Wednesday, 14 April 2010

So this is what you can expect.

All those 'Downfall' video mashups taking the mickey out of people with no sense of humour were certain, one day, to get one of them to try to prove their 'untouchable' status.

John Howell, a candidate for Henley-on-Thames, was one of a number of Oxfordshire Conservatives to be attacked in the doctored four-minute clip, which features an actor playing the German dictator in the film Downfall.

So he called the police.

Because he was outraged. And offended. And upset. And so desperately superior to those he wishes to represent that he must quash any dissent. Insulting politicians? That's illegal.

The link in the excerpt isn't mine. The Telegraph put that there. Good for them. Nobody should be immune to being outraged or offended. I am outraged every day by the antics of those who think they rule by divine right, but I have never called the police to complain that my sensibilities have been infringed upon, and I never will. Insult me, expect a response that does not involve the law in any way. I am, on a verbal level at least, able to adequately defend myself. Physically attack me or make a credible threat to do so, and that's a different matter. I really don't mind what you say to me, only what you do - or intend to do - to me.

It will be interesting to see how the Cameroids respond to this. Do they realise just how much politicians are despised yet, and why? It's not just the fraudulent use of expenses, it's not just the controlling and banning of everything - including all dogs from parks because some owners don't clean up - it's because of attitudes like this:

'If people can't and won't pick the mess up, then we have to try and make them do it and this is a way of trying it and we hope that people will help.

''Somebody has got to take a stand somewhere and I know we are not going to please all of the people but that's tough.''

We have decided, the people who pay us don't like it, and that's just tough. Follow the rules and shut up. Is that going to be the line in the future, Cameroids? This is more Tory dictatorship - how is it different from Labour dictatorship? If your candidates are going to call the police because someone made fun of them, it looks very much like 'no change' to me.

What I find most outrageous is that, even though they are facing a general election, they still think it's a good idea to ban all those dogs from parks, to call the police when they get insulted, to push through more vicious legislation to control us all and they do this in the certainty that in four weeks, we will be stupid enough to vote for more of it.

I am offended, deeply offended, to realise that most people will indeed be stupid enough. Even many smokers, fat people and those who like a drink. They will vote to have their lives made more miserable and to pay more for it. They will vote for people who feel entitled to push them around. They will vote for people who will not only bathe in their money, but who will employ more, unelected people and let them do the same. To whom can I report this outrage, this offence?

Only to the people committing it. Who will dismiss my concerns as 'not in the public interest'.

If only we had a Libertarian candidate here. I couldn't stand myself because if you did put me in Parliament, I'm just going lose my temper with these pompous morons and deck somebody with a crowbar. They won't like that very much. Encouraging the burning of fat people, the criminalisation of the innocent and physical violence against smokers is all fine with them, but they don't want to experience it themselves.

The Tories say they want 'change'. The only change I see coming is the face of the man wearing the hobnail boot that's kicking me. Remember whose councils have been prosecuting people over bins, threatening pensioners over graffiti, and now banning dogs 'because we can, and that's tough'. All the main parties are the same. Their councillors have proved it and have been proving it for years.

Now, they feel justified in calling the police because someone doesn't like them, and it's illegal not to like them.

Soon it really will be. Soon we will all have a picture of Kim Jong-Cameron on prominent display in every house.

Mine will be in the toilet. In case I run out of paper.


Anonymous said...

Sorry, Leggy, but there’s no space for comments on the “dog” story, so do you mind if I vent my spleen here? I’m so cross about this!

We take all of our holidays in the UK, and our dog comes with us. So this has, effectively, knocked Nottinghamshire off our list of places which we can visit. We always carry a plentiful supply of poo-bags with us and are scrupulous about clearing up after her and disposing of the bags in the appropriate bins, and are always furious when other dog owners don’t do the same (which, contrary to what the anti-dog brigade might like to say, is quite rare these days), because it just gives people like this further ammunition to bring in OTT bans like these. So, this is a perfect example of how to turn erstwhile supporters into resentful, angry opponents. And, although the “that’s just tough” comment says it all, even more telling is Ms Armstrong’s rather Freudian first comment (emphasis mine): “We are being ruled by a minority of people and the majority have to put up with it.” Ooooh! I can feel my spanking-hand beginning to tingle ………

Anonymous said...

'If people can't and won't pick the mess up, then we have to try and make them do it and this is a way of trying it and we hope that people will help

Sent this to our local (not in England) paper. Didn't get printed though.
Re: Reckless dog owners must be stopped.

It would seem that Cllr XXXXX has given little thought to his outburst on the situation regarding dogs fouling public areas.
I would like to suggest that far from prosecuting the owners of dogs fouling footpaths, or even bus shelters, these owners should be encouraged. The decline in abandoned canine excrement has brought about a rise in all manner of social ills, many complained about bitterly in the letter pages of your publication.
Might I suggest the following advantages to the streets being littered with, to quote Cllr XXX. ‘what pets do naturally‘ none of which he saw fit to mention:
1. Incidents of people tripping over paving slabs and other obstacles would be considerably reduced because pedestrians would take a lot more care over where they were walking.
2. The practice of groups of people stopping, talking, and blocking the pavements, forcing others to walk in the road to avoid them, would cease.
3. Obesity would be reduced as the attraction of the excellent cakes and pastries on offer in the town would lessen after the prospective purchaser had negotiated the fouled footpaths of XXXXX to get to them.
4. Gangs of youths would cease to use bus shelters and street corners as recreational areas due to the stench - point confirmed by the councillor himself.
5. Probably the greatest effect would be the elimination of drunken behaviour - falling over in the street would be pretty unpleasant and guarantee the fallen would not ’pull’ on that night out. Reductions in the cases of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases would result.

Leg-iron said...

I have to ask - what do you think of the smoking ban, the plan to burn fatties, the idea that anyone drinking more than the State allows is evil, the idea that anyone denying climate change is a heretic...

It's the same game.

Dogs are weapons and we aren't allowed weapons.

It will all be clear soon.

opinions powered by