guess it’s just part of life’s rich pattern and anyway, much of it’s for fun and there’s no harm in it – the only bad publicity is no publicity. So, this post was inspired by a great item on Lilly’s Life and you might like to take a look at these pictures I’ve “pinched” from her and others, along with some altered versions:-
This is Lilly “with” George Clooney – and my version…
Then there’s me, with Kylie - damn, they make ‘em all gorgeous in Oz, don’t they?
If you followed all the shenanigans of the US08 presidential election then you’ll probably have seen Sarah Palin and the original, apparently “borrowed” off of facebook…
There are thousands of other examples including the happy family one that sparked Lilly’s post and which you can see here…
I see the London Underground’s principal union is causing havoc while they can during the dying days of Labour. There are no doubt those that support their action and they might even have a valid point (though I don’t think so, but everyone’s entitled to their point of view). I would just say one thing to them – don’t forget the people and beware their wrath.
Most of us will support any group with whom we sympathise. But there’s a limit. Tube workers remember what happened to the miners! They had a hard job and most people (including me – sort of) were on their side when it came to getting well paid and achieving the best working conditions they could, but their union (and most specifically its boss, Arthur Scargill) wanted to play politics and hold the country to ransom – and they did too. People accepted it for a while, but it became more grudgingly as time went on.
Consequently, they were eventually viewed as militant assholes by much of the country and when it came to their confrontation with Maggie Thatcher most of us just thought, “Screw you! We’re not going to put up with this any more.” Now, we don’t really have a mining industry of any note in the UK. To me, that’s pretty much a good thing – it’s a dreadful job to ask anyone to do anyway!
Again, the car workers and particularly British Leyland had “Red Robbo” and others like him – now we don’t have a car industry to speak of, not of our own at least.
So, Tube workers, for what it’s worth, my advice would be, don’t anger the people – because if you make too many people’s lives a misery for too long, the country may well discover that, when our backs are to the wall and push comes to shove, we really don’t need a London Underground at all, however inconvenient that may be for a while.
If Gordon Brown doesn’t disappear off the political face of the planet very soon and take his uneconomic, Luddite, spendthrift ideas with him, then the Stock Exchange might well move out and much of London’s financial business could go with it. Then, apart from going to the theatre, or visiting Buckingham Palace and the Tower of London, why would anyone want to go there anyway – it’s cold, rainy, often dirty and you get metaphorically mugged, if not physically. If that situation becomes a reality, what the hell would make it worthwhile maintaining a troublesome and expensive underground railway system?
Like I said, beware the wrath! If you once get ordinary, decent British people angry enough, they will turn on you with a vengeance – as Gordon Brown, Labour and politicians in general are finding out right now in relation to MP’s expenses, as well as their general ineptitude! Be warned! Don’t take the p*ss! We’ve most of us have just about had enough of that at the moment!
The Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, or Kevin Dudd (depending I guess on whether you like him or not) seems to have upset a few people.
A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks and gives you a sense of security while you’re actually being screwed!
In spite of all that, in an effort to economise, Britain has come up with it’s own new coat of arms that will be cheaper to reproduce than the old one.
Farrah Fawcett a stunningly beautiful woman
Michael Jackson a musician and showman extraordinaire
Wandering around cyberspace in the wee small hours, you come across some odd blogs and websites. Some, of course, are amateurish and badly designed and/or executed, whilst others are very sophisticated indeed. Naturally, yet others are just the ravings of nutters – and there are a few of those out there, believe me. However, you’ve got to go and look, haven’t you? You’ve got to explore, investigate and discover what you can – it’s human nature.
