.... and a happy new year.
I'm unlikely to be posting again before the new year is under way so I'll get my best wishes in a little early.
Have a good one, everybody.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Time for change
I've decided it's time to freshen up the look of Ranting Stan. I'm not one of those people who either has the time or the inclination to spend hours tinkering with blog settings or fine tuning to get exactly what they want so I just go with whatever is available "off the shelf". I'm not looking for "contemporary" and I don't want anything flash - just subtle, conservative and, hopefully, tasteful.
Hope you like it.
Hope you like it.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Vanity projects
Despite desperate economic circumstances and cut backs in government spending, the government is pushing ahead with plans to spend untold billions of public money on a "high speed" rail link between London and Birmingham.
The fact is that there is already a perfectly good railway link between London and Birmingham - the problem it has is that it has been neglected and allowed to decay for the best part of twenty years or so. This rail link - in good condition - is quite capable of supporting trains capable of very high speed, but I'd question if there is even a need for such a high speed link at all.
All people really want from their trains is that they depart when they are supposed to, arrive when they are scheduled to and are reasonably clean and comfortable while doing so. They're not really bothered whether it takes an hour or fifty minutes - what bothers people is when they are told it will take one hour and it ends up taking an hour and ten minutes and they miss their connection or appointment.
Rather than wasting money on new projects, the people would be better served by a government that ensured that the existing infrastructure was fit for purpose and delivering the service people want. Spending billions we haven't got on infrastructure we neither need or want is just sheer vanity.
The fact is that there is already a perfectly good railway link between London and Birmingham - the problem it has is that it has been neglected and allowed to decay for the best part of twenty years or so. This rail link - in good condition - is quite capable of supporting trains capable of very high speed, but I'd question if there is even a need for such a high speed link at all.
All people really want from their trains is that they depart when they are supposed to, arrive when they are scheduled to and are reasonably clean and comfortable while doing so. They're not really bothered whether it takes an hour or fifty minutes - what bothers people is when they are told it will take one hour and it ends up taking an hour and ten minutes and they miss their connection or appointment.
Rather than wasting money on new projects, the people would be better served by a government that ensured that the existing infrastructure was fit for purpose and delivering the service people want. Spending billions we haven't got on infrastructure we neither need or want is just sheer vanity.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Utopia? For whom?
Once again the imagined "rights" of a foreign criminal are placed above the very real rights of their British victim. It's not the first time this has happened and unfortunately it won't be the last either - thanks to the meddling and incompetence of the progressive liberals.
The proglibs like to believe they are creating a utopia - but the question is, for whom?
Before the proglib experiment began 50 years ago, Britain was a great place to live as long as you were a decent law abiding person. Sure, we were pretty rough on criminals and the immoral, but there weren't too many of those and certainly nothing like what we have today.
The vast majority of people could live decent, ordered and content lives free from intimidation, fear and threat - either from criminals or the state. Everyone had access to quality education, there were plenty of jobs available in industry, factories (that made real things), offices and shops, marriage was the bedrock of society and most families enjoyed money in their pockets, food on the table and all the consumer items they either wanted or needed in an ordered and civilised society.
Then came the proglibs with their dream of creating a utopia - and fifty years later we've got it.
A utopia for criminals and the immoral, that is.
By almost every measure of societal progress things are worse now than they were fifty years ago - and where they aren't that is only because of technological or medical advances which would have happened whether the proglibs were in charge or we had remained a social conservative nation.
Anyone who thinks things are really "better" today is either deluded or a fool - or both. And things will not get any better until we dump the proglib revolution where it should be - an unfortunate chapter in our national history - and get back to social conservatism.
The proglibs like to believe they are creating a utopia - but the question is, for whom?
Before the proglib experiment began 50 years ago, Britain was a great place to live as long as you were a decent law abiding person. Sure, we were pretty rough on criminals and the immoral, but there weren't too many of those and certainly nothing like what we have today.
The vast majority of people could live decent, ordered and content lives free from intimidation, fear and threat - either from criminals or the state. Everyone had access to quality education, there were plenty of jobs available in industry, factories (that made real things), offices and shops, marriage was the bedrock of society and most families enjoyed money in their pockets, food on the table and all the consumer items they either wanted or needed in an ordered and civilised society.
Then came the proglibs with their dream of creating a utopia - and fifty years later we've got it.
A utopia for criminals and the immoral, that is.
