Michael Jackson's genetic inheritance

Much has been said about Michael Jackson in the past few days. It used to be said that one shouldn't speak ill of the dead. In Jackson's case it's not so much about speaking ill as trying to illicit the truth. He appears to have left more questions than answers which always causes a frenzy in the media.

One question which hasn't been answered is the case of the children. If the three children grow up to adulthood as normal loving people then miracles do happen. Until now they have been treated as a commodity. They were produced in a most peculiar way and then basically bought by Jackson from the biological mother as she is being described. Somehow we are led to believe they are his children. It is all too bizarre and I would suggest that the deceptions and the untruths stop now for the sake of those children. One thing almost everyone wants to know is where they themselves came from. Surely that is why genealogy is one of the top subjects of the internet. These children deserve to know the truth because otherwise the absurd speculation will carry on all their lives.

Jackson is said to owe money to all and sundry. So the creditors are scrambling around like vultures. It would be best for a set of accountants to get through the whole estate and just tell it like it is otherwise all sorts will be claimimg this and that is theirs. And the powers-that-be need to get the actual detail of his death clarified and confirmed, otherwise this issue will carry on with all sorts suggesting this or that did or did not happen.

When a life has been led with such bizarre activity attached to it there can be little wonder that people are curious. Curiosity is one thing, manipulative speculation is quite another. It would be far better that Michael Jackson's closest friends and family spell out the truth of his problems rather than let his memory be tainted with innuendo and gossip for ever and a day.

Swine flu parties are a pig of an idea!

I've been busy lately redecorating the kitchen. Unlike those on generous allowances or big bonus packages, I have currently a financial juggling exercise. I decided it was time to make the place look better but was not keen on paying large sums in labour costs so went down to B&Q and got the paint and got stuck in. Of course, whilst up a ladder my blogging activities are somewhat restricted. But as I gazed at the paint wondering if it would be as it said it was on the tin my mind drifted into blog thoughts. Plenty of them. In fact my mind has far more than I ever put down here.

Now that I am paint free and typing away, I find that the first thoughts are on swine flu. I had a crazy idea. Do Muslims and Jews get swine flu? Of course they do, but it was one of those daft thoughts. I'm not alone in daft thoughts it seems. Some people are throwing "swine flu parties" in an attempt to get immunity against the virus. Whatever next. "Please come to my swine flu party. Infection guaranteed. Bring your own germs!" Doctors say it's not a good idea.

The very thought of intentionally getting this form of flu is itself a form of illness. Mental illness. We already have headlines about people dying. Of course, if you read the rest it always says they had "underlying health problems". Which is exactly what happens with so-called normal flu. People do die but they tend to be the weak, infirm and already ill.

What goes on at a swine flu party? Are they legal? "Excuse me sir, we have reason to believe you are holding an illicit swine flu party contrary to Health Provision 46 of the Penal Code". What if you don't get the flu? Or worse, what if someone got something very much worse? "Dear Griselda. I came to your swine flu party in the hope of catching this disease well before winter. I didn't catch it at all! But I got a form of malaria unknown in the UK. What have you done to me!!"

The mind boggles that such people are in the country. It must be a hoax. Isn't it?

Michael Jackson's "final curtain call"

Michael Jackson is dead. However, like Princess Diana and John Lennon to name two whose lives live on, he will be immortalised as Jacko the King of Pop. Troubled people tend to make the best artists. That may sound weird but it does have a pattern. All the best comics and comedians were troubled. It is as if the human workings cannot do everything. In Michael Jackson's case that was an impossibility. His death will spawn a whole new raft of books, films, TV shows, and newspaper articles. The internet will be alive and well with Jackson stuff.

His music was certainly in the highest realms. You may or may not have liked it but it was greatly appreciated by many. And it will live on. I always liked his first solo song, "Ben" which is still played on radio stations. I didn't take to everything he did but what he did I always knew was good. He was also a magic man with the dance moves. Many a child has tried to emulate Michael Jackson.

