Scottish quiz night madness

I’m not going to write an in-depth examination of the new laws passed in Scotland to try and reduce alcohol consumption or even argue against all of them.

All I’ll say is that all you non-smokers who like a drink down your local and who rejoiced when the smoking ban came in had better start realizing that that was but the thin end of a very thick wedge…

If you want to know all about the situation in Scotland and more then Dick Puddlecote and Rantin’ Rab have both blogged very eloquently on the subject.

However, one of the measures really caught my eye for which I can see no valid reason and which just flies in the face of all common sense and logic:

A prize of “cash behind the bar” can no longer be given as a reward for winning a pub quiz

Now, I think pub quizzes are a good thing.

Maybe not every night in every pub, but they help to take a boozer from being simply just a place to booze in to a different purpose in the local community once in a while.

And why the cunting fuck not?

They’re maybe not for everyone – I tried one once but it wasn’t for me – but they’re a lot better for a night out than just watching people drink, if that’s what floats your boat.

So, what’s wrong with a cash prize?

Maybe £30 shared between 4 people after a couple of hours of questions?

That’s not enough money to get bladdered on afterwards when split 3 or 4 ways and it’s not as if you’re going to get Stella-swigging chavs pissing it up the wall afterwards – chavs aren’t usually known for participating in such events.

I’m guessing most pub quiz winners just take part for the craic and then any dosh won just defrays the cost of a few drinks quaffed during the quiz itself.

No, all I can think of is that the lawmakers have decided that if there is cash to be won in a pub then people are going to spend it on booze.

Well, so fucking what?

Who the fuck are they to tell people what they can win and how they should spend their money?

Where does all this stop?

How many more bars and clubs have got to close as more and more people decide to stay at home and choose what and how much to drink – and smoke – because it’s just no fucking fun going out any more?

So many questions and this isn’t even a fucking quiz night.

All we can hope is that what’s happening in Scotland won’t happen here.

I wouldn’t bet on it, though.

Cunts.

Not my ‘Digital Champion’

Where do you fucking start?

Well, here or here might be a good place.

Olympic aim to get Britons online

Speaking to BBC Business Editor Robert Peston, Ms Lane Fox said she wanted a “virtual race” to coincide with preparations for the 2012 Olympics.

As the government’s new Digital Champion she has been charged with getting millions online who are not yet connected to the internet.

The race is on to get as many British people online as possible by 2012, Martha Lane Fox has told the BBC.

So, Martha Lane Fox is our ‘Digital Champion’.

Digital Champion?

Who the fuck thinks these ‘job’ titles up?

Yet another focus group of drones paid for by the taxpayer at the behest of some Nu Labour cunt of a politician who doesn’t understand that this country is fucked economically speaking, I’d imagine.

It’s adding insult to the injury already announced that those of us with fixed phone lines will have to pay a levy of 50p a month to fund nationwide broadband internet access.

But, more significantly and inevitably, the devil is in the detail here:

Some 17 million Britons are currently not online, either out of choice or because they cannot afford internet connectivity.

Ms Lane Fox has indicated that she wants to concentrate on the six million poorest “nonliners” first.

For starters let’s just forget about those 11 million who couldn’t give a fuck about the internet and just hope that access isn’t made compulsory by this ‘inclusive’ government.

It’s that six million “nonliners” that worries me.

(“Nonliners”…give me a motherfucking break you soundbitten cuntwafts…)

These would presumably be the same six million that the taxpayer is supporting.

Now, don’t get me wrong here; I don’t wish to see anyone starve, be homeless or lack the other basic human comforts, but that doesn’t mean that I’m willing to fund luxuries for people.

I also have no wish to condemn anyone who’s been buttfucked out of a job and onto the breadline by this sorry bunch of tractor-counting cuntsocks that we call a government.

But…

Internet access is a luxury.

Ms Lane Fox doesn’t think so, however.

But she’s wrong – not to mention intellectually-challenged.

