Sharpe's Opinion

It is Returning. It is Returning. It is Returning…

Yes, that’s right – it’s the return of Doctor Who Final Episode Bingo™!

The rules, as explained last time round:

The bingo card contains a number of predictions. If any row of 5, vertically, horizontally or diagonally, occur during the New Year’s Day episode of Doctor Who, you may shout “BINGO!!” at the TV screen. If you are playing the ‘adults-only’ drinking game version of Doctor Who Bingo, take a sip when any prediction comes true, but if there is a bingo you must down whatever it is that you have left in your glass.

Click on the card for the larger version.

As with last time, I didn’t look at any spoilers or rumour sites in constructing the card, so I genuinely have no idea whatsoever if any of the predictions are likely to occur or not occur (although I’m fairly certain many of them won’t). Many thanks to everyone who offered suggestions for squares – I’ve incorporated as many as I could!

Tim Minchin – White Wine In The Sun [iTunes Link]

There’s a campaign to get a Rage Against the Machine song to Christmas No. 1 as a protest against X Factor. All very funny and everything, but to my mind, much better would be to get a proper Christmas song up the charts. And this is a proper Christmas song. Beautiful, sentimental, and a secular anthem to boot¹ So save the pennies you had earmarked for Killing In The Name, and instead buy White Wine In The Sun by Tim Minchin, on iTunes or HMV or Tesco or anywhere else.

It appeared in the iTunes Store on Monday, and made it up to number 64 before slowly slipping backwards to where it now rests at 73. This is a shame.

So help get it into the top 40 for Christmas and go and buy it now. Tell your friends!

1. Surely any Christmas song which includes the line “I’d rather break bread with Dawkins than Desmond Tutu, To be honest” deserves your support! [↩]

Well I thought I was unshockable. Until this lunchtime, that is, when I came across this BBC Africa ‘Have Your Say Africa’ thread asking ‘Should homosexuals face execution?’¹.

I ask you. The cheek of it. Under the auspices of inviting people to comment on an Anti-Homosexuality Bill which will be debated by the Ugandan Parliament on Friday, Auntie has demonstrated its shocking left-wing bias and desperate need to pander to the Gay lobby.

First of all, what makes them think they can raise this issue in the first place? I mean, it’s not like Uganda is a proper country, or that we should care what laws their parliament decide to pass!

And then the BBC have used such a disgracefully loaded question, one clearly designed to galvanise opinion against the actions of the Ugandan government, whilst spreading the news of this legislation to an ever wider audience. The question is framed in terms of ‘executing homosexuals’, instead of providing a more wholesome image of the proposed legislation by wording it in terms of cultural conservation and preserving family values. This is clearly a desperate attempt to make the legislation sound as horrible as possible to bring out the liberals and get themselves some attention.

Don’t believe me? Just look at some typical responses this question has brought crawling out of the woodwork:

Isn’t it strange that the Ugandan parliament doesn’t suggest the death sentence for corruption? Political corruption in Ugandan causes far more misery than gay men. […] This is obscene, hypocritical, prejudiced nonsense. It is something from the Dark Ages.

Robert, UK

What a barbaric and ignorant proposition. If Africa wants help from the west then I see no reason why we should not attatch some cultural conditions to that aid.

A shocked gay man, uk

I feel like I have just stepped in to a demonic parallel universe? Should homosexuals be executed??? And people are actually debating it!

Tim Northyorks

I am a South African and I find the negative attitude of the Ugandan government and parliamentarians barbaric, uncaring and sickening. I have no problems with homosexuals at all. All I know is that people are born homosexuals and have no choice over the matter. It is no different from being born Black, white or brown, or male ,or female. Uganda is guilty of genocide and of violating homosexual people’s civil liberties.

Sizwe Motsoaledi, Giyani

While generally respecting black people as a race and a culture, I can only describe the Ugandan politicians who are supporting this bill as primitive, superstitious barbarians. I hope all the decent Ugandans do not allow their country to become synonymous with violent stupidity. Reject this bill

Rocket Scientist

What are the traditional family values of Uganda? Are they bigotry, hatred, oppression and state-sanctioned murder?

David, Europe

Just disgusting. From a state-funded broadcaster, too. Liberal propaganda of the highest order, paid for by the taxpayer.

When did Auntie lose her way so horribly? Bring back ‘Listen With Mother’, I say.

(Just for avoidance of doubt, yes, this is intended to be satirical… )

1. The question has been updated in the last few hours to ‘Should Uganda debate gay execution?’ But still. [↩]

This is (hopefully) the first in a series of posts mocking and analysing ‘Spinglish’, the native tongue of the modern politician (You may remember Spinglish from when it first appeared on this blog in August). When there’s enough, I’ll collate these posts into a full-fledged Spinglish reference site. Feel free to create your own Spinglish definitions and translations and email them to me (or post them to your own blog, if you have one)! Many thanks to Charlotte Gore for helping me flesh out the idea, and indeed the definitions.

- – -

“And in these uncertain times, we must be, we will be, the rock of stability and fairness upon which people stand.”
     – Gordon Brown, September 2008

“Now we also know that these are uncertain times, there are challenges ahead. The global economy is facing its biggest test in more than a decade. It demonstrates so clearly that, yes, there are huge opportunities from globalisation – but there are big challenges too. Especially today.”
     – Alistair Darling, February 6^th 2008

“I would venture that, in these uncertain times, it is even more important for people everywhere to come and learn about the work and the principles of the United Nations.”
     – Kofi Annan, November 7^th 2002

“It can never be more appropriate for this country to take on such responsibility than in times of uncertainty and doubt; sticking firmly to principles of freedom and inclusion, and eschewing protectionism and isolation.”
     – William Hague, February 4^th 2009

‘In these uncertain times’? What these times are uncertain about is, usually, left to the imagination of the audience. It’s also unclear why these times are less certain than times gone by – as any good weather forecaster would attest, making predictions always involves a degree of uncertainty. The intended message of this phrase is that where once the speaker was blessed with the ability to forsee the future, their confidence in the inevitability of events-to-be has now departed.

The purpose is clear: to make the listener feel uncertain, doubtful and ever so slightly fearful about the future. The listener, in this anxious state, becomes a little more open to whatever course of action the Spinglish speaker proposes to reduce that uncertainty. In this way it is much like the phrase ‘desperate times call for desperate measures’ – a call to consider outlandish actions which would be rejected were the times ‘more certain’.

Whilst this may seem to make the phrase a fairly dangerous one, in all the above examples the intended action is also rendered in pure Spinglish: becoming a ‘rock of stability and fairness’; facing up to unspecified ‘big challenges’; learning about ‘the work and the principles of the United Nations’. In each case, the Spinglish is used in order to justify further use of Spinglish – a marvellous feature of this unique and beautiful language which allows a speaker to continue for many minutes without actually saying anything at all.

So, ‘these uncertain times’ may be a phrase to watch out for, but it is still most often used innocuously. If ever you come across it in the wild, we recommend you inform the speaker that if the times are so uncertain to them, perhaps it is time they invested in a watch.

So you want to get involved in politics, eh? You want the world to be a better place? You want to Get Involved?

Well, as everyone knows, the way to Get Involved is to join a political party and start spreading the message! Off you go, start researching the parties and decide which one you want to join. It’ll be fun!

Of course, you’re going run across a problem. You’re going to discover, in short, that there isn’t actually a single political party worth the membership fee.

You can’t join Labour, you see, because you’ve seen what happens after 12 years of rule by people with their hearts in the right place but their heads firmly stuck in the crazy bucket. You can’t join the Conservatives because you’re not a millionaire and you don’t eat babies or get your moral outlook from a bloke in a dress and his imaginary friend. The Lib Dems look mildly tempting for a little while until you notice that they all bring homemade cupcakes with them to meetings and sing songs round campfires well into middle age. So that’s the main ones taken care of – who else? The Greens are a bunch of scary bearded sandal-wearing hippies tied to trees. UKIP only really care about one thing and it’s not the one thing that the rest of us really care about. White cloth over the head is very much out this season so the BNP are definitely not an option – and besides, raw egg isn’t that tasty when it’s dripping down your face. After that, what are you left with? The Socialist Workers Party? The Libertarian Party? This started off with you wanting to Make A Difference, not become an evil dork! You’re not about to spend the rest of your life ranting on the internet/muttering in dark smoky rooms¹ about the authoritarian/bourgeoisie¹ conspiracy that’s out to subvert the sheeple who are slumbering to their doom.

And the overriding feeling from the lot of them is that they aren’t really out to make a difference – they’re out to make a war. They want to make a statement, or spread a message. They want to get one over the other guys.

It’s very easy to diagnose this problem. God knows I’ve said it before, the perpetually irritated one outlined much the same thing rather brilliantly just this morning, and the concept formed the backbone of the best episode of The Thick Of It so far². As with all things, though, offering solutions is a much harder task than defining problems.

So, here’s my idea: how about we all start just ignoring the various political parties wherever we can. Forget about their self-aggrandising, shrug off their ridiculously overblown accusations about their opponents. Ignore their posturing and their blatant vote-grabs.

Instead, let’s start treating them like religious bodies – for the similarities are indeed quite striking. Like religions, their importance depends entirely on us believing in their importance; like religions their strength is drawn from the unity and zealotry of their members and supporters; like religions they regularly condemn and attempt to suppress those who choose not to follow their ideals and ideologies. Like religions, they have been faced with an ever-increasing irrelevance in the modern world, and like religions their response has not been to accept this fact or work to make themselves more relevant, but instead to grow more zealous and more self-assured, to protest and assure us that they are extremely important, and to make dire warnings about what might happen if they were allowed to die away.

Most of us have learned to take this sort of behaviour from an Archbishop or senior Rabbi with a knowing roll of the eyes and a cluck of the tongue. So why have we not figured out how to do the same when politicians start explaining how much belief they have in the party system, or how important it is that people Get Involved in party politics?

Let’s start treating them like the religions that they are – and let’s start recognising that there’s a whole lot of value in being an atheist.

PS: At the precise moment my fingers were hovering above the ‘publish post’ keystroke, I was distracted by this tweet which lead to this blog post about games machines and political parties which renewed a little of my faith in the world. Go read it.

1. [delete as appropriate] [↩] [↩]
2. Confession: I’m kind of new to The Thick of It – but that episode was so good that I forced it upon my long-suffering wife, who also agreed it was fantastic, having never watched the series before. [↩]

Would you like a chocolate bar?

You would? Excellent! OK, I’ll get you your chocolate bar. That’s a promise.

Actually, hang on a minute. Instead of a chocolate bar, would you rather have a box of Quality Street? I mean, there’s a lot more chocolate in it, and far more variety… OK, we’ll forget the chocolate bar, then. I’ll get you a box of Quality Street.

Mmmm. Doesn’t your mouth just water at the thought of those choccies.

Hang on, you really don’t want a box of Quality Street, do you. You’d just get sick if you ate that much chocolate – and anyway it’ll make you fat. Don’t worry about it – we won’t bother with any chocolate. Silly idea, really. I don’t know what possessed me to make the offer, really. I mean, one chocolate bar probably would have been fine, but a whole box of Quality Street? Sheesh, how greedy are you?!

- – -

So, anyway, apparently the Liberal Democrats have decided no longer to campaign for an ‘in or out’ referendum on the European Union. Or, at least, so says Sir Mezies Campbell:

Sir Menzies told the Daily Politics there was ‘no public appetite’ for a vote since Lisbon Treaty ratification.

Which is funny really, since the Lib Dems were only promising an ‘in or out’ referendum on the EU so that they could justify not giving us a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. So they have:

• Promised a referendum on the EU Constitution in their manifesto at the 2005 election.
• Abstained from the Commons vote which would have secured a referendum on the broadly-similar Lisbon Treaty.
• Justified their abstention on the basis that it would be better to have an ‘in our out’ referendum. And then…

• Quietly dropped their pledge for that ‘in or out’ referendum on the basis that we the people probably don’t really want one anyway, now that it comes to it.

You know what? I’d have been happy enough with the chocolate bar.

There is one phrase which Lib Dems hate hearing; whose mere utterance sends a chill through their very bones and engenders much shuffling of feet and staring at fingernails throughout their ranks. I know that they hate hearing it, but I also know that the reason it stings is that it is so often being proven true. Here it is:

The Lib Dems are just the same as the other two parties.

- – -

Anyway. Sorry. Excuse me, I’m acting all unamused about it this. Forget about the referendums – who cares, after all? Ming’s right – there’s no ‘appetite’ for this stuff. No one’s intersted, really. Talking about Europe is something everybody hates doing anyway.

So, on a slightly lighter note, I thought I’d find out more, so I searched Google for ‘liberal democrat policies’. Would you like to see what I found?

404 Error: We’re sorry, no Liberal Democrat policies could be found.

…And you wonder why everyone thinks the Lib Dems are a joke.

Darren Bridgman

- – -

$ ruby christmas.rb

On the first day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
A partridge in a pear tree!

On the second day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the third day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the fourth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the fifth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the sixth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the seventh day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the eighth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Eight Maids a-Milking,
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the ninth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Nine Ladys Dancing,
Eight Maids a-Milking,
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the tenth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Ten Lords a-Leaping,
Nine Ladys Dancing,
Eight Maids a-Milking,
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the eleventh day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Eleven Pipers Piping,
Ten Lords a-Leaping,
Nine Ladys Dancing,
Eight Maids a-Milking,
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

On the twelfth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…
Twelve Drummers Drumming,
Eleven Pipers Piping,
Ten Lords a-Leaping,
Nine Ladys Dancing,
Eight Maids a-Milking,
Seven Swans a-Swimming,
Six Geese a-Laying,
Five Gold Rings,
Four Calling Birds,
Three French Hens,
Two Turtle Doves,
And a Partridge in a pear tree!

I’ll get me coat…