By almost every measure of societal progress things are worse now than they were fifty years ago - and where they aren't that is only because of technological or medical advances which would have happened whether the proglibs were in charge or we had remained a social conservative nation.
Anyone who thinks things are really "better" today is either deluded or a fool - or both. And things will not get any better until we dump the proglib revolution where it should be - an unfortunate chapter in our national history - and get back to social conservatism.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
How to become interesting
While he was Defence Secretary, the uttering of Bob Ainsworth were so dull and impenetrable that barely anyone paid him the slightest bit of attention. Even at the height of his career, few people knew who he was, listened to what he said or cared what he was talking about. As Defence Secretaries go he was one of the more easily forgettable ones.
Today, though, he has suddenly become very interesting to the liberal left media. Why?
Simply by calling for illicit drugs to be legalised.
Oddly enough, long before moving to defence, Mr Ainsworth was in the Home Office with a responsibility for drugs and organised crime. One presumes that the responsibility was to reduce it, but I'm not entirely sure if Mr. Ainsworth understood that.
Mr. Ainsworth now says that his recent about turn on drugs policy came about as a result of his stint in the Home Office - but that finished seven years ago! Are we really expected to believe that Mr. Ainsworth's sudden change of mind on drugs took seven years to formulate? I don't have a particularly high opinion of the intellectual capability of your average MP these days, but even I never thought that their minds were that slow!
Nah. Mr. Aisnworth didn't change his mind while he was at the Home Office - the position he is now stating is more likely to have been his view when he was attending meetings of the International Marxists and helping to wreck the British car industry as a trade union activist.
The only reason he is saying it now is that he knows he is unlikely to ever get a position in government ever again and he can now come clean and admit his real opinion. I doubt that Mr. Ainsworth has really changed his mind on drugs at all - what he says now is what he has always believed in my opinion - but by saying it now he has changed something. He's gone from being Mr. Dull and largely ignored by liberal left media to Mr. Interesting and the darling of the BBC.
Today, though, he has suddenly become very interesting to the liberal left media. Why?
Simply by calling for illicit drugs to be legalised.
Oddly enough, long before moving to defence, Mr Ainsworth was in the Home Office with a responsibility for drugs and organised crime. One presumes that the responsibility was to reduce it, but I'm not entirely sure if Mr. Ainsworth understood that.
Mr. Ainsworth now says that his recent about turn on drugs policy came about as a result of his stint in the Home Office - but that finished seven years ago! Are we really expected to believe that Mr. Ainsworth's sudden change of mind on drugs took seven years to formulate? I don't have a particularly high opinion of the intellectual capability of your average MP these days, but even I never thought that their minds were that slow!
Nah. Mr. Aisnworth didn't change his mind while he was at the Home Office - the position he is now stating is more likely to have been his view when he was attending meetings of the International Marxists and helping to wreck the British car industry as a trade union activist.
The only reason he is saying it now is that he knows he is unlikely to ever get a position in government ever again and he can now come clean and admit his real opinion. I doubt that Mr. Ainsworth has really changed his mind on drugs at all - what he says now is what he has always believed in my opinion - but by saying it now he has changed something. He's gone from being Mr. Dull and largely ignored by liberal left media to Mr. Interesting and the darling of the BBC.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
TV is so educational
A lot of people get very sniffy about television claiming that they never watch it - except for the odd documentary about some art house director or wildlife programme, but I'm not like that.
There's no doubt that the quality of television has declined considerably over the last 10-20 years as twenty four hours a day viewing and the number of channels has proliferated. I remember how back in the seventies we heard how the USA had a hundred channels and nothing to watch while Britain made do with just three channels and there were always a dozen or so "must see" shows every week.
Given the quality of output from British television compared to the US at the time it still amazes me that we decided to adopt the American model - but that is what we did and the consequence is that there is little worth watching on television today.
Nevertheless, television remains very educational. For instance, last night I watched the BBC's latest edition of "Holby City" and learned an awful lot from that.
I learned that foreigners are better than Britons - better people and better at their jobs.
I learned that women are excellent doctors and nurses while men are bumbling idiots - unless they are foreign men in which case they are excellent, but not as good as female foreigners.
I learned that both men and women are portrayed with flawed characters - but while women are aware of their character flaws men are blind to them due to their supreme arrogance.
Of course - if you believe all that you will believe anything.
And that - of course - is the point. A lot of people do believe an awful lot of what they see on television regardless of whether it is a "documentary" or a popular drama series. They don't realise that what they are watching isn't a snapshot of real life, but simply how things are viewed through the prism of liberal left propaganda.
