Sharpys' "speech".........

A friend of mine was accused of not being "politically correct".

He's decent enough chap. Of the "Northern working bloke" sort of mould (you know the type, decent sort of chap, flat cap, walking the whippet to the pub etc).

I don't quite recall where he responded to the accusation (some sort of meeting?), but he read it out at another meet last month.

I, in turn, purloined his printed copy/notes and said I'd publish it on the net.

And yes, it did make me laugh (well I think so, I was pretty drunk at the time)......

Reply to Accusations.

Last week there was an email exchange between X XXXXX members, during which, I was accused of:

Homophobia

Sexism

Racism

I will reply to these unfounded accusations separately.


Homophobia.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, homophobia is defined as: "An extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people".

I have no issue what so ever with gay's, queer's, faggot's, arse bandits, back door burglars, back door engineers, pansy's, poo pushers, Rear Admirals, rectal pioneers or knob jockey's.

Nor do I have any issue with any of the activities that the afore mentioned get up to that include: Licking the chocolate starfish, playing with the rusty bullet hole, mutual man milking, going down the dirt road, bun splitting, uphill gardening and going down the Bournville Boulevard.

Sexism.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, sexism is defined as: "Predjudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex".

I am of the belief that women SHOULD be allowed to vote Labour and be able to go into working men's clubs, to work as bar staff.

You will never hear me use crude humour such as:

How many men does it take to open a beer? None, it should be open when she brings it to you!

Or

What do you do when your woman comes out of the kitchen to whine at you ? Make her chain shorter!

This unfounded accusation came from someone who deliberately married a woman with small feet so that she could spend longer periods at the sink without feeling uncomfortable.

I do not subscribe to this "bro's before hoe's" attitude.

Racism.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is defined as: "Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior".

It is my belief that all races have something positive to offer and are better than the English in many respects. For example, Chinks, Frogs, Indians and Wop's are all great at cooking. Paki's make great taxi drivers and Poles will do anything for a couple of quid! In fact, they all do things that serve the English quite well!

This unfounded accusation was made by someone who has a facebook page dedicated to hating Argentinians, their country and their culture but who still manages to drink Malbec!

Summary.

I am surprised that the list of accusations made against me did not include weightism. Although not in the Oxford English Dictionary, weightism is a real word that is defined as: "Bias or discrimination against people who are overweight".

Living in the shadows cast by the eclipse of the bloaters has it's advantages. No sun burn, sun glasses never needed, night shift workers being able to sleep during the day, weighbridge callibration and ballast for super tankers are just a few. Never will you hear me complain about the extra miles needed to walk in order to circumnavigate a bloater.

I rest my case!

The above is a verbatim quotation, in the words of the most excellent Sharpy of West Yorkshire......... (I know, cos I've still got his notes, just in case the spawny twat drops enough lottery to set "M'learned friends" on me)

Hey ho ! The nazis are at it again.......

"They" make a rule, then the tory voting business heads work out a scam to cream off money, then they get too greedy and this comes to light, then the politicians panic and change that rule to pander to the voter, the industry that was "quids in" squeals like a pig and their supporters start rolling out criticism of that change.

We had the government's "budget" speech yesterday. A budget from a chancellor of the exchequer, who appears to have his eyes on further power (he doesn't need more money, he's already a multi-millionaire), so he's changed the rule that said that pension savings had to be used to buy an annuity. So now, new pensioners will be able to decide what they do with their pension money.

The pension management companies squealed at the loss of some of their share value and one of the "naysayers" stated that we'll all draw down all the pension money and fritter it away.......

But of course, that's not scaremongering is it.....

A bad week, and IMO, a loss to the country........

