Our fault? No, it’s yours.

So, the Tories are about to have their annual stage managed musical farce conference, and Baroness Warsi, the co-chair has stopped just short of telling the rank and file that it’s down to them to get the vote up. She uses terms like ‘reach out’ and other politico-asinine bollocks. When I heard what she said, all I heard was her putting in the ground to work to make sure that when the Tories get the pasting of all pastings from UKIP at the Europeans (stop sniggering at the back Labourites, let’s see how much of your support melts away to the BNP shall we? And as for you Lib Dems, well, there’s no point addressing them, I don’t think there’s any left) they can lay the blame squarely at the door of the campaigners.

How could people not vote Conservative? I mean, Theresa May’s announcement is music to the ears of the membership, isn’t it?

The Home Secretary’s words will be cheered by many Conservative MPs as well as Tory ministers across Whitehall.

Mrs May says today: “I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects. Obviously we’ve seen it with some foreign criminals who are in the UK.” The Coalition has set up a commission of human rights experts to report on the possibility of bringing in a British Bill of Rights to replace the Act by the end of next year.

Oh, Theresa, stop it. You’ll make the little office boy cry. The thing is, I’m not entirely sure this can be done, as it is derived from the European Convention of Human Rights, being a signatory of which is a condition of our membership of the EU.

Still, a British Bill of Rights. Can you imagine? That would be great.

If it hadn’t been written over 300 years ago.

We’ve already got one, you stupid bint. Jesus H. Christ on a little purple trike with a basket, bell, crash hat and hi-viz vest. How can you be Home Sec and not know about the 1689 Bill? We don’t need a new one. A new one is useless, mainly because successive generations have decided to completely ignore the original. Why would you pay any attention to the new one? And why do I get the feeling that a new Bill of Rights will follow the Napoleonic model? You know how it goes, in Europe, as a rule of thumb, any action is prohibited unless explicitly allowed, whereas in the UK any action is allowed unless explicitly prohibited. On the face of it a small difference, in reality a fecking enormous one. We don’t need a Bill giving us rights, they aren’t yours to give, that was established in 1215 for crying out loud.

Anyhow, I digress. There’s no chance we’ll get rid of the Human Rights Act whilst we’re still in the EU, and Cameron still maintains that we need to stay in, and because that’s what he wants, that’s what will happen. This is yet another cast iron guarantee job here, it’s a naked attempt to placate the proles before the big party, make sure they’re on their best behaviour.

Who gives a pair of dingo’s kidneys what the membership or the electorate want? They did their job, the membership elected him, the country elected him, now they should sit down, shut up and do what they are told. I’ve a feeling that if/when a debate is held on our EU membership, if it isn’t kicked into the long grass or filibustered, that there will be a whip involved. He really doesn’t want us to have a say, he’s in charge, he’s worked so hard for it. Who are we to start making demands? It’s all so unfair.

And the rank and file are supposed to sell this to the electorate? Well, good luck with that, you’d be better off trying to sell Boy George CD’s at a Klan rally.

The One That Will Be Watching Today. . .

I don’t care about drug abusing athletes, an irrelevant football tournament (Christ, even the Court of Arbitration for Sport agree), or swimmers. I really don’t care about fencing, rhythmic gymnastics and squash. As for Tae-Kown Do, skeet shooting and the modern pentathlon, well . . .

I do care about the ordinary Chinese people who have been swept off the streets in case they cause a scene, or had their houses swept away to build the infrastructure – in an attempt to show what a nice open place China really is, if you’d mind awfully not talking to that peasant, taking photos there or talking about that.

I do mind that competitors who are trusted to flog us breakfast cereals and running shoes aren’t trusted to comment on ‘political points.’ What? Like the right not to be pulled out of your house at stupid o’clock and sent to a ‘re-education camp’ for suggesting things like it isn’t nice to beat seven shades of shit out of Tibetan Monks or complaining that you need a visa to travel around your own fucking country. That’s not politics, that’s just being able to live like a normal human being.

I find it amusing that the IOC are bemused that the free and uncensored internet access promised to the press corps by the Chinese government has turned out to be not as free and uncensored as everyone had hoped. What did they expect? What are they going to do? Take the games away a week before they are due to start?

This talk about the games opening China up is bollocks. You think ZNL are obsessed with control? Well, the Chinese government will stop at nothing, nothing, to ensure that absolutely everything goes their way. In London in four years we’ll no doubt see the same practices employed in the name of ‘security reasons’ as the organisers work closely with the team in China, that will probably make these games a huge success.

Al-Beeb’s Newsnight last night had an interesting peice with a reporter (Rupert W-H if my memory serves) trolling around the countryside, it showed how thin the veneer of civilisation was, it was straight out of 1984, and utterly terrifying. Try and catch it on i-player, (it’s not yet up as I write this the next morning. Perhaps it is undergoing a re-edit?) it was a damn sight better than the cringe inducing puff-peice peddled on The Culture Show the other evening.

Way to go George W, bravely criticising China’s human rights record from Thailand. Perhaps you’d mind stopping the execution* of educationally sub-normal (and normally poor and/or black) citizens, and apologise for your brother’s cyncial dis-enfranchising of hundreds of poor and/or black voters.

However, I will be watching the opening ceremony, mainly because I love squirming on the sofa as the commentators (Huw Edwards and Hazel Irvine today) try to make some sense of the utter, utter bollocks going on in front of them, reading from a script with cod artistic symbollism that would make a student writing a GCSE English poetry essay blush.

‘. . . and now dozens of small children, all dressed in scarlet, dance about in a representation of the blood escaping the anus of the Emperor Minge after a particularly bad attack of piles in the 8th Century. . .’

Wouldn’t miss it for the world.

*I am well aware that many Libertarians are pro-death penalty. I am right against it. Ignoring the whole ‘let him have it’ and ‘what if the jury are wrong’ debate, I just feel that the death penalty is vengence rather than justice. The taking of a life in revenge would send me to prison as an individual, doing it as a society does not legitimise it.