I have a small bottle of a Chianti named Piccini. Well, I like to try new things so I thought I'd give it a go. It's not to my taste so it won't be high on the list next time I'm browsing the wine shelves.
The back of the label had some interesting new pictorial instructions, just underneath the advert for something called 'drinkaware.co.uk'. I won't be visiting that website. No need, the logic is obvious. If you're capable of drinking then you must be aware. If at any point you cease to be aware while drinking, that would be an appropriate time to stop.
Anyway, the label informs me that it contains seven different nationalities of sulphite, but above that are the three little pictures of interest.
The first one obviously means 'drink as much as you like, it won't make you fat'. The second tells you what you can expect the room to do if you overindulge.
The third one looks like a one-armed man taking another bottle from a rather large wine rack and is an encouragement to open another one. How does a one-armed man operate a corkscrew? This and other deep questions have occupied many a booze-fuelled discussion in the past, and no doubt will in the future.
Anyhow, I didn't like this one too much. Fortunately I have some port to finish off the evening later so I can take the taste away.
I can drink like this because I am an Adult, you see. I've long since passed every silly stage in the progression from child to adult, a process that in most societies happens overnight but here in Civilisation we like to make it take about five years. Currently the supermarkets want to check your age if you look under 25 so achieving adulthood in Tesco now takes even longer. Then everyone wonders why people don't grow up any more. There is no longer any defined state of 'adulthood', it's so blurred that there are 40-year-olds still acting like children because nobody's told them it's time to look after themselves.
That 25 thing is an odd rule, really. We are told that drinking to excess makes us look older so if someone looks young, why check if they are old enough to drink? Obviously they aren't going to drink the stuff themselves or they'd be all wrinkled and saggy. Just like all those fast-breeding smokers on the estates, who are impotent and have sperm that can only swim a few inches before they are out of breath. Must be the stork bringing all those children. Or perhaps there are some lies involved in the propaganda?
Al the Oily Fish has tried to defy his EU masters by imposing minimum pricing on alcohol, because he hates the working class and wants to make them suffer. His rich friends already pay so much for their champagne that minimum pricing won't affect them. No, it's you Buckfast, Carlsberg, Stella and Bells drinkers he wants to stamp on. He's going to ask you to vote for him soon. Then he'll stamp on you harder.
Now he wants to let local councils make it illegal to sell off-sales to anyone under 21. He's been slapped down this time but he'll try again. If you're 18-20, get some stock in. Soon all you'll have to choose from will be pub prices and if you smoke, you'll be out in the rain between overpriced pints. Once those pubcos have you as a captive customer, once the supermarkets refuse your business and you have nowhere else to go, what do you imagine they'll do to bar prices?
If you're over 21 you could dodge bar prices at the supermarket as long as you are not in the company of anyone under 21 and you look 26. Otherwise a 17-year-old till jockey will make your lifestyle choices for you. Illegal stills can only be a matter of days away now.
Criminal gangs will be gearing up for New Prohibition as I type this. They are already involved in tobacco supply and we smokers are supposed to care about that. Look again, we're classed even lower than criminals now so why would we worry about funding their operations? It's either pay low prices to criminals or pay high prices to fund ASH and the health Nazis. At least the criminals are not using the money to persecute us. It's not a hard choice. No conscience required - the other side doesn't have one, why should we?
It won't be a hard choice for drinkers either. Fund criminal activity, or fund your own persecution. Funding your own persecution costs more.
Next up, anyone who is overweight. Expect to see dodgy hamburgers in the backs of little white vans soon.
There's a new magazine out for women who aren't skeletal. Proper women, with something to get hold of. Look at the comments:
hope it's kept on the top shelf+1 in the horror section and is quickly placed in a brown paper bag as soon as it is purchased. I for one wouldn't want to see that being carried down the high street.
Gaz, n/e, 30/9/2010 00:18
Gaz wouldn't want to see people smoking or drinking either. Now he objects to someone carrying a magazine he doesn't want to read. Why? Because fat is just another word for 'smoking' in what passes for his mind. Gaz is pure Nazi through and through and will be there to fire up the ovens for those human beings who don't conform to a worldview so narrow it's two-dimensional. He doesn't see them as human. He is only obeying orders, but he's loving it.
looking at those pictures - these women would definitely be described as obese in medical terms - and should lose a few kilos - well, a couple of stone in one case.
Or is this another attempt to justify the obesity problem the western world is now faced with. Size 12, even 14 - but 18 and above is definitely OBESE.
peter, sydney, 30/9/2010 00:17
You must give up smoking because I don't like it. You must stay sober because I say so. You must be the approved size because I declare it so. Conform or be eradicated. Cleanse the population. It's final solution time again. Peter might be surprised to find just what the medical profession consider 'obese' these days. It's whatever they want it to be, Pete. Could be you.
Why should these women lose weight? Does Peter care whether they want to or not? What effect does it have on Peter if they are a little larger than the BMA's British Standard Human? In fact, what effect does it have on anyone?
Costs the NHS money? Don't talk rubbish. the NHS costs us money, not the other way around. It's our money they are refusing to spend on us. They take money with threats, tell us it's to fund a health service to look after us then refuse to let us use it unless we live our lives according to their dictates. They can refuse to treat us, but we cannot opt out of paying for a service we are not allowed to use.
That is, no matter how you look at it, fraud combined with theft. It cannot be justified on any grounds. You don't want me, as a smoker, using the NHS? Then stop stealing my money to pay for your personal doctors. I don't steal yours to buy my tobacco. You don't pay for a drinker's beer, nor do you pay for a fat boy's pie, but they too are paying for your personal health insurance and you declare they can't use it. Let us all opt out of paying for it and we'll get private health insurance. You can have all the NHS to yourself. Enjoy the free-at-point-of-infection diseases you can't get anywhere else. But unless I can opt out of paying for it, don't dare to tell me I'm 'costing you money'.
When the SNP first took over, they seemed to be doing things right. We'd hear about the Tiny Blur or the Brown Gorgon and their deranged henchmen every day, but not a peep out of Oily Al
and his shoal. They left us all alone and busied themselves with running the country.
Now they are the same as every other party. In the news a lot, and all of it bad news. Ridiculous proposals for insane laws passed by people in thrall to pressure groups. They don't run the country any more. They run individual lives. They are piddling about with who can buy a bottle of wine in a supermarket while the economy crashes around us all. There's only one conclusion that can be drawn.
There is not a single politician in this country who actually knows why they were elected.
So at the next election, when they ask for your vote, ask them that old interview standard. 'Why do you want this job'?
I'll be interested to hear if anyone gets an answer to that.