Much has been said about his life. Cut short in the biblical sense. He was only fifty. Two things occur to me. He was always criticised about being with children on his own. So was Lewis Carroll. Adults have a propensity to fear what they perceive as being unhealthy in this regard. I doubt if Jackson had an unhealthy thought in that sense. He appears to have remained childlike in his emotional state. Whilst being an adult he could also relate to the offhand way adults sometimes treat children. He could not stand children being ignored. He was the exact opposite of allowing children to be "seen and not heard". Adults expect children to go through a set number of hoops in order to reach adulthood. One ridiculous hoop is the "losing your virginity" one. It is like a badge of honour. In fact for most teenagers it represents failure and a general feeling of personal unfulfillment. Jackson's sexuality was discussed ad nauseam.

My take is that he recognised the "grown up" thinking that many children possess. My daughter used to tell me not to be "so silly" and she was only three then! Whilst a child is still a child, it does not imply that the child should be ignored or treated as if opinions do not count. Jackson appeared on their terms and was able to relate to them. His being with children freaked out some adults. However, I see it a bit like the innuendo of Kenneth Horne's radio shows. He said the innuedo was in the minds of the listeners. His Round the Horn and Beyond Our Ken had not a single rude word in them!

The second point is that Michael Jackson was also criticised for his appearance. This did appear bizarre. A black boy turns into white superstar. Whatever the reasons for his desire to experience the pains of plastic surgery for bodily enhancement, it kept the media motivated. Now he needs no more enhancements. Death is the same for us all. It is the greatest leveller in that respect.

Flippin' 'eck, it's Bercow!

Yes, John Bercow has come through to be the voice of the Commons, the Speaker, the choice of the "reformers". This must be the first election for Speaker where the candidates were utterly eager to do the job. No more so than in Bercow's case. It is said that the bulk of the Conservative benches can't stand him. If Nadine Dorries is anything to go by, then that is true. He has a lot going against him. First, he isn't very tall. Tories are rather suspicious of diminutive men. Second, he has changed his views from Monday Club stalwart to New Labour admirer (it is alleged!). But one thing that Tories detect and fear most is political greasing. They don't mind a bit of honest armtwisting. They tolerate outright dissent on occasions. However, sucking up to gain advancement is very much frowned upon. Bercow has been accused of this.

He has also been accused of flipping his homes. I doubt though that the papers accusing him of this will have much of it stick. He appears above all this now. However, come the general election things may be a bit different. He may have a whopping majority in Buckingham, but that was Tory voters then. Would they be so keen to vote for a flipping independent next time? It could be interesting.

Buckingham has enjoyed a mixed bag of MPs. They had the delights of Robert Maxwell. John Radcliffe, who has the famous Oxford hospital named after him, was elected for Buckingham in 1713, but died the next year. Given than John Bercow will be standing for election under the banner of "The Speaker" and that both Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates will stand aside, it is open to others to mount a challenge. Horace King found he had a challenge in 1970 from the then little known National Democratic Party.

Opportunity arises for anti-sleaze candidates. Also, those out to peel away the Conservative vote, such as UKIP. It could be an interesting election. John Bercow may well need to don his reformer's habit in case the electors of Buckingham get the habit of reforming their constituency representation.

The Press gets its vicars in a twist

The British press, particularly the downmarket Sun, has never really understood the workings of the Christian Church. Now that we live in an increasingly secular world, knowledge of the Church is virtually non-existent now. To the Sun any person in a clerical collar is a "vicar" regardless of the fact. If they are told that person is a bishop, they may recognise that. But mostly it's vicars to the Sun.

Now a vicar is only a title for a priest who has a living (a parish) usually set in an urban setting. Originally a vicar received tithes that were lesser tithes, that is not ones directly obtained from agricultural crops. That was a rector's benefit in kind! To the Sun a vicar is a vicar even if he is a rector, curate, chaplain, deacon, or non-stipendiary minister.

So it is with great shock that the Sun announces that "vicars" are joining the BNP. I've heard of no such thing. But the loosely-worded paper thinks otherwise. They keep calling the self-styled "Rev" Robert West a vicar. He isn't even in the Church of England. He joined a sect called the Apostolic Church and is now a wandering preacher or an independent cleric. They also announced that the Rev John Stanton was a vicar. Again, no such thing. He is another independent cleric running the Rock Dene Christian Fellowship in Rochford, Essex.

The press has little clue as to how to address the clergy. They have more than no knowledge about the titles of priests and they keep on using the term "vicar" with all the acceptance of the hatch, match and dispatch brigade. I accept that they live in this world as it is, but I do not accept that it is right to call people vicars when they are palpably not. I could well say that a BNP blogger was a newspaper editor and go round saying that lots of newspaper editors had joined the BNP. It would be nonsense, of course. I know it. It's a pity the Sun doesn't!

Tony Blair fears being exposed in Iraq "show trial"!

So, the scheming still goes on. Tony Blair is conniving behind the scenes to make sure his plots and furtive planning do not come out. As I say, before he meets his Maker the truth will out. He will find that there is a whole phalanx of people, from high to low, demanding that this enquiry is in public as far as it can be.

Why is he so concerned? Because he fears that he would be subjected to a "show trial" if it were opened to the public. Show trial? Does that tell us something? I think it does. Blair has a reputation for mangling the truth and behaving like a three-card trickster. No wonder Gordon Brown had shouting fits with him. But this will be no show trial. It will be a simple case of telling the truth. Blair may be able to gild the lily in private, but a public spectacle of shiftiness will be noted by the people.

It is said in the Guardian that Blair is believed to have been alarmed by the prospect of giving evidence in public and under oath about the use of intelligence and about his numerous private discussions with US President George Bush over plans for war. Again, that only reflects the number of red flags shooting up the pole.

The clamour for a public enquiry has started. Gordon Brown, in his usual gulping way, failed to offer any sincerity in the House of Commons over the need for secrecy. Nick Clegg puts it rather well. "If this is true about Blair demanding secrecy, it is outrageous that an inquiry into the biggest foreign policy disaster since Suez is being muzzled to suit the individual needs of the man who took us to war." If the public mood has anything to do with it, Blair will be giving evidence in public. Then he will have to decide once and for all whether he is a truthful man or an inveterate dissembler.

Tony Blair's cash injections

By the time Tony Blair leaves this earth to meet his Maker we will know two things. That he did a secret deal with George Bush about the War on Terror and then stitched up the House of Commons. That his property empire has been funded almost exclusively by the taxpayer whilst he was in Parliament. The Additional Costs Allowance and Tony Blair were made for each other! He even had the brass neck to claim two days before he scarpered as PM.

He has earned about £16 million since leaving office, through public speaking, directorships and a book deal. Now a lot of this money has probably gone to repay loans, but isn't it a bit rich that he used the "system" to get a leg up. Normal mortals have no such luck. Blair was an opportunist from Day One.

The Daily Telegraph asks a pertinent question - "The question of how Mr Blair was able to obtain a £3,467,500 mortgage on Connaught Square, which was more than 18 times his salary at the time, has always been surrounded in mystery." Precisely!

Supreme Leader has a slate loose!

The chief ayatollah, who is also the self-styled Supreme Leader of Iran, gave a rant of a sermon to a hunkered down mass of severe looking disciples. They clapped in unison, they grimaced in unison. The sort of people you wouldn't want to mess with. They all looked liked automotons as they appeared to relish the godless garbage that masqueraded as Islamic peace. Any dissenter in that crowd would have been promptly set upon by those around him, of that I have no doubt. If this bearded wonder thinks this represents a tolerant society he is on another planet.

Can you imagine the Archbishop of Canterbury delivering a diatribe of similar slander? The mind boggles. If Rowan Williams had done so, not only would the country think he had taken leave of his senses but the rest of the world would quite rightly be upset with Britain. I was struck by the humanity of the demonstrators in recent days. Faces displaying human courage and dignity, quite unlike the stony-hearted look of the ayatollah's followers.

As I write this the streets of Tehran are heavily laden with police eager to thrash the democratic life out of the protesters. It is all so sad. Some people just have the misfortune to be born into a country with despots and depraved persons in charge. Far from being a holy man, Khamenei is a vengeful man with a quixotic understanding of democracy. He thinks it is a fair election. If the man had an ounce of sense in his brain he would realise that this election was not only rigged but was farcicly unrealistic as a believable fix.

Khamenei is a man wedded to the violent oppression of those who would dare to challenge his authoritarian rule. In that he is palpably un-Islamic. Peace is a word that has Humpty Dumpty connotations for this tyrant.