Those on the wrong side of the digital divide were disadvantaged in many ways, said Ms Lane Fox. Studies showed, she said, that those familiar with the web earned more, performed better in job interviews, could save money by shopping online and had an easy route to keeping their skills fresh.

Among those 17 million Britons not online was a group of six million who were “the most socially and economically disadvantaged people we have in this country”, she said.

“We are really going to focus, I hope, on the six million that are at the bottom of the pile. Partly because that’s the right thing to do and partly because we know quite a lot about these people – who they are and where they live.

“I am sure we can put our arms around the problem,” she said.

(Slight pause whilst I vomit due to that last sentence)

Studies showed, she said, that those familiar with the web earned more

What studies? And maybe because they earn more they can afford broadband and thus be more familiar with it.

performed better in job interviews

Er…how does that work then?

could save money by shopping online

You need a debit or credit card to shop online. Possession of such a card hinges on some assessment of credit worthiness. This is something that the poor do not have very much of.

And why is it

the right thing to do (?)

We already have a section of society that is welfare-dependent and  that I’m helping to support. Why should I be expected to fund a luxury for them? Why is it always right to give to those who give nothing in return?

Let’s get this straight…

I’m expected to fund broadband access (something I pay for myself already and am also taxed on via VAT) for people I’m already helping to support?

Where’s the fairness in that?

Yes, it would be great if everyone who wanted it had broadband access, but where do you draw the line?

If we’re going to fund luxuries then why not go the whole cunting hog and give this 6 million what everyone else pays for out of their own pocket?

I’m sorry, but if we give internet access to that section of the ‘poor’ who are benefit-dependent by choice then we’re going to be subsidising a fair few people whacking off to internet porn or watching YouTube videos of what happens when you microwave a frog.

Both very laudable things to do if they can afford it.

If they can’t then why the fuck should I pay them to do it?

Along with buying their cans of Stella and fucking Lotto scratch cards.

You want all this stuff?

Well fucking pay for it yourselves.

As the Devil would say – fucking hellski…

PS

Many libraries offer free internet access and membership is free.

These places also contain things called ‘books’ which more people ought to read. Maybe being literate might have more to do with getting a better job than whether you have broadband or not.

Just a thought…

Shoot ’em all

It’s bad enough living in close proximity to other people – although if they’re reasonably civilized it can be OK.

Other people’s dogs are quite another matter.

It’s the fucking barking that gets me.

I’m assuming that when a dog owner lets his dog out into the back garden it’s for a crap or some quality sniffing time but most dogs just seem to want to cunting bark.

Now, if a human being went out into the garden every so often for a shout and persisted in such behaviour then I think that their mental health would be called into question.

If they kept on being a nuisance in this way then they might eventually get sectioned.

No such luck with a fucking barking dog though.

So, here’s an idea.

Legalize gun ownership and if you have a noisy dog living near you then you have the legal right to go and shoot the cunt – along with its braindead fucking owner.

Can you tell I’m annoyed yet?

A spew addition to the Blog Roll

Mr Nesbitt would like to spew all over you.

If you’d like to take him up on his offer then RantinRab will be more than pleased to shower you with his mad droolings.

Quite frankly, you’d have to be a bit of a cunt to pass on it.

Children and risk

Two stories have really captured my imagination today – that of Jaycee Lee Dugard who was abducted 18 years ago, and that of 13 year old Laura Dekker who wants to sail solo around the world.

They both seem to highlight a fundamental question regarding child welfare – to what extent should the State involve itself in the protection of children?

Obviously, as one of the most vulnerable groups within any society, children should be protected from harm, but the two cases I’m citing seem to throw up some interesting points that might answer my question.

The Dugard case – whilst bizarre – has elements of recent UK child abuse and murder cases in that although neighbours reported that there were children living in tents in the backyard, the abductor Garrido was a registered sex offender and the police actually visited the house, nothing was done at the time.

In this case, there was a clear failure on the part of the authorities to monitor sex offenders properly.

