Cameron, now what is his problem

Cameron is a bit like the racing driver who likes everything one sided, the best team, the most money, the most up to date, engine, tyres and equipment and a bit of sabotage of the opposition whenever possible. To put it frankly, the cards have got to be stacked in his favour before he even gets to sit at the table. He can not take surprises or be questioned on things which requires he think about them. He likes to be heard and not questioned, if he is then he'll only repeat himself or go on the defensive. He is a poor man's intellectual, not to mean he is poor but he would never inspire anyone in their right mind.  This would account for his constant, constipated angry look. In fact he should be called the constipated Prime Minister with his side kick smarmy school boy Georgie. These things always appear clear when he is at the dispatch box.

Time and time again Cameron will espouse the great deed of putting people into work, yet repeatedly he is unable to ask the question why it is the cost of living has dropped and why is it a large proportion of these jobs are low paid and part time hours. This leads him on the defensive to chastise the previous government and request an apology for their record.  Yet the national deficit is 1.2 trillion pounds and continues to increase. On the issue of asylum for Syrian refugees, Cameron diverts from the question and refuses answer why the UK will  not be taking in refugees.  Then yet again in facing a question from Miliband of why there is 13 million people in the UK in poverty and being in work Cameron again has no answer.  Yet again he goes on the defensive attacking Labour and their prediction there would be a higher unemployment rate. The reality of people being on welfare benefits and also being sanctioned more frequently on those benefits is not considered by either party.  It is clear though, if more people in poverty than there has been and there are more people in work and more people claiming some form of national assistance. The numbers don't add up. Labour has a question which has to be answered.

Yet as we know, he'd rather continue to hold the angry constipated PM look. As PM he leads an example of what good behaviour should be, and his aggression and avoidance of questions makes PMQs look as Berkow says like a Punch and Judy show.

Osborne's stupidity moves to higher levels of stupidity

It seems George Osborne never fails to go from one level of stupidity to another level of stupidity. He must live above a well of ignorance and stupidity and each time he goes home he is recharged again with these wonderful traits run through his personality like the place name on a stick of rock. (sugary cylindrical sweet,generally bought from sea side towns with the town's name printed through it). He stands on in his pulpit and tells Europe it needs to become more competitive and generate more wealth, stating it has been in steady decline for years, suggesting it was in decline even before the Tories came to power.  So although he and Cameron stood at the dispatch box and chastised Labour's government, they actually know and understand the recession of Europe is European and not British alone.  They've known this all along but like the idea of giving a kicking to the opposition. This is where Ed Miliband is unable to defend his party as he is unable to roll his sleeves up and play dirty, unlike Ed Balls who seems to have a real knack of being able to get under the skin of many Torys.

The Tories have excelled at job creation and on every chance will publicly state this, but equally the public response is to ask, how many of these jobs are on zero hour contracts, how many of these jobs are low paid, how many people are taking up multiple jobs as a means to support themselves.  In addition they target the benefits system and want to reduce the benefits bill. Yet, many of those same persons who are taking up these jobs which have been made have to request additional subsistence from the state to top up their income.  The retorting argument asks the Tories to examine the cost of living crisis the country is going through but they don't want to know about it.  It is a case like everything else, the Devil is in the details and Osborne knows it.  On a recent episode of Question Time even the Tory chairman Grant Chapps was seen to be unable to adequately answer these accusations.  He just doesn't have a clue, just like Osborne, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Osborne has only one cure for a recession, it is to cut back, and cut back even further.  His Tory illiterates are unable to consider it will only take an exceedingly long term view of the economy and the world which will bring the UK out of recession and make it competitive.  We're talking ten or twenty years.  He wants to cut back on welfare but in doing so he doesn't consider what is the best way to get people totally dependent on the welfare state off the welfare state. He doesn't consider these people may have become part institutionalised into being incapable or helpless.  He has got an notion how to encourage and help them gain pride in theirselves, he'd rather just cut back further and make an even lower social class of poverty the country has ever seen.  He can not see it is the who package which needs to be acted on. Education, help, support, responsibility and even employers who can see they to have to take a role in training people. A new born baby may not be able to speak so you wouldn't want it on a call centre, but at the same time you know in twenty years it will be a capable human being. Employers need help to recruit from the long term jobless and take on staff who may not be of much use this very moment, but after sufficient training and support they will be valuable employees. Nope, George sees only one way ahead, cut, cut, cut, let the rich stay rich and the poor get even poorer.