The left cottoned on to the power and reach of television many many years ago and now have complete control over it in this country - particularly in the BBC where they control not just the content, but also the way it is managed.
So you can still learn a lot from television - but the best thing to learn is where the off switch is located.
There's no doubt that the quality of television has declined considerably over the last 10-20 years as twenty four hours a day viewing and the number of channels has proliferated. I remember how back in the seventies we heard how the USA had a hundred channels and nothing to watch while Britain made do with just three channels and there were always a dozen or so "must see" shows every week.
Given the quality of output from British television compared to the US at the time it still amazes me that we decided to adopt the American model - but that is what we did and the consequence is that there is little worth watching on television today.
Nevertheless, television remains very educational. For instance, last night I watched the BBC's latest edition of "Holby City" and learned an awful lot from that.
I learned that foreigners are better than Britons - better people and better at their jobs.
I learned that women are excellent doctors and nurses while men are bumbling idiots - unless they are foreign men in which case they are excellent, but not as good as female foreigners.
I learned that both men and women are portrayed with flawed characters - but while women are aware of their character flaws men are blind to them due to their supreme arrogance.
Of course - if you believe all that you will believe anything.
And that - of course - is the point. A lot of people do believe an awful lot of what they see on television regardless of whether it is a "documentary" or a popular drama series. They don't realise that what they are watching isn't a snapshot of real life, but simply how things are viewed through the prism of liberal left propaganda.
The left cottoned on to the power and reach of television many many years ago and now have complete control over it in this country - particularly in the BBC where they control not just the content, but also the way it is managed.
So you can still learn a lot from television - but the best thing to learn is where the off switch is located.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Crap Britain
When lefties tell me how much "better" Britain is these days, one of their favourite references is how much better our health system is compared to, say, the pre-NHS days. I like to retort that the reason why health care has improved and so many people recover from illnesses which were once considered life threatening has nothing to do with the NHS, but is entirely down to medical advances and often due to the development of new drugs by those "evil" (and privately operated) pharmaceutical companies who - if the left got their way - would be bled dry of the profits that pay for future drugs.
There is no doubt that people died of illnesses back in the forties which are easily treatable these days - but I'm equally sure that nobody died of thirst while in hospital in the pre-NHS days.
Another of the lefties favourite references are the much vaunted "benefits" of immigration. Well, it certainly wasn't much benefit to this chap. Britain has become a dangerous place to grow old in. If the out of control youth and foreign criminals don't get you then the NHS probably will.
There is no doubt that people died of illnesses back in the forties which are easily treatable these days - but I'm equally sure that nobody died of thirst while in hospital in the pre-NHS days.
Another of the lefties favourite references are the much vaunted "benefits" of immigration. Well, it certainly wasn't much benefit to this chap. Britain has become a dangerous place to grow old in. If the out of control youth and foreign criminals don't get you then the NHS probably will.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Why our country is going to rack and ruin (2)
It's obvious from this story that incompetence and stupidity in authority is not limited to our parliamentarians.
It makes me wonder how people utterly lacking in basic common sense ever managed to get to such positions of authority - as well as wondering how much they get paid for doing a job that they are clearly incapable of managing.
Unfortunately, it does not surprise me in the least. I've no doubt that they have all got impeccable records for promoting "diversity and equality in the workplace" and have perfect attendance records on all the politically correct training courses and that, unfortunately, is what qualifies you for a position in authority these days while actually knowing what you are doing seems to be a "nice to have", but not essential.
When you realise that we are governed by people who openly invite foreigners to peruse our most sensitive secrets, who have turned over control of our laws and regulation to unelected foreign bureaucrats with a barely disguised distrust and hatred of our nation and that our national infrastructure is managed by people lacking the basic intelligence to foresee that de-icing trains might be needed when it is very cold ... well, it's no wonder the country is falling apart.
It makes me wonder how people utterly lacking in basic common sense ever managed to get to such positions of authority - as well as wondering how much they get paid for doing a job that they are clearly incapable of managing.
Unfortunately, it does not surprise me in the least. I've no doubt that they have all got impeccable records for promoting "diversity and equality in the workplace" and have perfect attendance records on all the politically correct training courses and that, unfortunately, is what qualifies you for a position in authority these days while actually knowing what you are doing seems to be a "nice to have", but not essential.
