Basically, he's got a neat Beard and therefore can't be trusted. Salad days will return when he shaves the bastard off, or just lets it go, man. It's not the beard per se: a wild man of the mountains or unshaven look is fine and natural. It's when beards are too manicured I find them distasteful. The criterion being if you spend more time trimming your face fungus than you would spend shaving, you're a wanker.

UPDATE: I am getting flack from the hirsute community for this. To be clear: re-read above. I am not anti beards. Some of my best friends neglect to shave. I am however against neat, manicured beards for the same reason I'm against the Hoxton fin. Women style their hair. Men shouldn't make so much effort.

There have been calls from various places for there to be a ban on MPs employing members of their family as researchers and so forth. Tedious moralising. A list of those MPs who do can be found here.

This is where politicians are right. The media cheapens discourse. Of course MPs should be allowed to employ wives as secretaries, but there should be at a going rate for equivalent employment. Conway (Major) and Conway (Minor) were paid £11,000 or so plus bonus of £3,000 for each year's work. If they had worked 9-5 during the Uni holidays, that would have been a generous settlement, but not wildly out of kilter with someone employed in London as an office junior. There's no doubt that the complainants have an axe to grind.

It is the fact that little or no work was done that has pissed people off. The temptation to do this stems from the fact that politicians are underpaid for the work they do. £60,675 is way below a Consultant or head teacher. This is politically sensitive and the easiest thing is to turn a blind eye to the corrupt use of the expense account to top up the salary. They're all at it, with Labour MPs being worse than the Tories, it's just that Pinkos abuse travel allowances pretending to support the brothers in the unionised transport industry, rather than join the boss class in their office.

The system encourages dishonesty.

The US army is a bit shit at dancing.



The British Effort is much better.... (as ever)

When I was a student, I used to work for my Dad, and I got paid what an apprentice would have received. And I was made to work hard, lest I let the family down. For example, I always got the shitty pick-ups from the local rendering plant where the retch inducing smell would stick to your clothes for hours after you left - a source of amusement to everyone else. My pay and conditions were commensurate with my age and experience, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Derek Conway is guilty of abusing taxpayer-funded advantages to "employ" his sons at vastly inflated rates for no demonstrable work. There is a simple word for this: corruption. David Cameron should remove the whip and the local party should deselect him, unless he immediately pays back all the money the tax-payer gifted his sons, with interest - a sum of about £130,000.

While we're on the subject of expenses, no-one in the system has their own money at stake, therefore they don't really care, which is why Mr Conway was able to get away with it for at least 6 years. No doubt there will be others who've done the same employing wives and mistresses, sons, daughters and blokes they met in toilets on Clapham Common whilst "badger watching". In order to combat this inevitable abuse, MPs should be paid a basic salary of £200,000 and not be given any further expenses at all. If they need a "researcher" they can hire one out of that salary. But what about second homes, I hear you whine? There is an inverse relation between proximity to London and house price. The nearer your constituency is to London, the less likely you are to need a pad in town. £200k is enough to live on in London. If you represent a toilet in the Peoples' Republic of North Britain, you can buy a constituency house for 3 months salary, which shouldn't be a problem for anyone, even those economically illiterate enough to stand for the Labour Party.

Simple solutions for a happy Britain. Can we go back to excoriating the Labour party please?

Knacker of the yard has finally persuaded the Orange slug to resign. A resignation which McBroon has indicated he will accept. So that's all right then. So that leaves the rest of the Incompetents in "Government" to go too and we can get on with dealing with the Brown economic collapse.

It's interesting to note that in the last decade, the FTSE 100 has advanced not at all. Not exactly a scientific barometer of the Labour's performance in office, but it doesn't bear scrutiny with the previous administration, nor international comparison. The reason: we've gone from being a low-tax, principle based economy to a High tax rule-based economy in a mere decade: a crash course in how not to generate efficiency in business. Hain fell foul of rules Labour put in place their very complexity designed as a trap for the Conservatives. Britian is now a lousy place to do business, unless of course you pay off the Labour party. Hain is not the worst incompetent nor the most dishonest minister to have served in government; Brown is, but he seems to think incompetence is a qualification for the job. What he is saying is that nothing matters except obeying the rules.

If it takes grubby dishonesty from perma-tanned gits to get this shower out of office then I'm all for it, and the sooner they go the better, because I want to get back to obeying the spirit of the law rather than its letter.

If so, why?

Warning: This strangely catchy music video contains extreme images of Jihad:

Please discuss:

On radio this morning, baby-faced shit-stirrer, Nick Clegg indicated that he would support the Government in refusing the British people a referendum on the EU constitution reform treaty, despite having promised one. This means that the Government (baring an unprecedented epidemic of honesty on Labour benches) will be able to go ahead with its plan to end the independence of this island nation without too much fuss about anything as untidy as y'know asking the people of Britain by whom they wish to be governed, which is, well sort of the point of democracy.

All right, I know: the Tories aren't exactly covering themselves in glory by not promising a retrospective referendum, but at least their position, alone amongst the major parties* in favour of a referendum on the issue is in a cooler part of hell.

But it is the mendacity of the Liberals' position which is most staggering: Rejecting a plebiscite on the issue in question, they propose an "in or out" referendum instead. If you read this blog, you're probably a political anorak, so you don't need me to tell you that the settled will of the British people is that they're broadly in favour of the EU, but dislike all its specifics. Thus when asked, they tend to become more sceptical of the whole edifice the longer any campaign goes on as they find out more. This is true of most of Europe too:

When asked, the people have said "no, you EU political fuckers have quite enough power already, we'll stick with the devils we know, thanks". They're always ignored.

However the one question on which the federast might get the answer he wants is on "should we leave the EU?". Knowing that the chance of winning a referendum on the Constitution or its bastard children is nigh-on zero, the most Euro-enthusiastic party in the has decided to ask another question. Safe in the knowledge that the Government will never ask, they side-step the issue of what total cunts they are. However the margin in favour of being in "Europe" at all is thin, and tends to move against during a campaign. The Liberals should be careful what they wish for, as I for one, and I suspect a plurality of UK voters may just be persuaded to vote "no" if that is all that is on offer.

This colours my view of the Lib Dems, many of whom I consider friends. They are certainly more amenable to reason (on issues other than PR and Europe) than many of the worthless lumpen proletariat (to paraphrase Malcolm McLaren: There was no labour movement, there's the Labour Party and then there was a Bowel Movement) who form the bulk of the governing party. It is impossible to debate with these slugs as they seem to be of the opinion that a red rosette grants one automatic moral high ground, whatever the effect of their disastrous policies on the ground. Whilst individual lib-dems are nice, they are en-mass a bunch of stinking treasonous mendacious wankers, capable of the most transparent doublethink on issues around democracy and the EU. I can't work out whether I loathe them more than I Loathe the Labour party, or whether I hope they destroy the Labour party in its upcoming decade and a half in the wilderness. I think that the generally sensible Liberal views on civil liberties, and Cleggies' desire to go to Gaol rather than have an ID card is keeping him away from my fantasies about painful and imaginatively extended death agonies, of which the Labour cabinet form the present subject.

Conclusion:

Agitate for a referendum. Spit bile at any Labour members you see and point out what sophilistic dishonest shite-hawks they are. Vote Tory, with a peg on the nose if necessary: UKIP is a wasted vote. If you can't bring yourself to vote Tory, you're a cunt but please, vote Lib Dem instead. If you think that voting labour is a good idea, kill yourself: you're clearly brain-dead anyway.

Peter Hain is an orange (as in bright orange, not Loyalist marching order) git. That he has not resigned yet, is a lasting stain on the British body politic, but I think his days as a minister are numbered.

He declared his donations from his fictitious 'think tank' late to hide them from Labour activists, to whom he did not want to reveal the scale and source of donations, during the campaign for Deputy Leader, figuring that he could brazen his way out of any ensuing shit-fight. During this campaign, he outspent his rivals by an order of magnitude, yet trailed in a pathetic fifth, beating only the risible chipmunk. The 'Progressive Policy Forum' is a think-tank so obscure that it appears to have no website, nor publications. Indeed it seems to exist only to launder money for Peter Hain. He has, by the admission of one of his supporters on the radio this afternoon, broken the law. A law, which Labour introduced to make life difficult for Lord Ashcroft and Sean Connery, major backers of the Tories and Scots Nationalists respectively: our masters are hoisted by their own dishonest petard.

The scale of their hypocrisy would be breathtaking, were it surprising. The fact is Labour are entirely without scruple in their desire to hang onto power at all costs. The electorate are finally seeing them for the disgusting shower they are.

Blogging is going to be light for the rest of January, because I'm spending 2 weeks getting shouted at for Queen and country. This means I need to work stupid hours to clear my desk beforehand and work stupid hours to empty my inbox afterwards. There may be the occasional post if I have time and access to a PC and am really pissed off about something, but otherwise the dude will return in February, refreshed and angry.

I have been Tagged by the ever lovely Katy Newton to reveal my week's Media consumption, here goes:

I Watched:

• Big Brother Celebrity Hijack. Now I know this is sucking my brain out, but it will get more highbrow from here. Look Katy makes the same excuse: Look. Does it make a difference, dear reader if I have money on the result? Victor to win...
• Leicester administer a thorough kicking to Harlequins. If Goode and Varndell don't get an England call-up (I know, even he should have to fight for his place) after this performance, then there's something wrong. 13-42 and it could have been so much more!
• Johnny Mnemonic: Dated, but strangely satisfying futuristic dystopia flick starring Ice T acting even worse than Keanau Reeves, if that's possible
  

I am Reading

• Crap, by Terry Arthur. I was given it to review, and I'm nearly finished - wait out.
  
• The Battle for Spain by Anthony Beevor. I'm enjoying it, but there are far too many left-wing factions for my liking. It would read better if there weren't. I haven't got to the bit where Franco kills all the commies.
  
• Death in the Afternoon by hemingway. The Olds have left the mother country so, I'm finding out about the sunny climes to which they've fled.
• The Economist Christmas edition is always full of fun.
• An anthology of war poetry, which was given to me for Christmas.
  

Where I surfed

• Check out the Blogroll. I probably visit y'all once a week at least.
  
• EBay, looking for a SurfBoard
• LoveFilm.com
• Momentary Academic's New Blog
  

I listened to

• Today on Radio 4
• In our time with Melvyn Bragg
• Moneybox Live
• Any Questions

Who gets tagged

• My sexy leprechaun
• Keatonmask
  
• Dropoutlife
• MA
  
• Lionheart, who gets a link which implies no support for his views, merely his right to express them. I'd be interested where he gets his facts from. This (via DK) says all.
  

Jim Knight, Schools minister: "We simply don't recognise the label 'soft' or 'hard' A-levels - all subjects are rigorously measured against each other to maintain standards."

So Tourism Management is as hard as let's say Physics? What a twat! It's this kind of self-serving doublespeak which brings politics into disrepute. I know he's lying, you know he's lying. He knows he's lying. Some claim it is "yah boo" politics which turns people off, but at least that's debate. You cannot debate with someone who will not accept the facts, and even engaging with people who operate like Jim Knight is a waste of time. SO PEOPLE DON'T BOTHER!

Should you say that Physics for example, is harder than tourism management, which did not even exist as an option when I took my A-levels, then Jim Knight would accuse you of "denigrating the hard work of students and teachers", which is in his doubleplusgood education system is the only reason for the ever increasing grades. That's like saying 'Zimbabwe is getting richer' because the average salary is now several million dollars a day. For Cambridge and others in the Russell Group to attempt to maintain standards by selecting only those with rigorous qualifications are likely to be described as "unacceptable elitism" and 'discrimination' against working-class students. The Laura Spence debacle has clearly made Oxford more cautious in its public pronouncements on the subject.

The discrimination against working-class students is the crappy teaching, low standards and low expectations that the comprehensive system engenders. How typical of the socialist mindset to attempt to pull back the bit of the education system that works to make things 'fair' to those in the bit that doesn't.

I've been very proud of how high I come in the rankings for the Google search term "Gordon Brown is a Cunt", but as you can see, I've been slipping. DK has been using the C word more than me of late and therefore as got the top spot (and the next 3, the bastard). Use of this most explicit Anglo-Saxon expletive is proportional to the rage and despair he and I feel at the entirely avoidable misery his policies are causing the country.

I don't think this relative ranking of Brownian loathing is fair: DK hates all politicians, and therefore his loathing for the goblin king is unexceptional. I do not hate all politicians, just socialist ones, and my loathing for the monocular Scots bastard is not part of a blanket prejudice; it is special, pure and reasoned. This post is a Naked attempt to boost AVBD's ranking for this most common of Google searches.

So just to ram the point home, Gordon Brown is not just any old cunt, he's the cuntiest cunt in a Labour party replete with twats, arseholes, self-seeking turds and cunts of the first stripe. I hope he had a lousy Christmas, in which his family rowed more than most. I wish him a miserable, thwarted new year. Rest assured, wherever he is, he is not, nor will he ever be, in my opinion, in enough pain. I just don't want a four-letter arms race to prove it.

Mike Huckabee's a creationist twat (I don't care what Chuck Norris says) and Barack Obama wants to invade Pakistan. They can pick 'em, the yanks. At least we Brits have the excuse that we had no say in McBroon getting the top job...

I think the most embarrassing thing if you're a seppo, is that none of the other candidates is any better.

Whilst most of my friends know I'm aggressively high-minded and serious, and I'd rather watch Newsnight than Girls of the Playboy Mansion, for example, I have a confession. I like big brother, and this year, it looks like they may have successfully renewed the concept. The first housemate was a ginger daywalking socialist porridge thrower, the second a Musician, the third a boxer, the fourth and fifth a pair of circus entertainers the sixth a racing driver. They all seem interesting
The carrot top is currently doing Matt Lucas' every whim.

Compelling.

Are you, dear reader going to abandon me if I write about this?

Arrived in my inbox this afternoon:

This is best read in your best "John Rhys Davis" camped up Arab accent (think Sallah in Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark...)

Beloved one, how are you doing today?,permit to introduce myself before going into detail of my reason for sending you this mail. My name is prince idumuje the deputy chairman of the United Kingdom Metropolitan police equipment trust fund.we were giving the sum of $30 billion dollars to equip the police force and various contract was awarded for the purpose. Right now I have in my possesion the sum of $50 million dollars for urgent transfer into a foreign account.This amount stand for over invoiced contract sum and all modalitis has been put in place. Best regards, P idumuje Should you be intreseted in assisting me, contact me without further delay.

I won't of course, but if you want to spam him, the e-mail is attorneymarc@gmail.com

What he said.

Look, The Whiskey Priest said it, not me!

I'm not sure Harry Hutton catches the genius of the man with his obituary, and the Telegraph's isn't up yet so I'll have to do my best.

He will be chiefly remembered for the Glorious romp through the Victorian age which was the Flashman novels. 12 of 'em, which had the bewhiskered anti-hero shagging his bawdy way round the empire. Though he was a coward, flashman looked the part and managed to get covered in glory at each juncture. Like some commentators, I thought the first book, given to me by a friend at 13 was a real document. It inspired me to read "the Signal Catastrophe" and I was most put out to find no mention of a "Harry Flashman, VC". I then researched the Victoria Cross and, finding no reference to him there, or the Army list, at last, as I was half way into the second book did I realise that it was a beautifully researched and hilarious work of fiction. Like Patrick O'Brien's Aubrey Maturin cycle of novels, they are based on a real historical figure, though Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton KCMG FCRS would not be flattered by the comparison to the arch cad and womaniser. Though he gets a short cameo in "Mr American" it is sad to think there are only 12 books which star this magnificent creation.