We want honesty and transparency in politics

The political elite in Britain have long been used to treating the electorate as morons. Somehow it is seen as an electoral own goal if a politician tells the truth. Lying is not encouraged but spinning the truth to such a degree that it only vaguely ressembles its original status is. Also encouraged is the black art of the political double entendre and the equally absurd habit of deliberately not answering a straight question.

Gordon Brown has been saying recently how much he recognises the public's desire for transparency. Yet he seems incapable of admitting any fault other than to suggest "we are all to blame". Even now he is encouraging his ministers to denigrate the Tories about "swingeing cuts". Everyone knows that the UK is heavily indebted. They know the banks and the government are still sitting on toxic debts. So why, when there is no public money to talk of, the Prime Minister insists that he is going to invest more money. What money? There is no money. He is just gambling on the future tax take of generations to come.

This is the Gordon Brown who sat by whilst the sub-prime scandal exploded around him. Yes it started in America, but it was British banks who were up to their eyeballs in the lending racket. He implies now that he never thought to ask a question. Not one ounce of inquisitive vibes left his body. We must therefore understand that he was either incompetent or a calculating character who hoped it would all blow over.

He never qizzed the bankers, he sought to delude the public, and he blamed others. Now he is acting as an invester with a philanthropic heart. It's all balderdash. He knows it and we know it. Ed Balls is a man where the disingenuous remark is always available. "The Tories are ideologically wedded to cutting spending to fund tax cuts for the few," he warbles. Old style rubbish politics.

George Osborne is right to say that the public wants the truth. We want to know how much the country owes and what taxes have to be raised to pay back our debts. Unless we know, we will not be able to have confidence in the future. That future could be one of selfishness now leaving future generations saddled with a third-world existence or it could be one where we really tackle the root problems and create an economy that is vibrant and entrepreneurially virile!

It's in our hands and it lies with our votes.

Iranian amateur ballot rigging

You have to hand it to Ahmadinnerjacket and his Interior Ministry goons. He's another brazen leader with all the democratic legitimacy of a cuckoo in a nest. His attempts at rigging the Iranian election would look a lot better if he hadn't given two of the losers 1% and 2% apiece. In such a hotly contested election, the result is more a joke than a serious attempt at ballot rigging. In that he has proved to be a shambolic amateur.

It is a sad reflection that for many human beings their whole lives are lived in countries run by despots and tinpot dictators. There isn't a person in the world that doesn't want personal freedoms and just to be left alone by the state. The likes of Ahmadinnerjacket, who looks like the worst kind of scruffy taxi driver you could be lumbered with, think they know best. They don't, but in this new world of American diplomacy, he's going to get away with it. I reckon we can be counting on more asylum seekers, and who could blame them?

Interestingly, Google confirms that the Iranian leader is to be called Ahmadinnerjacket if one is cheekily mocking his name. Any other form of spelling gets a rebuke from Google. "Did you mean Ahmadinnerjacket?" I surely did!

Fined £50 for dropping a tenner!

Mostly the police forces are served by men and women who want to do a good job for society. Just as it is clear that only a few MPs are keen to exploit the allowances they get, so it is that bad apples are few in the police force. Human nature is ever thus, that however well-intentioned the organisation may be in its public interaction, some may have their own interpretation.

Now there were two police officers walking the streets in Ayr, a nice seaside town on the South-west coast of Scotland. These two appear to be in a different league. Not from the bad apple minority, but from the clueless copper department. Stewart Smith is an arthritis suffer and he lives in Ayr. He was leaving a charity shop when a £10 banknote fell from his hand, without him realising. Mr.Stewart at first expressed his gratitude to the two officers who approached him to point out that the note had fallen to the ground. But moments later, after recovering the note, he was stunned to be accused of littering and slapped with a £50 fixed-penalty notice.

The tale becomes more bizarre and the police action more intolerable. What they should have done was to point out to Mr.Stewart that there was an anti-litter campaign of zero tolerance. However, that zero tolerance is aimed at deliberate actions and the wilful dropping of litter. This hardly falls into that category.

The penalty ticket says "You did drop a price ticket", which is true, but it hardly constitutes a pre-meditated action. Now Strathclyde Police are compounding their officers' behaviour by implying that Mr.Stewart was a trouble-maker! This is typical of today's society and very much so of those with some form of authority. It's not us, it's you. They are wandering around in a blameless bubble, keen to pass the buck.