In ten or twenty years from  now George Osborne will be in the news again. I can see in him an individual who likes to be in the limelight, he loves the attention. There is a touch of the histrionic about his personality, as well as a touch of the stupid, a bloody big touch of the stupid.  I can see George being in the news for something bad he has done, or for losing his entire livelihood.  For this is the future for someone as stupid as he is.  Unless he can employ helpers on zero hour contracts who are a bit more knowledgeable.  Of course he will, he's setting up the economy right now for this kind of scenario.  But mark my words George is heading for a fall at some time, I'm sure it will be when he is out of government. The crystal ball has told me so.

Impossible people, the vamipires of mental health

It has taken me my full life to really understand there are people I just can not get on with.  The saddest thing is some of these people are my closest relatives.  No matter how hard I try to talk reason with them it is as though I am on a different planet. They will not listen, and even if I begin by listening to them, to do my best with all the skills I've picked up, such as empathy, unconditional positive regard and active listening. They will not return the courtesy.  They are stuck in the same repeated behaviours and discussions time and again. No matter how I approach them the results are the same.  I if I give an inch they take a yard.  They always want to talk about themselves about their problems, about how things are so bad for them, they don't give a shit about pulling anyone else down into their insular quagmire of depression. Those of my family should be loving, compassionate and supportive, but everything is with a caveat. I resorted to not speaking to one person for about 12 months. Difficult seeing as I live with them, the self-centreness of them. I just can not handle it.  I want to communicate, to really chat but there is no avenue for words to be let in, the doors are closed. Realization and understanding in this situation are alien terms.

There are times I always question whether it is me, am I the one who has some mental illness because I can not communicate with them.  Yet I can communicate with many other people. Then the realisation breaks through it is not I who has the mental health issues it is them. One has been been hospitalised for mental health issues, another has been on long term anti-depressants and has varying degrees of agoraphobia, a third has been to counselling and recommended anti-depressants but refused them.  An in-law is an alcoholic and lives with the first depressed individual.  It's got the point I can recognise a mentally ill person faster than a cowboy can draw their gun in a duel. I too find I change my attitude and behaviour pattern when I am around my relatives, they have been given too much of my time and effort so now I don't want to even bother, I don't want to engage and this in itself could be another contributing factor.  However, I do my best not to converse to any great extent with them. Not engaging is a self preservation strategy and it doesn't waste heart ache and soul. I'd love them to change or to make an active effort to change their lives, but it seems to me there is no motivation to do so. They will carry on as they are, until the day they no longer breath.

These people do not just exist in families, they exist in every walk of life. The next worse place to encounter them is at work.  Here they sill remain impossible people but there is an unavailability about them. Some of them are able to climb the ladder of responsibility, they get into positions where it is inexplicable how they got there in the first place. It is inexplicable they are able to take the responsibility, and quite frankly they don't. I recall one woman many years ago at work who just talked a load of shit all the time. But staff had to listen to her because she was a middle manager. Eventually higher management got rid off her through a restructure and her next job was substantially reduced in grade and responsibility.  Another manager I remember with utter distaste was one who thought she was a lovey dovey actor type personality, however more than this she thought she knew best on everything. Those who did not share her opinion had no opinion worthy of listening to, she was said to have been responsible for giving her manger a mental break down. But the plain truth of the matter was, she was an invidious bully and  those around her had to suck up or they would become the next victims to her bullying practices.

I read an article about impossible people on the internet. Simply you are never going to change these people and at some point you have to let them go from your life, even if they are relatives. If all they do is pull you down and depress then there is no alternative.  One strategy mentioned is silence, another I guess is doing your dam best to make sure you see them as infrequently as possible. Or you can treat them like children.  Yet they are adults in every sense.  They have lived decades and haven't learnt or introspected on their actions, on how other may see them.  If they can't be bothered to listen to you why should you be bothered to listen to them. Let them get on with their life and be what they are going to be. If help is refused and the only help they really want is your own mental well being to be as warped as theirs. Then it's just not worth it, for I will guarantee depressed mentally ill family members will either not have a job or have a really crappy job and forever be moaning about it.  But they will not see they have any power to do anything about their own situation, preferring to attribute the locus of control outside of themselves.

