<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\07514058325\46blogName\75Chiswickite++-+formerly+The+Croydonian\46publishMode\75PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\46navbarType\75BLUE\46layoutType\75CLASSIC\46searchRoot\75http://croydonian.blogspot.com/search\46blogLocale\75en_GB\46v\0752\46homepageUrl\75http://croydonian.blogspot.com/\46vt\0752605630255414466250', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Friday, April 28, 2006
  • "Icons of Englishness"



  • This just embarrassing. It is the kind of nonsense you might expect to see cooked up in a completely artificial state. Like Belgium. I have always been led to believe that we who have won first prize in life's lottery do not need to have our identity explained to us, still less do we need crib sheets. Meanwhile, shame on whoever cooked this up, and still more odium for those who contributed to it.

    Labels:

    Thursday, April 27, 2006
  • Fun & games at Cranmer's blog



  • In which humble narrator attempts to engage in a theological debate grounded in reason, but instead goes head on with one who does not wish to do so.

    Wednesday, April 26, 2006
    Let's all laugh at Prescott:





    Even better:


    http://www.homepride.co.uk/images/left_panel_top_products.jpg

    Meanwhile, in the light of revelations already made , and those that seem likely to reach the MSM, how long can he last? As a doer, received opinion is that he is utterly useless, and I'm not going to start defending him, but he has served as a shield for Blair, who can claim that there is at least one working classs member of the cabinet and thus give the old class warriors that make up much of the activist caste some belief that the New Jerusalem might come along one of these days. Which it won't. However, as and when he does go, this will leave TB more exposed , and mean one more disgruntled ex minister on the backbenches.

    I'm torn between my desire to see Blair's long overdue and richly merited Gotterdammerung and the fear of a nuclear winter under Lord Protector Gordon, and I suspect that that which is bad for Blair may well be good for Brown unless the latter gets enmeshed in this. Along with doubtless many others I have heard all sorts of interesting tales about Gordon's predilictions, which I will keep to myself. However, the gullible (?), paranoid (?) etc will find all sorts of strange things being said on alt.politics.british.

    Labels: ,

    Monday, April 24, 2006
  • Charles Clarke at his repulsive worst

  • Does this man really have no self-knowledge? Are the commentariat and the public in general supposed to accept infringements of our basic liberties purely on his say so?

    If there is one lodestar that has served me well over many years it is intense suspicion of the state when it claims to be trying to do us good.

    Labels:

  • http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/21/amsterdam_blogger_study/


  • Perhaps for next attempted invention of the wheel they will discover that political bloggers get more active around elections. Reminds me of the great PhD thesis that found that old people move faster when they are in a hurry. Or the other one that noted that overcooking pork chops makes them tough and less appetising.

    Labels:

    Time for a republic

    Saturday, April 22, 2006
    Anyone else feel up to coming out as a blue republican? I don't doubt that Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Battenberg has discharged her duties to the best of her ability, but I regard gaining the role of head of state solely through the accident of birth as wholly wrong. My preferred back of an envelope solution for a constitutional settlement starts with the Speaker of the Commons acting as ceremonial head of state, giver of the 'royal' assent etc etc. My caveat would be that any speaker would have to have 2/3 support of the Commons, and never to have held cabinet or shadow cabinet rank, with this having the aim of avoiding blatant shoehorning in of apparatchiks. I will admit that Martin is one of the poorer speakers of recent memory, but Boothroyd (despite her bumptiousness), Weatherill, Thomas and Lloyd could all have carried out the ceremonial role to good effect.

    I have promoted the idea of a Republic on those lines to friends (mainly lefties) in the past, and have had it suggested that an elected president would be preferable. The argument that has been voiced was one of the primacy of the democratic process, but I remain unconvinced as I think that a popularly elected president - even one without executive powers - would necessarily be a political hack or else a shameless populist. If the Speaker idea was applied, substantial short-term constitutional change could be kicked into the long grass, and issues of what goes on the currency, postage stamps, what we prefix ships in the navy etc could be sorted out in the fullness of time.

    Meanwhile, whatever became of Stephen Haseler? Having read some of his stuff and heard him speak, I know he is a republican and, for want of a better word, sound.

    Wednesday, April 19, 2006
  • That Labour PPB


  • Utterly, utterly feeble. Nowhere near as entertaining as the NLP's yogic flying, Vanessa's loonies and the work of the NF/BNP etc. Shame the SPGB never managed a broadcast, as a PPB in which one is urged only to vote for a party if you accept the entire policy raft would add enormously to the Gaiety of the Nation.

    Labels: ,

    Tuesday, April 18, 2006
  • She's at it again....



  • Dear old Polly Technic. Clearly she has little or no knowledge of gambler psychology, with her fruit machine comment especially vapid. I'm not, and never have been one for fruit machines, but I know enough people who play them to rebut 'yes, it is a legitimate, and more to the point, eyes open form of entertainment'. People who play the machines know full well that the odds are against them (bar the pondlife who lurk in pubs counting the cycles and dive in when a win is due), but do so because they enjoy getting into the second or third level games. That's for them to decide, likewise casino gaming. I regard casino gambling, fruit machines, the nags etc as far less iniquitous than the national lottery, where the state truly is encouraging, rather than merely facilitating gambling. I think it was Walter Block who noted that state lotteries in the US give a lower level of payout than numbers 'rackets'. But of course the state does this all for own good, as it is the Good Shepherd to we errant sheep.


    And herewith a tyically pithy analysis from Spiked:

    http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CB026.htm

    Labels:

    Saturday, April 15, 2006
    Am I alone in wishing that the Entarteurs would deliver a thoroughly deserved custard pie to the face of the tedious Gordon Brown? I cannot think of anyone else in British public life who deserves it more.

    I suppose I can now expect a visit from Special Branch.

    Friday, April 14, 2006
    Looks pretty clear that the best bloggers - well, Guido for sure - do not work bank holidays, and indeed that comment posters must be doing so from work. Pah, lightweights....

    Labels:

    Wednesday, April 12, 2006
    Housekeeping point - my apologies for the hideously naff long links. My HTML is at about the same level as my high church Slavonic.

    (Looks like I'm getting there)

    Labels:

    Manchester - so much to answer for.


    Labour Funding since 2002: Source - http://www.cleanpolitix.com

    1 UNISON - £4,809,364.17
    .....
    26 Manchester Airport Plc - £174,075.00


    The ownership of Manchester Airport PLC




    The BBC investigation

    Now the questions - were the board of the company council officials? What happened to the remaining £71 000? Why wasn't this front page news for weeks? What were the board thinking that they thought that they could do this?

    Having been politically aware to some degree since the early 70s, this is the single most shocking abuse of power in British public life that I have ever encountered.

    Labels:

    Monday, April 10, 2006
    Another (good) man done gone
    And in greater detail

    Labels: