Monday, 24 November 2014

They’re From The NHS & They’re Here To Help…

…not necessarily to help you, though, so much as to see you as a hindrance to them helping themselves:
The husband of a depressed mother who killed her three young disabled children has criticised medical professionals for the "constant pressure" placed on the family to "submit the children to operations and other interventions".
And I wonder if that’s because they genuinely thought these interventions would help, or because they wanted to try out their skills? All sixty of them.

Yes, you heard that right – sixty!
During the trial, the court heard from prosecutor Zoe Johnson QC that Clarence and her husband "believed that the only appropriate care for their children was palliative care [but] the children had not reached the stage when palliative care was required".
If palliative care was inevitable, why quibble over when the ‘appropriate stage’ had been reached? 

This seems like yet another case of the NHS mindlessly following a ‘tick box’ approach, and not listening to its customer.
In a statement issued on his behalf, solicitor Richard Egan blamed medical professionals and social services for contributing to Clarence's depression. It said Clarence's depression "was certainly not assisted by the constant pressure placed on the family by some individuals within the medical profession and social services who could not agree with Tania and Gary Clarence's stance of prioritising quality of life for their children and who were not readily willing to submit the children to operations and other interventions that they felt were not appropriate in the circumstances."
It’s yet more of the ‘doctors know best’ approach. And it’s hardly surprising, since they are unlikely to suffer any of the fallout from this case.
"They also want to thank the police and the staff at the prisons who were never less than compassionate and sensitive, and the hospital carers who have treated Tania with great sympathy and understanding."
An interesting comment, given the usual whinges from the criminal-cuddling fraternity in the left wing press that their ‘clients’ are degraded and treated with scorn solely because they are criminals.

No, This Is Not ‘Justice’, This Is Abject Stupidity…

Tony Messenger on those who fan the flames of racehustling over Ferguson (and can we see a Grand Jury conclusion to the whole sorry farce today, please?):
This week, new Harris-Stowe State University president Dwaun Warmack told me the story of a call he received from a young black student who just a couple of nights earlier had been pulled over by police.
The student, with a high GPA and a clean record, was driving home in north St Louis County. His car apparently fit the description of another vehicle that had been involved in a crime. He was pulled over and taken out of the vehicle by police, frisked and placed on the ground face first while police ran his tags and driver’s license.
Police quickly realized they had the wrong car, the wrong young, black man. They let him go.
But that young man’s worldview, Warmack told me, is changed forever.
Yes, it's changed to prefer a world where police fail to stop suspects due to fears of racism and so crime flourishes, perhaps to affect him or his family one day…
Justice is less of that happening to young black men in St Louis.
Which pretty much guarantees that more crime will happen to them instead.

I fail to see how that helps anyone other than the likes of Louis Farrakhan…

Safe For Whom..?

“How safe is cycling?” asks the BBC.

Well, it’s a fair question, but rabid cyclopaths might not like the answer…
A parent Kristie was with at the time of the incident spotted the brazen cyclist riding on the pavement again just three days later.
She approached the woman and asked for her details. As a result, the police later fined her £30.
“I don’t think it’s enough,” said Kristie. “She’s back to riding on the pavement after she hit a child. I wouldn’t even have been able to get back on that bike.”
Ah, but she’s saving the environment, you know!

Sunday, 23 November 2014

Never Mind 'Who Lives In A House Like This?'...



...who gets to name the wi-fi router in this house, that's what I want to know!

This Is Why I Love Twitter…

…and in particular, the option to create parody accounts:



Well played, well played indeed.

Your Challenge For Today...


...locate a newspaper headline that's more chav-defining than this one!

Sunday Funnies...

Preferably not available for download on your Kindle...

Saturday, 22 November 2014

Oh, But I Think You Are

Mel Wakeman, senior lecturer in applied physiology at Birmingham City University, said yesterday: “Hungry Horse obviously have no conscience and no doubt both their wallet and the size of their customers will be getting fatter by the week.
“To me, this is simply ludicrous and irresponsible. I am no killjoy…”
Hey, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc…
“Why can’t they include on the menu what the customer would need to do to burn all those calories off? ”
Because there’s no room, given all the demands from the other obesity crisis squawkers to include the calorie count & the allergens, perhaps?

And if we are going to start demanding information regarding potential consequences be included, what disclaimer shall we have put on any degree course you might teach, eh?
The pub chain defended it's creation and called the dish "bizarre but brilliant".
It looks revolting to me, and I’m a committed carnivore, but each to their own, and since they aren't forcing anyone to eat it, what business is it of some clown at a third rate ex-polytechnic?