Fuck me, with the rough end of a pineapple ! Two posts in one day............ Anyway. It's been a bad week for UK politics. We've lost to of the lefts prominent and influential characters. Earlier in the week, it was Bob Crow. One of the countrys best, modern day, union leaders IMO (and no, I'm not an "RMT" member). Then followed by Tony Benn. A well known British "lefty" if there ever was one...... In the case of Bob Crow, his death was premature, at 52 years of age, only 4 years older than me (currently). With Tony Benn, not entirely unexpected as he'd been "ill" for some time and was 88 years old..... I consider myself an "old style socialist". Not one of the newer centrist types, who seem to want to lick the arse of business. I believe that there'll be winners and losers, but that as long as what ever is to be won and lost over, is done in the fairest, most democratic way possible, then that's fine by me. Whichever side I'm on, I have to accept it. The centre and the right, politically speaking, are, seemingly, more fashionable today. I might think that the only good "tory" is a dead one, but I'll happily fight for the right of people to be tories, however much I disagree with them...... So, ok, the "left" is unfashionable at the moment. The loss of characters like Tony Benn and Bob Crow, will throw the UK political scene out of balance. There may indeed be people in the background to replace them, but I don't know who they might be, as no-one's names come to mind at the moment........ Which is a shame, as generally speaking, the British political scene seems to be peoples with a lot of bland, slimey, lickspittle, grovelling creeps at the moment. Who want voters to think good of them, to think themselves worthy of receiving our votes. Well let me say this..... You're doing a shit job of changing anything for the better, you're tinkering round the edges of things that end up with us getting more of the same old shit. How about suggesting that changing a few of the fundamental things that give us this pile of shit that we call "Great Britain" ? Give us a formal, written, constitution. Give us a formal, written, bill of rights. Ban "public" (which means private, fee paying, to any American person who might read this) school. If "Public" school is so much better than state schools, then bring the state schools to the better standard. Don't allow the rich to buy their kids a better education at the expense of the rest of us, and as that's not all they get with their public schooling - they get access to "the old boys network" i.e. where people who went to the same (usually, exclusive, fee paying, private) school, or maybe the same equally exclusive University (there's a couple like that, who come to mind), and end up only getting their friends into jobs or appointments, often with state/government positions, etc etc etc..... Make it that if there's some, however distant/tenuous "conflict of interest", that the person who might be in a position of influence, has, by law, to stand back and allow others to make the selection/appointment/decision. Little things like that, might, give us a better country. Equally, it would reduce any influence of the xenophobic, rascist, "little Englander", fools who people the political right. Things like election to government by proportional representation, would be the most fair and democratic. After all, most people wouldn't recognise their member of Parliament if he/she was staring at them in the street! They look for the political affiliation on the ballot paper. Sure, such rules and regs, would give us a few extremist outsiders, but any influence they might have or bring in, would be watered down as to be ineffective. We'd have few, if any, "landslide" victories, by one part of the other, so it would have to be smaller, incremental changes in society. Less of making the rich richer, and more fair to the rest of us. In any case, this is unlikely to happen, as both the tories (right/centre-right) and labour (centre and centre-left - certainly not left at the moment) don't want that too happen as they'd likely be the biggest losers - they wouldn't be, but they'd have to work much harder to have the influence they currently enjoy in their respective "sphere's"......... I for one, will happily remember the likes of Bob Crow and Tony Benn........

What is it with the Yanks ? (and others, for that matter)......

If this is yours, then you're likely an American. If you have a different flag, then you're probably not American, you're something else....... So to the American's who claim to be something else, if you were born in the United States of American, or you have moved there, taken the test and obtained citizenship, then you're fucking American. You're not British, Irish, Spanish or any other fucking "ish" for that matter (you may be in the lucky position of being able to hold "dual-citizenship" - lucky for you then eh!). You tell an Irishman that you're Irish, he'll likely ask where you were born. If you say somewhere in America, you'll get told that you're a Yank or at least not a "proper" Irishman. The same in Scotland, GB in general and many (most ?) other places. We don't mind you being American. I have cousins who enjoy that privilege (?), but that doesn't mean, irrespective of common DNA characteristics, that they're like me, a Brit/English. Equally, it doesn't matter what your own DNA characteristics point toward, and skin colour or other physical characteristics just point you toward where your DNA has travelled from. You're still the Nationality of your passport! Personally I don't care where you are from. I will offer you the same manners and respect, as I expect to receive in response. I don't care where you're from. Yes, equally if your cultural background and experiences differ from mine, I consider it a privilege to learn of yours. I might not understand them or even agree with them necessarily, but that's not for me to say. They're different from mine and should be respected as such. I'm not prefect. I'm of an age where some rascist comments etc were commonplace, so they are in my vocabulary. That's not to say that I wouldn't be disgusted with myself if I used such words today. I would be. The only likely difference is that I might have different skin colour and other ethnic/genetic regional identifiers from you, but we're born in the same way, our basic bodily functions are the same, we suffer in a similar way to illness/disease and when we die, we end up the same way....... So you, my friend, just be happy with what it says on your passport. If your cultural and ethnic background enable you to teach me something, then I'm grateful for that knowledge/learning. It makes the world an interesting place. Equally if something in you, causes you to discriminate against me in some way, expect me to fight you in some way too.....