On 15 April, Britain had her first TV live election debate. This was billed as a must not miss - TV audience were expected to be in their millions. David Cameron was expected to come out on top - after all he had worked on TV before turning to politics.
The first question was on IMMIGRATION - a word the British always invoke when they perceive their economy/country to be in crisis - the 'other' have to be blamed for the mess that their country is in - in this case, RECESSION. I was puzzled as to why the TELEVISION station - ITV chose immigration as the first question of the evening. Like the rest of the UK media, ITV seemed to be joining the bandwagon in favouring Mr David Cameron (I hope that they - ITV will forgive me if my assumption is wrong). Immigration has been Cameron's poker hand since he was elected the leader of the Conservative Party. It could also be his nemesis. I was expecting the economy to be the first question though - considering how the media had attacked The Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown prior to the debate on his handling of the economy and the recession that befell us. Although this crisis was GLOBAL, living in the UK, one would think that Britain was still an empire. It took Cameron almost a year to acknowledge that the recession was global. Nonetheless, all the political parties, I assume were prepared and knew that immigration was one of a number of topics on most white voters minds. Britain, I am told remains at least 90% white - but you wont believe this living in the country.
Cameron was the first to answer the question on immigration put to him by a member of the studio audience (most sat there like gnomes), I was and still is appalled by Cameron's racial politics. He had, since he was elected the Conservative leader, to be quietly planting in the public's mind his fear of the 'other'. He did not disappoint in his answer. He started by reminding us that he met a "black man" who came here when he was "six" and that even this man was against the influx of people into a 'FULL' Britain.
What exactly does Cameron mean? For anyone who had watched the TV documentary "posh at the top" a few years ago, this documentary depicted David Cameron as extremely right wing and this position had blighted (shortly anyway) his political ambitions. To address this set back, he quietly began to reposition his political views until he got himself elected as the leader of the Conservative Party-coining the nonsense we know today as "compassionate conservatism". Once more, a thorough analysis of Mr Cameron's comment on Thursday 15 April 2010 revealed his real politics - one of fear and hate. Mr Cameron seemed to be saying that although he does not like non whites into the country, he is tolerant of those who are already hear and settled BUT have now come to accept his view that Britain is full! But Mr Cameron is against the brain drain that many third world countries have witnessed - so he is willing to allow those who possess qualifications that are so desperately needed by the Britain.
This black man if he ever existed, reminded me of an article in New York Times (see earlier blog on the Tea Party) about blacks and Hispanics seen in the Tea Party. Many black people in the UK are indifferent to people who arrive into the country in search of better life. The UK owes most countries. This is a country built on the backs of the great great grandparents of those they are trying to keep away today. And the brain drain will not help to stem these people from trying to come over to the UK.
The mass immigration witnessed over the past 13 years are as a result of EU expansion, the war in Bosnia and the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars which the Tory party supported!!! Mr Cameron will do best to remind the public of the number people who emigrate. Mr Brown of the Labour Party and Mr Clegg of the Liberal Party were quite right to avoid Mr Cameron's political mischief.
Every time I think that it is time that I returned to voting the Conservative party, Mr Cameron continually reminds me that his party is not quite the Party of Michael Heseltine and Kenneth Clarke (intelligent, honest and blunt)that I once admired. At least with Mrs T, we knew what we were dealing with. With David Cameron, it like playing on a quick sand.
Saturday, 17 April 2010
From New York Times - THE TEA PARTY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 17, 2010
Op-Ed Columnist
A Mighty Pale Tea
By CHARLES M. BLOW
GRAND PRAIRIE, Tex.
On Thursday, I came here outside Dallas for a Tea Party rally.
At first I thought, “Wow! This is much more diverse than the rallies I’ve seen on television.”
Then I realized that I was looking at stadium workers. I should have figured as much when I approached the gate. The greeter had asked, “Are you working tonight?”
I sat in the front row. But when the emcee asked, “Do we have any infiltrators?” and I almost raised my hand, I realized that sitting there might not be such a good idea.
I had specifically come to this rally because it was supposed to be especially diverse. And, on the stage at least, it was. The speakers included a black doctor who bashed Democrats for crying racism, a Hispanic immigrant who said that she had never received a single government entitlement and a Vietnamese immigrant who said that the Tea Party leader was God. It felt like a bizarre spoof of a 1980s Benetton ad.
The juxtaposition was striking: an abundance of diversity on the stage and a dearth of it in the crowd, with the exception of a few minorities like the young black man who carried a sign that read “Quit calling me a racist.”
They saved the best for last, however: Alfonzo “Zo” Rachel. According to his Web site, Zo, who is black and performs skits as “Zo-bama,” allowed drugs to cost him “his graduation.” Before ripping into the president for unconstitutional behavior, he cautioned, “I don’t have the education that our president has, so if I misinterpret some things in the founding documents I kind of have an excuse.” That was the understatement of the evening.
I found the imagery surreal and a bit sad: the minorities trying desperately to prove that they were “one of the good ones”; the organizers trying desperately to resolve any racial guilt among the crowd. The message was clear: How could we be intolerant if these multicolored faces feel the same way we do?
It was a farce. This Tea Party wanted to project a mainstream image of a group that is anything but. A New York Times/CBS News poll released on Wednesday found that only 1 percent of Tea Party supporters are black and only 1 percent are Hispanic. It’s almost all white.
And even when compared to other whites, their views are extreme and marginal. For instance, white Tea Party supporters are twice as likely as white independents and eight times as likely as white Democrats to believe that Barack Obama was born in another country.
Furthermore, they were more than eight times as likely as white independents and six times as likely as white Democrats to think that the Obama administration favors blacks over whites.
Thursday night I saw a political minstrel show devised for the entertainment of those on the rim of obliviousness and for those engaged in the subterfuge of intolerance. I was not amused.
I invite you to visit my blog, By the Numbers. Please also join me on Facebook, and follow me on Twitter, or e-mail me at chblow@nytimes.com.
Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Terms of Service Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map
April 17, 2010
Op-Ed Columnist
A Mighty Pale Tea
By CHARLES M. BLOW
GRAND PRAIRIE, Tex.
On Thursday, I came here outside Dallas for a Tea Party rally.
At first I thought, “Wow! This is much more diverse than the rallies I’ve seen on television.”
Then I realized that I was looking at stadium workers. I should have figured as much when I approached the gate. The greeter had asked, “Are you working tonight?”
I sat in the front row. But when the emcee asked, “Do we have any infiltrators?” and I almost raised my hand, I realized that sitting there might not be such a good idea.
I had specifically come to this rally because it was supposed to be especially diverse. And, on the stage at least, it was. The speakers included a black doctor who bashed Democrats for crying racism, a Hispanic immigrant who said that she had never received a single government entitlement and a Vietnamese immigrant who said that the Tea Party leader was God. It felt like a bizarre spoof of a 1980s Benetton ad.
The juxtaposition was striking: an abundance of diversity on the stage and a dearth of it in the crowd, with the exception of a few minorities like the young black man who carried a sign that read “Quit calling me a racist.”
They saved the best for last, however: Alfonzo “Zo” Rachel. According to his Web site, Zo, who is black and performs skits as “Zo-bama,” allowed drugs to cost him “his graduation.” Before ripping into the president for unconstitutional behavior, he cautioned, “I don’t have the education that our president has, so if I misinterpret some things in the founding documents I kind of have an excuse.” That was the understatement of the evening.
I found the imagery surreal and a bit sad: the minorities trying desperately to prove that they were “one of the good ones”; the organizers trying desperately to resolve any racial guilt among the crowd. The message was clear: How could we be intolerant if these multicolored faces feel the same way we do?
It was a farce. This Tea Party wanted to project a mainstream image of a group that is anything but. A New York Times/CBS News poll released on Wednesday found that only 1 percent of Tea Party supporters are black and only 1 percent are Hispanic. It’s almost all white.
And even when compared to other whites, their views are extreme and marginal. For instance, white Tea Party supporters are twice as likely as white independents and eight times as likely as white Democrats to believe that Barack Obama was born in another country.
Furthermore, they were more than eight times as likely as white independents and six times as likely as white Democrats to think that the Obama administration favors blacks over whites.
Thursday night I saw a political minstrel show devised for the entertainment of those on the rim of obliviousness and for those engaged in the subterfuge of intolerance. I was not amused.
I invite you to visit my blog, By the Numbers. Please also join me on Facebook, and follow me on Twitter, or e-mail me at chblow@nytimes.com.
Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Terms of Service Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map
Thursday, 18 March 2010
The Return of the CON[servative] Party ?
As the election in the UK looms, I continually wonder about the media's (some section)obsession with David Cameron - Leader of the Conservative Party. From the moment he was elected, he has shifted more times than quick sand. On his first Christmas message to the population, he called for an end to name calling within politics. This truce was short lived. Immediately after the holiday break, he and (on occasions) Mr Cable of the Liberal Party have personalised their attacks on the Prime Minister, Mr Gordon Brown. I shall not give a full dossier of these verbal insults both in the House of Commons and in the media. But for those who care to to find out, they should thrall through some of the pages of press.
On the recent downturn in world economy, Mr Cameron saw the management of such high profile public affairs as a JOKE. He refused to acknowledge that recent recession was worldwide; rather he chose to tap into the general public's anxiety about their livelihood for personal political gain - insisting that this was a 'solely' British problem even when the countries like GERMANY, JAPAN, USA, CHINA, RUSSIA, S.AFRICA etc were experiencing similar difficulties. He only let slip during the question time that he world recession was easing prompting the Prime Minister to respond sarcastically.
These shenanigans were taking place with UK's 'media' support when the rest of the world were lauding the Prime Minister for his resolute leadership in trying to seek a solution to to the problem facing the world. As a result of these politically motivated insults, we have seen some mediocre celebrity like Jeremy Clarkson contribute to these idiocy.
Even the upturn in the economy was not necessarily to his (Mr David Cameron) liking as it might derail his quest to become the Prime Minister. I fear and dread if this were to become a reality. To enable a man who is so far removed from the reality of everyday life to run this great country will be like allowing a fox to guard a chicken pen.
His recent antic with Sir Trevor MacDonald on ITV was plainly laughable. It was again an attempt to match or rather compete with the Prime Minister's emotional and impressive out take on himself and family, the Labour Party, the country and the recession. In fact with the Prime Minister, we saw a genuine man battling with the country's difficulties. David Cameron's interview had no content - it was so disingenious that I had to just laugh out loud when the programme ended.
I hope that those who wasted their evening time in watching it can once more see through this man. It took me back to the programme "POSH AT THE TOP" shown a few years ago on one of the terrestial tv channels.
On the recent downturn in world economy, Mr Cameron saw the management of such high profile public affairs as a JOKE. He refused to acknowledge that recent recession was worldwide; rather he chose to tap into the general public's anxiety about their livelihood for personal political gain - insisting that this was a 'solely' British problem even when the countries like GERMANY, JAPAN, USA, CHINA, RUSSIA, S.AFRICA etc were experiencing similar difficulties. He only let slip during the question time that he world recession was easing prompting the Prime Minister to respond sarcastically.
These shenanigans were taking place with UK's 'media' support when the rest of the world were lauding the Prime Minister for his resolute leadership in trying to seek a solution to to the problem facing the world. As a result of these politically motivated insults, we have seen some mediocre celebrity like Jeremy Clarkson contribute to these idiocy.
Even the upturn in the economy was not necessarily to his (Mr David Cameron) liking as it might derail his quest to become the Prime Minister. I fear and dread if this were to become a reality. To enable a man who is so far removed from the reality of everyday life to run this great country will be like allowing a fox to guard a chicken pen.
His recent antic with Sir Trevor MacDonald on ITV was plainly laughable. It was again an attempt to match or rather compete with the Prime Minister's emotional and impressive out take on himself and family, the Labour Party, the country and the recession. In fact with the Prime Minister, we saw a genuine man battling with the country's difficulties. David Cameron's interview had no content - it was so disingenious that I had to just laugh out loud when the programme ended.
I hope that those who wasted their evening time in watching it can once more see through this man. It took me back to the programme "POSH AT THE TOP" shown a few years ago on one of the terrestial tv channels.
Access To Health Care
The article below (from New York Times)once more highlights the importance of Obama's health care plans to millions of Americans, albeit a watered down version of what was initially proposed. It is therefore bewildering that many citizens including those who stand to gain most oppose it - mostly Republican's followers. It is also interesting to read that Sarah Palin's parents used to take them to Canada for health check, so why is she so opposed to Obama's proposed reform? I wonder if race has something to do with it.
Whatever the excuse, the spending on a universal health care access will never match the needless war in Iraq. It is time that we allow common sense to prevail instead of politicking with people's lives. PLEASE !!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/opinion/18kristof.html
Whatever the excuse, the spending on a universal health care access will never match the needless war in Iraq. It is time that we allow common sense to prevail instead of politicking with people's lives. PLEASE !!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/opinion/18kristof.html
Friday, 12 March 2010
Monday, 8 February 2010
BBC on 20p Coins
Bigger valuation for faulty coins
Undated coins have not entered circulation for more than 300 years
A batch of 20p coins accidentally issued with no date on them could be worth £50 each, say coin dealers.
Tens of thousands of the coins have been produced in error by the Royal Mint at Llantrisant, near Cardiff.
They are said to be the first undated British coins to enter circulation for more than 300 years.
The Royal Mint said the issue had been resolved but wanted to reassure the public that the faulty 20p coins were still legal tender.