Flashman is a great character, but it is the semi-autobiographical McAuslan series of novels which had the greatest impact on my life as they inspired me to join the British Army. Finally, one cannot attempt an obituary without mentioning "Quartered Safe out here", which remains a required text at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. This book documents how hard the war was for the forgotten army in the East from the point of view of a Private soldier: ordinary men achieved extraordinary things in paddy fields, jungles and hills fighing a fanatical enemy to a standstill, despite lacking the support of the European theatre. The Cumbrian Borderers spearheaded Field Marshal the Viscount Slim's final offensive against the Japanese in the last great land battle of the war, and "tore them apart".

Given his military record, glorious writing career and personal modesty, we can forgive him the the utter crap which was the Octopussy screenplay. George MacDonald Fraser: Soldier, journalist, writer, historian near wrecker of James Bond and inspiration for thousands of public school bullies. 1925 - 2008. A life well lived.

The NHS is 60 years old.

Any criticism of this national institution is usually spun as criticism of the sainted nurses and doctors who work therein. Let's get this straight. It isn't. It's bureaucrats I hate, not the medical profession. It's socialism, the root cause of Bureaucrats I blame for rubbish hospitals, not the poor bloody infantry dealing with the skewed incentives built into the system of healthcare delivery that a vindictive, spiteful and short-sighted government put in place after the second world war.

Now, the NHS enjoys the misplaced affection of the people of this country who forget (or have been brainwashed into forgetting) we used to have a world class health service before it was nationalised, and now we have a distinctly second rate one: on all measures: research, cancer survival, operations, waiting times, cleanliness we perform less well than France, Germany, the Scandinavian countries, Australia, when we had one of the best at year zero. Our Peers have not flattered the NHS by copying it, with good reason.

Now your average lefty will use the word "underinvestment" probably with the words "decades of" beforehand. He will then cite the USA as the counter example. The most intelligent thing to do at this point is punch him in the face. It is not about the money: The UK spends approximately the OECD's average per head on health per capita. What is interesting is that the public spending is more than the rest of Europe, but there is almost no private sector provision in the UK. That is where the difference lies. Nor is the USA's pure insurance with limited state-help the only other option: No other country has an NHS; most have a mixed, decentralised system. No other country's health service is Free to its users.

Health spending in the UK is, and always has been adequate. Despite this we have far fewer doctors per head of population and fewer Nurses than the OECD average. Life expectancy is in the bottom Third, and survival rates for serious conditions are rarely anywhere near average. If you're British, don't get cancer.

Why?

The answer is in one of the NHS's founding principles: "free at the point of delivery", and in its name: "National". Because there's no cost to patients, they are more likely to seek unnecessary medical help. This creates costs and removes resources from the deserving. It means an army of bureaucrats is required to direct resources as there is no information on demand coming from a market. Bureaucracy is rarely efficient or responsive and there are inevitable delays in deploying innovative treatments which are made available rapidly to those in insurance-based systems. This explains our poor cancer survival rates. Secondly, if you aren't rationing by price, and no cost is put on time, waiting lists are the inevitable result. They are noticeable for their absence in all other systems. Again delays in seeing specialists are a cause of poor survival rates in the UK for most serious conditions. National means the world's second largest employer has been created. Efficient? Responsive? unlikely!

As a result of this bureaucratic control, politicians see fit to meddle: We're left with ridiculous ideas like Cameron's of fining tax-financed organisations, the PCTs for each hospital acquired infection; or the Prime Minister pontificating on cleaning regimes, as if 1.3 million employees can be micro-managed from the centre. Resources are scarce, and it is important to direct what you have most efficiently and markets do that most efficiently. It is the "Free at the point of delivery" which ensures that private medicine is a marginal part of total expenditure, and ensures shortages of doctors, equipment and time.

The NHS: the third worst thing to happen to Britain since the war, behind the Welfare state and the European Union. We need to dismantle the NHS, return to local management by doctors who should start charging patients for doctors time. Insurance needs to be built into the system and private cover needs to be tax-deductible.

Unfortunately you need to undo 60 years of Socialist propaganda before the public will accept what needs to be done. Either that or have a Government with balls the size of watermelons, with a mandate to change the system and there's no chance of that happening any time soon.

So Britons will continue to die younger than necessary. Well done NHS.