Surely the police can see that this kind of absurd behaviour brings them into disrepute. I'm against the actions of litter louts. They make an unholy mess of the place. However, there is something to be said for policemen having a brain in their heads rather than a politically correct computer. If they witnessed the man having difficulty putting his money in his pocket, it was mean-spirited of them to fine him.

Accidents and accidental behaviour are just that. They certainly do not belong in the same category as premeditated crimes or a casual attitude that leads to wrongdoing.

Giglamps Rentamouth of the UAF

This is Giglamps Rentamouth from the self-styled United Against Fascism organisation. He is a tasty piece of democratic legitimacy, that's for sure. He is the mirror image of the fascists he seeks to impose his restrictions on. An aggressive man, full of bile and self-righteous pomposity. He was also on Newsnight when he let his mouth run away with him and accused Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat MP, of not putting enough effort into challenging the BNP. Simon Hughes has an exemplary record in opposing the BNP. This clown has the exact opposite.

I cannot for the life of me understand why David Cameron would want to be associated with such an undemocratic and positively loathsome character as this. Because David Cameron is a signatory to their cause. The Conservative Party should be able to confront the inate socialism and spurious policies of the BNP without consorting with mindless criminals like this!

Bell, book and Phoenix!

Now here's another sad tale of Christians pitted against the world. A judge in Pheonix, Arizona has sentenced a bishop to three years probation and a suspended 10-day jail sentence on charges of violating city noise ordinances. What was his crime? That the electronic bells at his northern Phoenix church were rung too loud and too often. But apparently they sound no more loud than ordinary street traffic. Interestingly, the Phoenix noise ordinance does not include an exemption for religious worship, though it does provide an exemption for ice cream trucks, which are allowed to emit 70 decibels, measured at a distance of 50 feet. Having heard such ice cream jingles only this afternoon, I'd not complain about the bishop's bells.

Now that he's got a criminal record, could the bishop come preaching in Britain or would he go on Jacqui Smith's old list? The new Home Secretary used to be a postman, so he knows about noises on the street. It's a weird world we're entering.

New Labour police crackdown on preacher!

Freedom of speech is under attack in the wonderful world of New Labour. A street preacher in Gainsborough, Lincolnshire got two "well-meaning" coppers coming up to him to give him grief. Whilst I don't necessarily agree with this type of proslytising, I certainly defend his right to free speech. It is certainly no business of a couple of policemen going round determining what can or can't be said in a lawful manner. It is precisely this overt oppression of the traditionally minded person that is so offensive. The secular state is rising under New Labour. The Presbyterian Conscience appears unable to bring himself to defend liberty against the drift of sinister sources that would proscribe views and beliefs that they find offensive.

This is the video that the preacher took of the event. Very interesting, very disturbing.



Archbishop Cranmer's blog has a good post on this.

Gordon Brown in cover-up tricks scandal!

Gordon Brown must have lost a couple of marbles in the reshuffle process. He's been gulping on about transparency, yet he now steadfastly refuses to release the report into the expense pot that minister Shahid Malik was dipping into. Tahir Zaman is a property landlord who claims he rented Malik property at below the market rate. So the basic accusation against Malik is that he claimed full whack whilst just paying Mr. Zaman a near-peppercorn rent. It also seems that Mr. Zaman may unwittingly be a target of the Downing Street Smear Machine.

So instead of transparency we get a prime minister who is top of his game, not as prime minister, but as a cheap cover-up conman. He wants to suppress the report of Sir Philip Mawer. A spokesman for Gordon Brown said, "It is not our intention to publish the report. It goes into quite a lot of detail about Mr Malik's personal affairs. It would not be appropriate to publish."

Not appropriate? What planet are these morons on? In the midst of a scandal over how some MPs enriched themselves and made a mockery of the system, the Downing Street bunker resorts to cover-ups and secrecy. Is this what Labour MPs were told on Monday night when they crammed into that committee room? "Don't worry," says the hapless Brown, in some mea culpa moment. "It's all back to cover-ups and cosy deals tomorrow!"

Norman Baker, a Liberal Democrat MP and freedom of information campaigner, has said, "Gordon Brown has fallen at the first fence on the transparency course. If Mr Malik has been cleared as we are told, why not publish the report?" Why not indeed!

Caroline Flint's foul mouth

Gordon Brown was right to sack Caroline Flint. The woman has done this country no favours in her ministerial "career". Her absurd attack on the Prime Minister just proves the point. And, yes, he may be grumpy and bit gauche around women, but he is certainly no misogynist. She branded Gordon Brown a 'f****** b******' as she stormed out of Government in anger at his 'sexism', it has been claimed. That sexism she calls "window dressing". She says the PM used women as 'a smokescreen, a way of making it look like you've got a lot of women around the table' while giving them little influence. How she thinks the country can fall for that rubbish beggars belief.

Caroline Flint is a woman who thinks highly of her own abilities. She appears to be (I take from the Farage comment) a curious hybrid, part temptress, part machievellian schemer. Basically, a woman to be given a wide berth, which is precisely what Gordon Brown has done.

Every time she comes on Question Time, her lips curl in snide ripostes to the audience. She definitely has a massive chip on her shoulder. Ex-MP Oona King, Gordon Brown's former aide, said it was 'absolute nonsense' to suggest he had a problem with women. She also accused Ms Flint of exploiting her sexuality. She said, "She shocked a lot of women in the party by often posing in a fashion that implies she's more interested in the way she looks than the policies she presents." Touché

Ignorance in the Immigration Service

I've long since thought that the level of education in the country was dipping to levels of paucity. A catholic approach to learning is lacking in certain areas. Knowing a broad range of interesting facts and information is deemed unnecessary in today's modern world. So it comes as no surprise to learn that the Immigration Service has no clue that there are Welsh speakers in Patagonia.

On Bank Holiday Monday, a Welsh-speaking Patagonian Evelyn Calcabrini, aged 20, was heading to Glyndyfrdwy, Denbighshire, to stay with a local couple for six months. However she has been sent back from Heathrow Airport to Patagonia after immigration officials refused to believe she was travelling to Wales to learn Welsh. Even with the intervention of two Plaid Cymru MPs, the UK Border Agency said "NO!"

An official said, "We have strict rules in place to protect Britain's border and the responsibility rests with applicants to demonstrate they meet the requirements of these rules and will comply with any conditions attached to their leave. Where they do not, entry will be refused. The system is firm and fair, and it applies to everyone." Firm and fair? Not if it is being adjudicated by educationally sub-normal apparatchiks. Even after being told that the couple would vouch for the young woman, these culturally unaware penpushers declined her entry.

I suggest there is a trip laid on to Patagonia for the UK Border Agency. Let them see for themselves that Wales has historic links with the area. What do they say - travel broadens the horizons. Having let in a host of undesirables on the flimsy evidence that they have never heard of Abu Hamza and the like, these protectors of the borders need a few lessons that might help themselves and us all.

Level-peggers versus the armchair critics

This European election is not so much about the winners but more about the losers. Labour lost votes by the truckload. Apart from the Greens, English Democrats and Christian Alliance, the parties were level-pegging with 2004. The question for the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, UKIP and BNP is this. "Has our support peaked or can we mop up some of these armchair critics of Gordon Brown and politics in general?"

Because the main beneficiaries of the Euro elections in the UK were the 66% who stayed away, muttering about Gordon and all the ills in society. These armchair voters have allowed the BNP to rejoice in a victory. It has recharged the batteries of UKIP and given them a baker's dozen of MEPs. It has made the Conservatives feel that they have triumphed, whilst in fact they did virtually nothing to show that they are on a winning streak. And the Liberal Democrats have come out without a stain but with their old clothes still on.

Labour won the armchair vote by a landslide. They have done so in the last ten years. Harriet Harman keeps saying Labour won the last general election. They did no such thing. They just got more MPs than the other parties. But only 20% of the electorate went out to vote for them in 2005.

British democracy has a problem. The armchair voters let in the BNP, but they also allow us to have "winners" who are really "losers". If we had electric chairs for these backsliders to lounge in, would it encourage a better turnout?

Now this may all sound like I want Labour to do well. No I don't, but I would like the people to feel that democracy counts, that it matters in our lives. I don't know if these stay-at-home voters are Conservatives or what they are. My guess is that they are a pretty mixed bag. However, it's either that this 66% don't care or they think this is the best way to protest. No, the best way to protest is to vote, but to vote with a clear view of what you really want.