The thing is, normal people can not actually deal with abnormal impossible people. Another expression I've read used for these persons is Emotional Vampires.  Which is so true. It becomes a difficult task keeping your own sanity around them. Stopping yourself from getting angry, or from getting into those vicious circle arguments which go nowhere and achieve nothing. They just will not learn or understand, and it takes your own realisation and conscious decision making process to stop your own behaviour from providing oxygen to their fires.  It also leads me to an inevitable conclusion, you can not expect emotional or psychological support from these people, you can not expect them see anything other than their own point of view. They will never break out of this and they will never change their ways or seek to improve their situation. Which means, you can only change  your ways or run for the hills. Up in those hills you may even find another person who knows where you are coming from. Stephen Covey in his book 7 Habits of Highly Effective people terms this as being Pro-active.  By this he means you have to change your own rose tinted spectacles through which the world is interpreted and how you act.  It's like consciously saying, this person may be the most obnoxious person in the world, but I'm not going to let anything they say or do have any meaning to myself.  Although insightful, it is very difficult to do, but it can be achieved.

South Africa and the signs

It has been sad that one of the after events to linger on in public consciousness is the fake sign language interpreter.  I really don't know who he thinks he his kidding but to me, he doesn't know how to sign at all. So it is pretty obvious he has more than 15 minutes of fame and he got paid a handsome wage for it as well. His excuse of having schizophrenia has not been verified by any medical professional, so it even compounds his lie further.  Further this suggests to me South Africa is has an element of corruption so deep in it, allowing a fake signer to interpret at an international world event which puts South Africa on the world stage is one of the worse things going.  A developing country should never of allowed this to happen in the first place. In my opinion the only thing this man should be signing is the receipt for his personal belongings after coming out of a cell.  If South African's take no action and fail to investigate this further it could suggest they are resigned to their own corruption and the world can not take them seriously. 

I ask could this be the return of a tribal state as well?  In watching an episode of the politics program called Question Time which was broadcast from Johannesburg it seemed evident a lot of black south African's felt angry at white South African's and contrary to Madella's view of reconciliation and forgiveness, these people came across as wanting not just their land back but blood.  It's clear the country is dissatisfied with Jacob Zuma and the ANC.  It is in a conflicting state of mind because it was the ANC Mandela was a member of, but as they say, things change. The danger is of an extreme right wing who now get a chance and foothold. If they do we'll see yet another African state at war with itself with mass murder and possibly genocide.

Who know's what the outcome is going to be over the next few years, but there is no doubt in my mind this is a country in the throws of political uncertainty.

Nick Clegg alone in the dark

In discussion with a colleague the name Clegg cropped up. Cleggy, Clegg, Clegg!  Yhere seemed to be general consensus.  Firstly, it was the wrong decision for Clegg to have joined the Tory party in a coalition. His reasons may have been because he wanted to be in power, but actually he already was in power, having the casting vote over both parties he could of reined in every single decision they both made. Instead he compromised on his party's own manifesto and knocked back the Liberal party by at least another 70 years. He had power and he was so blinded by siding to the right and making a single party.  The result is to now make him and the Liberals or Social Democrats or should we just say the third party look like a bunch of clowns following and elephant with the shits. For every day which goes past they get the biggest pile of dung dropped on them ever and can not avoid it no matter what they do. They are tied tightly to the backside of a beast called Toryville.  The second point we agreed on was how interesting it would be to see if Clegg could win his seat again, his original win was based on a promise to thousands of students particularly in his own constituency that fees would be banned. Right now if I was a student, I'd be planning to vote for any other party just to ensure Clegg lost his seat. Student unions and organizations are probably formulating strategies this very moment, between rounds of cheap beer and all night cramming sessions.

Unfortunately I can not see a clear winner for the next election either, Cameron is as fashionable as a fart in a lift and Miliband is standing at speakers corner with no crate to stand on and a bunch of blue coats throwing cabbages at him. The unions may have made the wrong choice in brother, of course this is nothing they would explicitly admit to, but I wouldn't mind betting covert conversations of how the hell do they get out of this fine mess are going on in the background.  I'm pretty sure Clegg will not be around at the next election which means if there is a third party it may not even be the Liberals, surprise, surprise it may just well be UKIP.  Who seem to be pandering to extremes of both Tory and Labour parties.  UKIP have bought out into the open all the scape goats we deny actually exist.  Blame on immigration, blame on the EU and blame the French.  Even though Nigel Farage says he likes them.

If I were to predict the next election it would be hung with two third parties, both Liberals and UKIP. Clegg well I'm sure he will go the same way as a Duck Tours bus needing a service, yep, to the bottom of the Thames.

Cameron throws rattle out of pram and America goes in

Bashir Al Asad is an man who will pay for his crimes to his own people, like Saddam it will happen. It will take time I don't think it will be in the next year. Something will happen his card of mortality is marked and the days are being struck off.

