Archive for June 15th, 2010
Sub-titled: If I were Prime Minister
I would state in Parliament the following
“We cannot interfere with Obama, he is President of his country and we have to presume he has a reason for his anti-British comments. However, I think he is ill-advised and if he has any advisors who know the difference between an English company and an international company they should quickly put him in the picture.
“Whereas I cannot interfere with his actions, I am aware that his comments are affecting the lives and pensions of 39% of Americans and just over 40% of British pensioners.
“I am sure he will look after his American pensioners should his comments destroy BP – I wonder what the B stands for since they ceased to be a British company?
However, with the present economy as it is, we cannot afford to look after our own pensioners as the status quo stands. But it is our obligation to do this. So we have to find a way.
“From next month we will start withdrawing our forces from Afghanistan and hope to have the entire force back in the UK within three months. We can do this more quickly if we move them in stages. Immediately out of Afghanistan to a friendly country on its border, then more at leisure back to the UK.”
I would not need to inform the Americans as this would be on the world news within minutes.
If President Obama demands a meeting then it would have to be on British soil. We are not anti-American but a majority of people in this country believe that what he is doing is harmful and, in addition to this, we are not stopping terrorism by being over there, and the money wasted in this fighting zone is as bad as the billions wasted by us being in the EU. We could, if we were out of both areas, be totally financially solvent within five years.
I note, in the Telegraph this morning, that more and more children are turning to the Open University as they cannot afford three years of part time study.
About the only great thing that Harold Wilson ever did, way back in the sixties, was to create the Open University.
However, the corporate world weren’t sure about the students who passed and tended to treat them as inferior to students who went to a “proper” university.
But it wasn’t more than a decade before company management began to realise that not only were these Open University graduates as bright as their red brick counterparts, but they had showed tremendous dedication by foregoing their spare time and studied hard every evening and weekend, to get their degree.
It wasn’t long after that the employers began to put a higher emphasis on an Open University degree.
In the newspaper I read the following:
Dr Latchman said: “The Review Panel, led by Lord Browne, has already stated that it recognises that student financial support for part-time students is not sufficient, especially when compared to the support provided for full-time students.
What utter bollox! (That is Afrikaans for rubbish by the way) Yes, I agree, the students do need help, but not financial support. If they are working, they aren’t spending their money going to the pub during the evenings are they? Yes, money would be useful but not given to the students in financial support.
It can be given by opening up schools in the evening so these guys can go and study together with a bright tutor always present to give help as best he or she can. The hardest thing for a student is lonelyness. Even married students can be lonely studying if their spouse hasn’t a clue of their subject, or the agonies they go through.
(Open University student drop-out)
I “borrowed” this from a fellow blogger’s post this morning. I felt I should do my bit in spreading this information.
Compass conference, which took place over the weekend, had some interesting little hints at a return for the far left. It is worth noting that Compass’ own mission is to provide “direction for the democratic left”, yet they seem to be embracing rather anti-democratic left-wing forces.
The first example is from something Compass’ Chair, Neal Lawson, wrote in the Guardian. He said:
The collapse of existing socialism, east and west, means that these have not been fortuitous times for progressives.
Mark Wallace took issue with this:
Pardon me? So the collapse of socialism in the “east” was a bad thing for so-called progressives?
Precisely which aspects of the Soviet Union do British progressives identify with? The murderous police state? The mass famines? The crushing, grinding poverty? The racism or the homophobia? The censorship? The state-sponsored theft? The privileged, hypocritical elite robbing ordinary people to furnish their own lives of luxury? The genocides and deportations? Or maybe just the rubbish cars?