On the other hand, the Dekker case is unique in that it has a 13 year old put under (not ‘into’, please note) care because her parents wanted her to be allowed to miss school for two years to sail solo around the world. Pretty amazing, although the fact that the girl had her own yacht at the age of 6 must be some indication that she knows how to sail. In this case, at least, the authorities have acted in good time.

As I’ve said, the Dugard case is one that illustrates failure to protect children from the threat of paedophiles, but what about the Dekker case – are the authorities right on this occasion?

On the face of it it might seem so, but I’m not so sure.

Small boat ocean sailing these days may still be fraught with danger, but with GPS devices, satellite radios and better boat construction, it’s never been safer and I can’t imagine for a moment that Mr Dekker is going to send his daughter out in a leaky tub with a compass out of an Xmas cracker and a Maplins walkie-talkie. Neither can I see Mr Dekker checking back on Laura in two years’ time – he’s going to be monitoring her progress constantly.

Here’s what Laura herself has to say:

Since I was 10 years old, I’ve known that I would like to sail around the world.

I want simply to learn about the world and to live freely.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I find that admirable.

And think of the confidence her parents must have in her ability to succeed. That’s not something casually bestowed.

Inevitably, the Dugard case has brought up the Madeleine McCann affair again and raised the possibility that something similar might have happened to her.

The Madeleine references have also helped me towards an answer to my original question.

Although there’s a world of difference between leaving a 3 year old for half an hour whilst you go off to have dinner with some friends and allowing your 13 year old daughter to sail around the world for two years, I find myself forced to the conclusion that the Dekkers come out of all this as far more responsible parents than the McCanns.

Given the age difference and other circumstances, Laura’s plans don’t seem as risky as they appear on the surface.

And, as usual, the real victim in all of this is common sense.

Yes, we should protect our children, but we shouldn’t insulate them from the real world and the consequences of their own actions as part of it.

We owe it to them to protect them from obvious and potential dangers but we also have a duty and responsibility to allow them enough freedom to develop their own sense of responsibility. However, we seem to be doing neither very well at present.

As in most matters, the State thinks it knows best, but a society within which children are abused and murdered whilst being allowed to develop without any sense of personal responsibility would suggest otherwise and activities that I took for granted in my childhood, such as climbing trees, are now the subject of risk assessment.

Playgrounds that I played on as a kid just wouldn’t be allowed anymore, although I can’t recall any accidents resulting in anything worse than a scraped knee, and would have been closed following a risk assessment by a group of over-protective, over-educated, overpaid, underworked shitheads.

But has anyone ever assessed the risk of risk assessment?

Maybe it’s time someone did before we produce yet another generation who can’t think for themselves and give the State a self-perpetuating excuse to do it for them…

So fuckin’ what?

If this offends you then blame Al Jahom and then kindly fuck all the way off – he started me revisiting old punk favourites…

And here’s the cunting song again – with yours truly on guitar; second from right.

Sorry about the embedding option being off, but you can still watch with a single click.

I’ll see what I can do to rectumfy matters…

UPDATE: Just click on the above video and it will now work.

Many thanks to Mark – guitarist extraordinaire.

Road tripping

We’ve had our grandson staying with us and I had to take him back home yesterday.

What follows is a random collection of thoughts, rants and observations prompted by the journey (with Radio 2 on) from Milton Keynes to the Forest of Dean and back again…

30mph in a 50 zone


The roads between Milton Keynes and the Forest of Dean are pretty poxy. Very little in the way of dual carriageway, so once you get stuck behind a vehicle then you can be there for quite a few miles. At this time of year it can even be a tractor but at least they’re going slow for a reason…

Yesterday’s award for most annoying cunt on the Queen’s Highway goes to the owner of the silver Fiesta who insisted on driving at 30 to 35mph for some 10 miles through what was mostly a 50mph limit. In fact, that road used to be 60mph but due to the mistaken assumption that speed kills – and not bad fucking driving – it was reclassified several years ago. What also got me was the braking to 20mph at every corner.

Having been done for speeding last year, I’m now generally pretty careful about keeping to the limit so it’s not that I wanted to cane it yesterday. Just being able to drive at the legal limit would have been fine, but the shithead in front seemed to have some sort of obsession with crawling along and holding up an ever-growing stream of traffic.