But with dealers saying the coins could be worth up to £50 each, anyone finding an undated 20p may be reluctant to put it towards a loaf of bread.
The date on the new 20p was moved from the 'tails' to the 'heads' side when the country's coins were redesigned last year.
The coins without a date were created by accidentally pairing up the new 'tails' side with the old 'heads' - meaning no date appeared at all.
Legal tender
A batch of somewhere between 50,000 and 200,000 of the coins are thought to have entered circulation.
A Royal Mint spokesperson said: "The Royal Mint can confirm that a small number of new design 20 pence coins have been incorrectly struck using the obverse from the previous design, resulting in these coins having no date.
"The issue has now been resolved and the Royal Mint would like to reassure members of the public that these coins are legal tender."
COIN FACTFILE
The 20p piece was first struck in 1982
The Tudor Rose design was used continuously on the 20p until 2008
There have been two other coins with errors struck in the decimal era since 1971, but they did not enter circulation.
The first British coin issued with a date in numerals was the English 1551 silver crown of King Edward VI
From 1662 onwards all coins have carried the date of issue
In the mid-19th century, Queen Victoria issued a series of silver florins that were dated in Roman numerals
Source: The London Mint Office
Nick Hart, of specialist coin dealers The London Mint Office, said: "Last year the Royal Mint changed all the designs of our circulating coinage, which is a tradition every 40 years or so.
"And when they did this they struck a new design on one side of the coin and the old design on the reverse of the coin and that's led to one of the sides being undated - which makes them incredibly valuable."
He added: "We believe this extremely rare error will certainly get the public looking at the coins in their pockets again and noticing the excellent new designs launched by the Royal Mint last year on our coinage."
Matthew Dent, 26, from Bangor, Gwynedd, won a competition to design the first new British coin series for 40 years.
The London Mint Office said there had been two other coins with errors produced in the decimal era, but they did not enter circulation.
In 1983 some 2p coins were struck with a die that used the old terminology "NEW PENCE" instead of "TWO PENCE".
And in 1994 a gold £2 commemorative coin was issued with the wrong legend on the Queen's portrait side.
Undated coins have not entered circulation for more than 300 years
A batch of 20p coins accidentally issued with no date on them could be worth £50 each, say coin dealers.
Tens of thousands of the coins have been produced in error by the Royal Mint at Llantrisant, near Cardiff.
They are said to be the first undated British coins to enter circulation for more than 300 years.
The Royal Mint said the issue had been resolved but wanted to reassure the public that the faulty 20p coins were still legal tender.
But with dealers saying the coins could be worth up to £50 each, anyone finding an undated 20p may be reluctant to put it towards a loaf of bread.
The date on the new 20p was moved from the 'tails' to the 'heads' side when the country's coins were redesigned last year.
The coins without a date were created by accidentally pairing up the new 'tails' side with the old 'heads' - meaning no date appeared at all.
Legal tender
A batch of somewhere between 50,000 and 200,000 of the coins are thought to have entered circulation.
A Royal Mint spokesperson said: "The Royal Mint can confirm that a small number of new design 20 pence coins have been incorrectly struck using the obverse from the previous design, resulting in these coins having no date.
"The issue has now been resolved and the Royal Mint would like to reassure members of the public that these coins are legal tender."
COIN FACTFILE
The 20p piece was first struck in 1982
The Tudor Rose design was used continuously on the 20p until 2008
There have been two other coins with errors struck in the decimal era since 1971, but they did not enter circulation.
The first British coin issued with a date in numerals was the English 1551 silver crown of King Edward VI
From 1662 onwards all coins have carried the date of issue
In the mid-19th century, Queen Victoria issued a series of silver florins that were dated in Roman numerals
Source: The London Mint Office
Nick Hart, of specialist coin dealers The London Mint Office, said: "Last year the Royal Mint changed all the designs of our circulating coinage, which is a tradition every 40 years or so.
"And when they did this they struck a new design on one side of the coin and the old design on the reverse of the coin and that's led to one of the sides being undated - which makes them incredibly valuable."
He added: "We believe this extremely rare error will certainly get the public looking at the coins in their pockets again and noticing the excellent new designs launched by the Royal Mint last year on our coinage."
Matthew Dent, 26, from Bangor, Gwynedd, won a competition to design the first new British coin series for 40 years.
The London Mint Office said there had been two other coins with errors produced in the decimal era, but they did not enter circulation.
In 1983 some 2p coins were struck with a die that used the old terminology "NEW PENCE" instead of "TWO PENCE".
And in 1994 a gold £2 commemorative coin was issued with the wrong legend on the Queen's portrait side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)