Posted by PDF

Shameless hucksterism (yours)

I haven’t updated the link list for about a year, partly because I’m lazy, and partly because all blogs are a pointless and shit waste of time. However, as a masochist, I reckon it’s time for some additions – and if that means spending up to several minutes wading through pointless, turgid screeds written by blethering self-important idiots, so be it.

So – should your blog be on it? Leave a comment if you think you’re hard enough.

Would that it were so…

Top quality right-wing paranoia here:

it’s not just Google’s media and financial muscle that benefits the left. Liberals run the leading blog search engine — Technorati. They run the leading blog software manufacturer — Six Apart. They invented two of the most important blogging technologies — Podcasting and RSS. The list goes on and on.

In other words, because people with creative skills tend to lean leftwards, we’ve developed the chance to deny the righties a platform. The thing he’s missed, of course, is that we don’t want to be like him: we don’t want to deny the people we think are idiots a platform. We’re happy to laugh at their idiotic stylings instead…

Chances of these murdering bastards being brought to justice?

Zero, obviously. If any Canadians are reading, it’d be really super if you could burn down the White House again…

Why has the occupation of Iraq been so successful?

Because the terrorists fear freedom as much as they do our firepower, of course! New Get Your War On – do it.

Fackin’ cant

From a bizarre parallel universe: 

Apparently, Peter Stringfellow is heterosexual. And like many heterosexual men, he likes teen girls. We should pray for him that he gets a handle on this problem and refrains from harming any more kids.

Meanwhile, we need to wake up. The fact that this is typical behavior for heterosexuals doesn’t stop us from continuing to elevate such folks to positions where they gain access to our kids.

Or something.

Katie Davis is evil, but the system is worse

The headline is fairly trivially true based on this story. Falsely accusing someone of rape is pretty much as bad as raping someone, especially since it makes accusations brought by real victims less likely to be believed.

However, the most outrageous thing about the whole case is that the man accused spent 10 weeks on remand in prison as a ‘child-rapist’ (during which time, enlightened and community-minded citizens smashed up his house) based on nothing more than Ms Davis’s word: there was no other evidence whatsoever to bring his story into doubt.

This is simply wrong – nobody should be consigned to jail, whether following conviction or while awaiting trial, on the uncorroborated word of another person. And if you disagree (or indeed, as some suggest, think the law should be made even more wrong in this context) because you think applying a proper ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ test would let too many real rapists get away with it, you’re just as bad as the people who support internment-without-trial for alleged terrorists.

(minor digression: based on this photo, I’m struggling to see why anyone would consent to sexual activity with Ms Davis in the first place…)

Time for the white community to denounce the Anglofascists in its midst

I missed the story of the BNP members caught with a small arsenal of explosives. So did you, probably, because – unlike when Muslims are caught without any explosives but with a copy of the Anarchist’s Cookbook – cunts like John Reid didn’t turn it into a “you should all be very scared. Fear the foreigners. Fear them!” PR blitz.

QWGHLM has more, including a link round-up that I can’t quite be bothered to steal. Which links to a surprisingly sensible Harry’s Place article, which has a traditionally insane comments thread:

But these fellows were associated with the BNP – not for the first time the the BNP is most definitely left wing.

Downthread, someone wonders how a “left-wing” site can be anti-racist and pro-civil-liberties. While this person is clearly an ignorant tool, I fear New Labour might have done irrevocable damage to the public conception of left and right…

Most distressing

I hoped I’d never have cause to say this, but Graham Norton is right and his critics are idiots. Ecstacy is undeniably a whole load of fun, and pretending otherwise does nobody any favours.

Devillish silly plan

The Devil does good ranting, but really does know fuck all about economics or people.

He smacks down an article pointing out that introducing flat tax would do nobody any real good, through the convincing counter-argument that under UKIP, flat tax would cut everyone’s tax bills, and we can all live in a magical fairy castle in the sky with no smelly foreigners.

Of course, what UKIP actually plan to do is massively cut taxes (hence why everyone would pay less tax under their scheme) without a corresponding hit in public services, paid for by a) reducing public sector inefficiency, from which nobody has actually ever managed to make significant savings b) pulling out of the EU, which costs us fuck all anyway [*] and c) magical new money that tax cuts will generate by massively stimulating economic growth, which they never have [**].

On the people side, presumably because he’s a self-employed IT contractor, he assumes people want to be self-employed and want to fill in tax returns. They do not. Generally, they don’t give a shit about taxes, beyond the occasional pub moan – just like they don’t give a shit about the EU apart from enjoying the convenience of the Euro when they go abroad and tutting when their tabloid of choice makes up a new lie about Eurocrats Gone Wild.

Fortunately, because UKIP are a mad bunch of cranks who care passionately about tax systems and bent bananas and other tedious things, they stand no chance of being let anywhere near anything vaguely resembling power any time soon, or indeed ever.

[*] assuming EU membership brings us no benefits, which is a stupid assumption, it costs us a couple of billion a year in transfer payments out of £500 billion government spending. The only studies that claim the EU carries greater costs are hopelessly rigged; they need to pretend that all business regulation carries no benefits (possibly true) and only or primarily happens because of the EU (certainly untrue) to get beyond a £1-2 billion figure. UKIP’s scheme would require the government to save £34 billion.

[**] when you have marginal tax rates at 1970s levels, it can be a different story. However, the recent US example, where the tax cuts have only had a positive effect on the economy because they’ve been combined with crazily unstable spiralling in government borrowing – is typical of their impact in medium-tax economies. Especially when, as in UKIP’s plan, the majority of benefit goes to the rich, who don’t spend as high a proportion of new income as the poor.