Hugh Muir’s Tin Ear

Unlike the unfortunate Thornberry, no-one’s taken away his shovel, so he keeps on digging that hole…
“You are smug and patronising,” pronounced the heavy-set man from the back of the room. Don’t worry; I’ve been called worse. But he was interesting. “I am a lifelong Guardian reader,” he said, during a Guardian Live event. “And I’m campaigning for Ukip in Rochester.” One assumes he was one of those behind last night’s convulsion in Kent, which has seen Mark Reckless relaunched into parliament and the continuation of Ukip’s assault on both Tories and Labour. Our critical friend will be feeling very pleased with himself today.
Indeed so. So what?
He shouldn’t be.
Oh? Do tell…
I am not one of those who would brand all Ukippians as racist. I can see the need to carefully confront the way the party appeals to neglected, marginalised communities.
I thought those ‘neglected, marginalised communities’ were always ethnic enclaves, Hugh? Or travellers, or Muslims?

I mean, that’s what the likes of the ‘Guardian’ are always telling me, anyway…
Lord Ashcroft, according to reports, sounded a recent warning to David Cameron about the risks of further alienating Tories who might vote Ukip. “You’ve got this group of Ukip voters, 95% of whom are decent people, you’ve abused them, you’ve thrashed them, and now you tell them that they are coming home to Daddy.” But at the same time, those voters have a responsibility.
Do they? To whom? To you?
They want to protest about the economy, about immigration, about the effects of globalisation, about the detachment of ordinary communities from frontline politics. They can and should be able to do that. The responsibility lies in their choice of vehicle for that protest.
Well, how beneficent of you to grant them that right to protest! How noble you are to graciously caution them to make the right choice – truly, we are not worthy!
The voter is entitled to view these things in line with their personal priorities. They may accept the vileness of much Ukip does but nevertheless take the view that this is of less consequence than the party’s usefulness as a stick with which to beat the other parties. That is a practical decision. But let’s not pretend that it is a moral one, or that it is right to absolve their decent supporters of any moral responsibility.
Morals..? Seriously, Hugh, you’re going to bring morals into this? To intimate that Labour would be the more moral choice?
In the aftermath of Rochester, mainstream politics must reconnect with alienated communities. People have deep concerns. Politics must work harder to address them, or to at least make it plain that they understand the depth of those concerns. But they must not pander, as they have been pandering, and they should not infantalise the electorate. It is really not unreasonable to ask that decent British people behave decently.
And by ‘behave decently’, do you mean roll over and accept what the small, unrepresentative Islington elite declares is in the UK’s best interests, and so we should all just shut up and do as we are told?

I think the voters of Rochester and Strood just showed you what they think of that.

Labour Needs DEFRA Assistance For Their Foot-In-Mouth Disease…

Oh, dear, oh dear, Emily Thornberry, how does one extricate oneself from a faux pas? Hint: not like this!
After the first barrage of complaints, Thornberry said her critics may have been showing “a somewhat prejudiced attitude towards Islington” .
She added: “I’ve been down in Rochester … and I’ve been tweeting one or two quotes of what people have said to me on the doorstep, and images that I’ve seen … and then I came across a house that was covered absolutely from the roof all the way down to the ground with England flags – they couldn’t even see out of the window. It was an amazing image, so I took a photograph of it and I put it on Twitter.”
It had three flags. Three. I've seen houses covered with more than that when there’s an England match on!

But hey, Emily, play that Victim Card if you think it’ll help…
The Labour MP said she thought there was “a lot of mischief-making” going on. “You know, I think the truth is, while the byelection’s going on, people haven’t got a lot to say,” she said.
“They can say there’s people out on doorsteps knocking on doors. And I suspect that those kind of people are trying to promote a somewhat prejudiced attitude towards Islington. ”
And ‘those kind of people’ are greatly in appreciation of your sterling efforts to help them do that, Emily!
“I was brought up on a council estate and I’ve never seen a house where people can’t see out of the window because of England flags. It was just trying to give, to the people who follow me on Twitter, a kind of picture of what the Rochester byelection is like.”
And instead, it gave them a pretty good idea of what you are like – the typical sneering Islintonite career-politician, untouched and unaffected by the policies you support and enforce.

And, though I myself piled in with the rest on Thursday evening, I might have had a tiny smidgen of sympathy for someone hounded out of her job by a social media mob…


…then I remembered Ched Evans and Julian Blanc, and I thought “Oh, well, sauce for the gander!”