When you realise that we are governed by people who openly invite foreigners to peruse our most sensitive secrets, who have turned over control of our laws and regulation to unelected foreign bureaucrats with a barely disguised distrust and hatred of our nation and that our national infrastructure is managed by people lacking the basic intelligence to foresee that de-icing trains might be needed when it is very cold ... well, it's no wonder the country is falling apart.
Monday, December 06, 2010
Why our country is going to rack and ruin
On the face of it the news that the research assistant of a Lib Dem MP is accused of being a spy for Russia has a cold war feel about it - and reading through the various news reports of this incident it would appear that the big media agree ..... but it isn't.
It reveals with stark clarity the reason why this country is in such a sorry state - stupid and naive leadership.
You can argue whether Mike Hancock - the MP in question - was stupid or naive (or both) in employing a Russian national as his research assistant, particularly given his position on the national Defence select committee, but it is impossible to argue that choosing to do so isn't stupid, naive or both.
That one individual MP would be that stupid and naive is bad enough, but the fact that it didn't occur to any of the other MPs in the House of Commons or to the leader of his party that this was not the sort of person any nation should be employing to work on sensitive national interests is beyond a joke.
It also reveals the astonishingly blase attitude our leaders have to the issue of immigration. Why didn't anyone wonder why Mr Hancock felt it necessary to employ a foreign national as his research assistant - couldn't he have found a British person to do the job?
Did he even try?
It reveals with stark clarity the reason why this country is in such a sorry state - stupid and naive leadership.
You can argue whether Mike Hancock - the MP in question - was stupid or naive (or both) in employing a Russian national as his research assistant, particularly given his position on the national Defence select committee, but it is impossible to argue that choosing to do so isn't stupid, naive or both.
That one individual MP would be that stupid and naive is bad enough, but the fact that it didn't occur to any of the other MPs in the House of Commons or to the leader of his party that this was not the sort of person any nation should be employing to work on sensitive national interests is beyond a joke.
It also reveals the astonishingly blase attitude our leaders have to the issue of immigration. Why didn't anyone wonder why Mr Hancock felt it necessary to employ a foreign national as his research assistant - couldn't he have found a British person to do the job?
Did he even try?
Saturday, December 04, 2010
Caught lying at the interview
For years now, the Lib Dems have had the luxury of being able to make up policy in the sure knowledge that they'll never have to implement any of it. This has meant that they've been able to indulge in all sorts of gesture politics and moralising and get away with it.
Now, though, they find themselves unexpectedly in government and their "beliefs" and policies are proving to be as substantial as soggy tissue paper. They are like the interview candidate who makes all sorts of claims about their experience and qualifications for a job believing they'll never be offered the position and then finding themselves in the job.
And just like someone in that position they are quickly found out - exposed as frauds and totally out of their depth.
It makes me wonder, though. I mean, there are those of us who knew that anyway, but the millions of people who voted for the Lib Dems must be feeling extraordinarily let down right now. Will they ever vote for them again - and if so, why?
And as they have been revealed as being totally inadequate, that their policies are poorly conceived, poorly planned and totally inappropriate then why the hell does anyone bother to listen to them still?
Now, though, they find themselves unexpectedly in government and their "beliefs" and policies are proving to be as substantial as soggy tissue paper. They are like the interview candidate who makes all sorts of claims about their experience and qualifications for a job believing they'll never be offered the position and then finding themselves in the job.
And just like someone in that position they are quickly found out - exposed as frauds and totally out of their depth.
It makes me wonder, though. I mean, there are those of us who knew that anyway, but the millions of people who voted for the Lib Dems must be feeling extraordinarily let down right now. Will they ever vote for them again - and if so, why?
And as they have been revealed as being totally inadequate, that their policies are poorly conceived, poorly planned and totally inappropriate then why the hell does anyone bother to listen to them still?
Thursday, December 02, 2010
Nurses that don't nurse and carers who don't care
The Daily Mail is backing a campaign by the Patients Association to change the way the NHS handles complaints with particular concern over the care received by hundreds of thousands of elderly patients in NHS hospitals every year.
The fact is that nurses have given up on nursing. They have turned a vocation into a profession and no longer bother themselves with the basic fundamentals of patient care - like making sure they are fed, watered, clean and as comfortable as they can be.
It's typical of our entire way of dealing with the sick and elderly. If you're in hospital you'll be "looked after" by nurses who don't nurse and if you're at home you'll be dealt with by carers who don't care.
It's symptomatic of a system which has forgotten what its purpose is and no longer exists for the reason it was first created. The purpose for which the NHS was created was to provide high quality health care free at the point of use for all people. That is no longer why the NHS exists. It now exists to provide state employment for a huge number of people.
If that wasn't the case then why would it matter whether the health service was provided by private enterprise or by a state run institution as long as it was free at the point of use and available to all?
The fact is that nurses have given up on nursing. They have turned a vocation into a profession and no longer bother themselves with the basic fundamentals of patient care - like making sure they are fed, watered, clean and as comfortable as they can be.
It's typical of our entire way of dealing with the sick and elderly. If you're in hospital you'll be "looked after" by nurses who don't nurse and if you're at home you'll be dealt with by carers who don't care.
It's symptomatic of a system which has forgotten what its purpose is and no longer exists for the reason it was first created. The purpose for which the NHS was created was to provide high quality health care free at the point of use for all people. That is no longer why the NHS exists. It now exists to provide state employment for a huge number of people.
If that wasn't the case then why would it matter whether the health service was provided by private enterprise or by a state run institution as long as it was free at the point of use and available to all?
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Lord Carey is wrong
The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has suggested that Britain has become "ashamed" of Christmas.
He is wrong.
Although I welcome Lord Carey's comments for bringing the matter to public attention, the simple fact is that, although many are ignorant of the message and meaning of Christmas, most British people are not ashamed of Christmas or the Christian heritage of the nation.
Lord Carey is falling into the same trap that many commentators and opinion formers do - he is assuming that the thoughts and actions of those in authority are representative of the general population. They are not.
The fact is that authority in Britain is dominated by political correctness. The simple truth is that unless you subscribe to the politically correct world view of progressive liberalism there isn't a hope that you may reach a position of authority in Britain today. It doesn't matter whether you work for one of the major political parties, in the public sector or civil service or for a private company - unless you sign up to the policies of progressive liberalism you will not reach any significant position of authority.
This isn't because most people are progressive liberals either - it is because it has become enshrined in our law that you must subscribe to these views ... publicly at least.
You are required, by law, to actively pursue the policies of "diversity", "mulitculturalism" and "non-discrimination". As a result, nobody who doubts the validity or need for these policies can or will reach any position where they can influence policy making or decision making in any significant body. Even if they do, the slightest step out of line will see them very quickly removed from that position.
So, the whole of British authority is dominated by a particular mind set which assumes that we all accept that mind set as well - even though most of us do not. The vast majority of people in Britain do not wish each other "Seasons Greetings" or "Happy Holidays" at this time of year - we say Happy or Merry Christmas.
The fact that virtually all public celebrations - whether it is on Christmas cards, decorations or displays - are devoid of anything relating to the birth of Christ is entirely down to the fact that authority in Britain today is dominated by minority opinion which is not representative of the general population.
They are not "ashamed" - they are just ignorant and unable to think any other way.
He is wrong.
Although I welcome Lord Carey's comments for bringing the matter to public attention, the simple fact is that, although many are ignorant of the message and meaning of Christmas, most British people are not ashamed of Christmas or the Christian heritage of the nation.
Lord Carey is falling into the same trap that many commentators and opinion formers do - he is assuming that the thoughts and actions of those in authority are representative of the general population. They are not.
The fact is that authority in Britain is dominated by political correctness. The simple truth is that unless you subscribe to the politically correct world view of progressive liberalism there isn't a hope that you may reach a position of authority in Britain today. It doesn't matter whether you work for one of the major political parties, in the public sector or civil service or for a private company - unless you sign up to the policies of progressive liberalism you will not reach any significant position of authority.
This isn't because most people are progressive liberals either - it is because it has become enshrined in our law that you must subscribe to these views ... publicly at least.
You are required, by law, to actively pursue the policies of "diversity", "mulitculturalism" and "non-discrimination". As a result, nobody who doubts the validity or need for these policies can or will reach any position where they can influence policy making or decision making in any significant body. Even if they do, the slightest step out of line will see them very quickly removed from that position.
So, the whole of British authority is dominated by a particular mind set which assumes that we all accept that mind set as well - even though most of us do not. The vast majority of people in Britain do not wish each other "Seasons Greetings" or "Happy Holidays" at this time of year - we say Happy or Merry Christmas.
The fact that virtually all public celebrations - whether it is on Christmas cards, decorations or displays - are devoid of anything relating to the birth of Christ is entirely down to the fact that authority in Britain today is dominated by minority opinion which is not representative of the general population.
They are not "ashamed" - they are just ignorant and unable to think any other way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)