Tag Archives: change

The Church of England and disestablishment: I will consider a couple of days, and then decide what to say.

David Davis

The Asse-Hat is going to go along with his socialist masters in government on this one, we can all now see.

I will decide what to think in a day or so. This is all blowing up correctly while everyone is out shopping in Woolworth’s, so that nobody will notice.

Perhaps the English cathedrals will be razed after that, and the land used for “affordable housing”. Just think what fun it would be for the builder-chaps in their jolly little plastic hats, to go at the windows with a wrecking-ball.

It’s all about “change”, you see.

Barack Obama: perhaps there will be time to buy tinned goods, firelighters, petrol-cans, tent-fabric, dressings and chicken-shit.

David Davis

Perhaps he didn’t mean all that “change” crap after all. I do hope not. Here’s what we said a long time ago.

It looks like “business as usual” on Capitol Hill, for a bit. At least, since having actually won, we shall not be leaving Iraq and Afghanistan with our tail between our legs quite this minute. Time to at least get the planes and vehciles out I guess, to sell them to some dictator or other (see “Mercs for Jerks”.)

Wonder what she will think of him in a few weeks’ time:-

Gordon Brown versus David Miliband (is he really called that? It’s asking for trouble.) Also … “CHANGE” …

I also want to use this bit to talk about the notion of “change”, as it is commonly peddled as a panacea, by politicians and “management” “consultants”. (These latter items are a tautology, and an intelligent space-alien from planet Tharg would gasp in incomprehension at the very concept.)

David Davis

Now, for libertarians, the spectator-sport of watching socialists (who are of course the ultimate enemy – all other classifications: one-nation-Tories, Militant Islamists, modern TV-production-companies, UKIP, the EU, and whatever else, is merely a form of lateral stamp-collecting) tear up each other’s dirty linen in public is a tremendous hoot. It makes up for all the tricoteurish cackling that conservatively-minded individuals of many liberal kinds got in 1990, when the “Tories” axed their ace of trumps and put in a droid instead.

Fraser Nelson at Coffee House thinks that the pub-fight has now extended and is about to spill out into the street.

David Rubberband has either expressly confronted the PM by implication, or has made it look like he has. There are two scenarios:-

(1) Brown will at the first opportunity demote him in a “reshuffle”. This will cost, even though David Rubberband may/will bounce back some months/years down the line. this will make ZanuLaborg look even worse than it does.

(2) There will be a leadership challenge, which Brown will probably lose. If so, then I don’t think people will stand for a second PM being shoehorned in without a General Election, which ZanuLaborg will probably lose. Not by 140 seats, but enough. People forget how hard it will be to overturn entrenched inertia in the many, many Rotten Boroughs in metropolitan districts.

Either way, it’s fun. I’ve also somewhat pre-contradicted my intention to lambast those of the political/enemy class, and “management” “consultants”, who constantly repeat that magic mantra-word “CHANGE”. Rubberband himself either said it or implied it in the last 48 hours.

What I mean by what the commentariat and the Media world call “political” change is the kind I define as being brought about by utopian vandalism. This is not the kind which markets benignly cause to occur naturally. I fear that Rubberband meant more if the kind which socialists invariably do, and always for the worse, to whatever wretched civilisation they get their infected teeth into, is almost invarariably bad, and almost all of which is unwanted and unasked for by ordinary individuals.

There would prbably be no voters for socialism, if socialists did not go about telling people that they could have other people’s stuff. Thus vast amounts of unautorised “change” would never havew taken place.