What's 'Dave' for? I ask that question in both of its meanings, that is, what utility does the Rt.Honourable 'Dave' Cameron possess as a political leader, and what policies does he support? It's not an unreasonable question given that 'Hash Broon' has spent money like a drunken sailor for the last 10 years and now that the wheels have come of the gravy train he is forced to go and borrow £43bn, repeat, £43bn, which we will have to pay back. A few obvious policies would be to get the state to withdraw as much as possible from our lives by selling off whatever it is they own and run badly, like schools and hospitals, and to cut taxes so that we, the customers can re-stimulate business with our own money. But today it is reported that the Tories will not cut taxes in their first four years. Indeed, 'Dave' is full of bright(-not) ideas on how he is going to spend our money by giving new mums home visits by nurses despite our hospitals being short-staffed, and giving couples a year off when they have a baby. To re-enforce the message of this bribe we are given a reality(-not) TV report on breakfast with Cameron and kids. Now that the dandruff-endowed rats of Canary Wharf have been given, courtesy of dim 'Dave', himself, the green light on the Cameron brood, especially the retarded one, I hope they live down to their reputation by sinking their yellowed teeth-stumps into that family for ever. It was a cynical, stupid, cruel and ultimately useless piece of agit-prop for which his innocent children will pay the price over the years to come. Search as I might, I can find absolutely no reason to vote for 'Dave', but a lorry-load not to!
Where I would vote if I could: I almost feel sorry for Lefties in the States having to choose between that puffed-up cobra full of venom that is 'Lady Hilary Macbeth' Clinton, and that amiable know-nothing, black, Cheshire cat who is nothing but a smile. I have considerable doubts concerning Sen. McCain not helped by Oliver Kamm's endorsement in which he insists that McCain is not a conservative. To be fair, it is incredibly difficult to pin any of these politicians down as to what they do or do not believe in, probably because they don't believe in much of anything. However, McCain does appear to have some basic tenets, for example, there can be no doubt that he is a patriot having proved it in one of the toughest tests ever. Also, he has stated very publicly that he is a free trader. If either of the other two get in and do what they threaten by way of protectionist policies then my advice to you all is sell everything you can, especially investment savings, pension funds, the lot, and buy gold - if you can afford it now that it has gone over the $1000 mark! So my vote would be for McCain because I want a militarily strong, rich, confident, free-trading America.
Macbeth: Keen-eyed readers will have spotted my reference to Macbeth above, and if you suspected that perhaps that play was in the forefront of my mind then you would be right. After my production last year of Hamlet ("Brilliant " The David Duff Times: "Definitive" The David Duff Echo: "Superlative" The David Duff Klaxon), I took this year off/couldn't get a job (delete to taste) so now I have to put myself forward for a production next year. Our Play Selection Committee, in an act of collective philistinism, failed to choose any of the modern plays that I put forward for consideration. However, because we are a Shakespeare Society, in which at least two of our plays every year must be by the country boy from Stratford, there is always something for me to have a go at. Next year is our 75th anniversary year so in honour of this splendid birthday they have offered up 3 Shakespeare slots and one of them is Macbeth. Like all the Shakespeare's I have directed, to begin with I both know them and don't know them, by which I mean, that not being a university-educated Eng. Lit. man, I know several of them by repute, or by having seen an occasional production, but none of that means I really know them. So if I get the job, and it's very much an if, then its back to the books time with good old Harley Granville-Barker, Quiller Couch, Frank Kermode, Wilson Knight and all the other great scholars who forgot more about Shakespeare than I'll ever know. But of course, above and beyond all those great academics, it is the text itself where-in a director must immerse himself in order to do what a director has to do - serve the writer!
The Darwinists continue to wriggle on the hook: An amusing review on (yet another) book attempting, desperately, to explain why altruism has not been extinguished in the human race as Darwin's theory insists it should be. Always the 'Darwinistas' come back with all sorts of explanations which either miss the point, or attempt to turn the point around by saying that altruism is really selfishness in disguise. I mean, how desperate can you get?! All quite pathetic as well as ignorant and why they should insist on a monopoly of teaching their religion in, of all places, science lessons is quite beyond me.
Comments