I just don't want the UK run by the armchair voters. That's worse than any party you don't like being elected. It's up to the parties to get the voters to the polling stations.

Cornish pasty needs no Brown sauce

Gordon Brown is in a real bind today. Mulling over the worst election results for Labour ever! Forget about 1918, it's never been this bad. In Cornwall Labour came sixth, behind Mebyon Kernow, the Cornish nationalists. A Labour Party supporter is now and endangered species in that county. The only question is whether anyone wants to save them. Currently the answer is - NO!

European Elections June 2009

I've closed my poll on voting intentions. Considering I'm eurosceptically conservatively minded on this blog, it wasn't going to be a scientific result, but it gave an interesting result nevertheless. I guess it shows that some party supporters are more net savvy than others.

60 votes were cast and I offered ten parties to choose from.

1. British National Party 28.3%
2. UK Independence Party 26.7%
3. English Democrats Party 13.3%
4. Conservatives 10.0%
5. Pro Democracy: Libertas.eu 6.7%
6= Liberal Democrats 5.0%
Greens 5.0%
Jury Team 5.0%
9= Labour 0.0%
No2EU:Yes to Democracy 0.0%

This is some people's ideal result for Sunday night. It would be oblivion for Labour!

Are UKIP voters barmey?

You couldn't make it up. Traditionally in the UK, polling station staff fold ballot papers before giving them to voters. UKIP's high command, ever vigilant for the problems their supporters face at election time, have demanded unfolded ballot papers. This is because some voters cannot conceive of the idea of unfolding them before putting a cross on their paper.

One man from York told the BBC he had been "absolutely shocked" that he could not find the party he wanted to vote for on the ballot paper and had to ask officials where it was. "They explained you have to unfold it again, right at the very bottom there was another very neat fold that you could not see, folded backwards," he said, implying that UKIP was under the last fold (but he could possibly check that!).

My question is "Should such a person be let into a polling station in the first place?"

You have to wonder! UKIP is saying, "We are getting literally hundreds of calls saying we can't find you on the ballot paper so we voted for somebody else." It's all a load of nonsense. Pull the other one. UKIP is just in it for a publicity stunt. Or a pre-emptive strike in case it all goes pearshaped!

More fool the BBC and the Electoral Commission for falling for their prattish behaviour.

Boris Johnson wades in!

The Mayor or London hasn't claimed for duck housing but he managed to get a ducking himself! Nothing fazes him. He'll be mentioned on Have I Got News For You, no doubt about it.

Britain's Got Talent and Hazel and Caroline and...

"The winners of Britain's Got Talent 2010! It's the Division Belles!!!" So declare Ant and Dec to a delighted crowd. "You thought there was nothing for you after the Cabinet, then Hazel? You certainly proved him wrong!"

Hazel, Caroline, Beverley, Laura, Meg, Joan and Dari all take a bow and Simon Cowell wonders what to do next. The Division Belles are stars.

Hazel Blears is not without talent. She shouldn't waste it on the Labour Party. Beverley Hughes has resigned too. Caroline Flint is thinking of packing it in, I hear. Come on, get tapping Hazel. Gather your chums around you. You can win that show. Go global like Susan. Oprah will have you on her show. It will be a ball! I can't wait.

And with that fantasy in my head, I'm going to bed!

Chipmunk gophers Gordon's nuts!

Hazel Blears has decided that the time has come to take a gouge out of Gordon, politically speaking of course. Today she has resigned from the Cabinet as Communities Secretary in order to spend more time in her community, namely Salford. Yesterday it was the Home Secretary, tomorrow will it be someone else. Not Geoff Hoon, because he hasn't got the scruples or even the photo montage kid, James Purnell, who is equally guilty of expense immorality. These two, though, have not done anything to upset the Presbyterian Conscience. Hazel did, even though her misdemeanors were so similar as to warrant a forensic examination to spot the difference.

So, Hazel has gone. This government isn't imploding, it's exploding. It's more like a firecracker with lots of little explosions. Those explosions get bigger by the day.

PMQs is coming up soon. I'll be watching to see how it all goes for the Prime Minister. Watch for a lot of gulping air from him and glum faces from those behind him. Jack Straw's face is the one to watch. If he doesn't look supportive, I reckon he will be choosing the words to use when he tells Gordon that the game's up!