In a statement by US Secretary of State John Kerry, France is described as it's oldest ally. As though to give a back hand bitch slap to the UK. There was no reference to how the UK went into Iraq and it was France who held off and opposed action with Germany. Together these nations were obstinate not to join in. In the UK the public believes the war in Iraq was wrong and the UK followed America like a little loyal lapdog. Even with the mentally challenged President Bush. You'd of though Blair would of been sane enough not to follow Bush anywhere. Shame on you America, who would of thought you were a fair weather friend.

In the meantime Cameron stands and hears the news he has lost the crucial vote for the UK to be a participant in taking military action. His response is with the emotional intelligence of a child, when he admits the UK will not move and he has listened. He says it with the tonal quality of someone who will get you back. There is no dignity in his reply because he is a child and should not be a Prime Minister, he so wanted his name stamped on a war so he could be famous.and it wasn't going to happen. However he is now famous for something quiet different. The first Prime Minister in well over a hundred years to be defeated on a decision of war.  He blames Milliband, his arch rival who he has so petulantly bitch slapped in nearly every PMQs there has been and now it comes back on him.

So why might the American's not get why this vote happened and how it happened? We don't like to be running around like an American lapdog, the special relationship appears to have been too much of a one way thing from the UK's point of view.  The aftermath of both Iraq and Afghanistan has been prolonged and expensive, in terms of life and money. America did not have a get out plan and did not appear to respect the native populations of both these countries. There is a love for being gun totting, shooting, asking questions but only what rifle lubricant they should use to make their bullets go faster. They have also shown incredibly bad judgement, Bush for one, Vietnam another. We are in a recession and fed up with all wars. There is a continuing deficit and we are bankrupt. Lastly, this decision is not the be all and end all, things can change and it can be revised. Waiting for the rest of Europe to join in is a wise decision, it is then with consensus and legal.  It is also cheaper. Also dare I say it, there may be some possibility of political dialogue, talking with the Devil Asad.Although it sounds mad may not be, there may be some real motivation and purpose to do so.  Oh yes, and just to say it again, we're not a lapdog, so get over it.

Too much of a Royal Baby

My normal radio choice has been put in disarray for contrary to belief there is too much of a good thing.  It's a fault of the media going crazy over the birth of a baby, a royal baby, too royalty. Personally I don't give a damn about royalty so why should I have to endure vast amounts of news time on this non event.  It certainly isn't because the entire British public want to hear about a royal baby. For the statistics of those who feel royalty has a place in the UK are worth looking at. In the Guardian 24th May 2012, of respondents to a survey on royalty, a total of 22 per cent said of English people said we'd be better off without them, whereas 69 per cent said we'd be worse off. These statistics also showed royal popularity had been at it's highest for the last 15 years. I've tried to pull up historical statistics on the royal popularity contest, but it is difficult. There are just too many web sites.  However, 2012 was special, it was a jubilee year so the whole nation was under an obligation to be part of it. On jubilee day, I refused to watch the news or any TV, again that was another bad news day.

I find the figure of just 22 per cent holding an anti royalty feeling as overwhelmingly low.  Also these surveys can be inconclusive.  For example why did the 69 per cent think the UK would be better keeping the royal family?  The biggest factor is because they feel it is worth world press coverage and advertising.  It makes the rest of the world come to the UK with the misguided perception of kings and queens being wonderful traditional things.  There's a romantic ethereal quality to them.  They don't consider their inbreeding, and historically tyrannical behaviour towards their own subjects. However, it wasn't long ago when there was a national crisis with the public and with the royal family. Had it been done at the time of Princess Diana's death in 1997, popularity dropped like a stone. The queen knows this herself and the public got to a precipice of resentment turning to loathing and complete contempt.  There was suggestions of Dianna about to announce her engagement and marriage to Dodi Fayed. Nobody knows for sure, but such an act would in itself of caused a lot of issues. He being of Islamic faith some conspiracy theorists suggest had a part to play. To have a Muslim vein to the royal family could of been just stretching the political correctness vein just a little far.

See!  Already I know too much about the British royal family than I want.  This anally retentive information has been forced on me through the media. I'd rather there were news programs about economic theory, or exposes of the real cost of politics in the UK. Royalty has no place in my life and were I able to expunge it from my memory by taking a royal memory erasing pill I would. They have no real function, all they do is sap money away from tax payers and live the golden life style. I am not a subject of them, I owe them nothing, they have done nothing for me other than peer out from the face of coins and notes. In short if I never hear, see or read another article about the royal family it will be too soon in my life.