Cunt.

Lily Fucking Allen


She guested on ‘Steve Wright in the Afternoon’ – yes, we had Radio 2 on…

If there’s anyone who’s been so successful with such a minimal amount of talent then I’d like to know who the fuck it is so that I can demote Ms Allen from the first place she holds just above Coldplay in second place and U2 in third.

Why the fuck she sings with that irritating glottal stop when she doesn’t talk with it is a mystery to me. Maybe she just wants to sound ‘street’.

Who knows?

And, I suppose (in the grand scheme of things) who really gives a fuck anyway?

File under ‘Talentless Bint’.

A van pun


I passed a grass cutting services van just outside Buckingham.

It had the name ‘The Lawn Ranger’ on the side – which made me chuckle, but even better was the caption underneath – “Weapons of Grass Destruction’. I’m sure it’s been used before, but it was the first time I’d seen that one.

Liverpool Plod


It seems the police in Liverpool have hit upon a novel idea to cut down the crime stats there.

They go around the streets in the early hours of the morning seeing which front doors are unlocked. Then they alert the occupier to the fact – which would seem to this citizen to be fraught with all sorts of danger such as being twatted with a baseball bat.

So far, 50 houses out of 1500 checked were not secured.

To which I say, so fucking what?

That’s less than 4%, and if that 4% of people choose not to safeguard their property then it’s their own look out.

More importantly it’s yet one more example of the State interfering with people’s lives by taking away individual responsibility.

It seems common sense to me to lock your door at night and I think that the vast majority of people would agree. It’s just that some people just don’t care.

So, fuck ’em. Let them get burgled and then tell them to fuck off.

Sorted.

Junk food


I tend to get a bit crabby if I don’t eat at midday so when we stopped for petrol (@105.9p a litre) I had one of these, which I ate as I drove – thus striking a blow for personal freedom.

Frankly, although it did the job, it was pretty nasty. Limp pastry with a vaguely savoury filling of homogenous goo.

Not an experience I’d want to repeat, although the fucking thing repeated on me for the rest of the journey.

Edward Kennedy


As even a tapeworm could have predicted, every news bulletin carried the news of his death in an overly obsequious manner and also included that cuntbucket at Number 10’s our esteemed PM’s tribute:

Senator Edward Kennedy will be mourned not just in America but in every continent.

I’m guessing that certain households in Northern Ireland will have cracked out the bunting and be feeling a little buoyed up by the news, Gordon, so fuck you.

For a more balanced view, Ed West’s piece in the Telegraph is worth reading.

Political dynasties? Bad news in general. Even the Blairs are trying to get one going…

So, Cherie – fuck you too.

Dead badgers


Cars 2 – Badgers 0

Highway Code courses for badgers – NOW!

Should be good for another few hundred grand pissed away on some fucking quango or fake charity

Football hooliganism


First time West Ham and Millwall have played in quite a while…local derby…two ‘firms’ well-known for the odd ruck or two…

Why was anyone surprised?

It’s a stone-cold, 100 proof, 24 carat gold no-fucking-brainer.

Of course, it shouldn’t be tolerated, but a lot could have been done to minimise the trouble – mainly more police inside the ground. Or failing that, it should have been played behind closed doors. What is apparent is that the police deployment was all wrong and some of the fuckers in Liverpool who were trying to see if people’s front doors were unsecured at night should have been sent ‘dahn sarf’ to help out.

Meanwhile, I found this on a fan forum:

Life time bans for throwing a bottle seems over the top to me, thuggery is always been in football and always will be.
Football in this country is now a lot better than many others, italy, poland etc.
I would hate to have a ifetime ban for the club i love just for a moments madness, i do however think the stabbing is well over the top and should not be tolerated.
Football is a passionate game

Passionate?

Let’s see if you think it’s ‘passionate’ when some cunt lobs  a bottle at another cunt – a cunt like you, for example…

Get a motherfucking brain, you window-licking, mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging shithead.