UKIP MEPs as they are known!

This is worth looking at if you are considering voting for UKIP. Take a good dose of amnesia pills before voting if the facts don't put you off!

http://www.wekip.org/

Browns's talent has browned off!

I like this quote from Sue Carroll on the Mirror website about Susan Boyle.

"In touch with public opinion as ever, Gordon Brown told GMTV of his concerns for Susan. Rightly, he fears for the future of an awkward, not entirely telegenic Scot who failed to win support… and for Susan Boyle too."

Excellent!

Piers Morgan spinning in Susan Boyle case!

Piers Morgan is a cheeky tabloid spinner. He can't help himself. His latest spinning session is going on TV to say that all contestants get the help they require from a team of pyschologists.

However, it emerged last night that Boyle – who has learning difficulties after being starved of oxygen at birth – had not been psychologically tested by producers before she was allowed on to the show, although psychologists were available to contestants who needed them. The production company, TalkbackThames, said it would now review its policies. A spokeswoman said, "It is a talent show at the end of the day and people are auditioning on their talent merits. There is no formal psychological testing at the beginning of the show. Compared with something like Big Brother, where you are looking at people going into a house for three months, the people on Britain's Got Talent have three or four performances maximum and spend only seven to 10 days in a hotel for the semi-finals and final. It is a very different scenario." She added, "But because of the level of media attention and the speed with which this has become a global phenomenon, we will be reviewing all of our policies and in relation to psychological assessment."

So how come Piers Morgan is giving the impression that everything was OK and is OK? He suggests that Susan was in agreement with everything although being "physically and mentally drained". Perhaps they see their "investment" under pressure? A psychiatrist at The Priory, where Susan Boyle now is, is none too satisfied with the arrangements. Let's hope she makes a speedy recovery and is not exploited in her desire to sing professionally.

Libertas not UKIP on 4th June

Libertas offers the best hope for changing the trading arrangements, political secrecy and the undemocratic nature of the European Union. Libertas stands for ending the corruption, stopping the waste, putting democracy at the heart of Europe and returning control to the member nations. It does NOT want Britain to be consumed by a bureaucratic European superstate. It does want the UK to be a leader in a free, democratic, efficient European Union that only tackles those things that are best done at an international level.

That means NO MORE laws interfering in the domestic UK governance. NO MORE quangos set up to waste money. NO MORE undemocratic decisions taken by "ministers" who only want it their way. The Irish, Dutch and French are the only countries to have had a democratic vote in recent years and they were told that their answers were "un-European".

Libertas wants co-operation only on an international level. This would obviously benefit trade, travel, employment, investment and environmental issues. So it is a positive YES to beneficial international agreement.

You can vote for the goons, gadflies and general expenses grabbers if you want. Only Libertas offers a constructive approach for eurosceptics. In fact, I don't really like that word. I'm positive about wanting a Europe of co-operating nation states, where each can be proud of its culture, its laws, and its lawmaking. I am positive about protecting the UK from the superstate bureaucrats.

Anthony Butcher is standing for Libertas in the North-West. He says, "Why am I standing for Libertas? Libertas is offering a future for Europe never seriously considered before. Until now, the choice has always been 'more or less' Europe. But it doesn't have to be that way. Because Libertas is standing right across the European Union, we could have the power to change the entire direction of the EU. I don't want an EU superstate. I want a Europe of cooperating sovereign nations. Cooperation doesn't work when it is forced upon us top-down by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. As we have seen, all this achieves is growing resentment and an ever increasing bureaucracy."

That's the kind of MEP I know we need in this country. He also says, "...I later joined the UK Independence Party and was elected to their National Executive Committee. In 2006 I left the party feeling that although I agreed with many of their complaints about the European Union, I couldn't support their negative direction and hostile form of politics, both internal and external." Negative direction. That's it in a nutshell. You only have to look at UKIP's track record to find that it is a kind of "ferrets meets Kilkenny cats party" to put you right off. Expense scandals, mortgage frauds, leadership battles, backbiting and defections. Not a particularly good endorsement for elected representation.

For a positive approach to tackling the wrongs in the European Union vote for your Libertas candidates. Let's make it right for us in Europe.