There's so many thing deserving attention, maybe this is not worthy of my precious time, but the Daily Mail is such a snidey piece of trash, and the critique applies to about 50% of the paper's output.
Is this newsworthy? An actress from Emerdale is now working as a shop assistant. So fucking what? Is this investigative journalism? Have the Daily Mail journalists not got other things worth prying into?
The article ends with this:
"Last night, Adele told the Mail: 'I'm a jobbing actress and in this climate you can either sell your soul or do an honest day's work.'"
I ask the Daily Mail; do you have a problem with this? You think there's something shameful in working for a living? Do you think it's easy going to Hollywood and making it as an actress? Would you like to encourage her, give her your support, applaud her for having the balls to try and for rolling up her sleeves and making a go of it?
No; you're a bunch of miserable, misanthropic, jealousy-ridden sourpusses, doing your bit to trivialise women, feed their insecurities, laughably preening yourselves on the moral highground.
Is this newsworthy? An actress from Emerdale is now working as a shop assistant. So fucking what? Is this investigative journalism? Have the Daily Mail journalists not got other things worth prying into?
The article ends with this:
"Last night, Adele told the Mail: 'I'm a jobbing actress and in this climate you can either sell your soul or do an honest day's work.'"
I ask the Daily Mail; do you have a problem with this? You think there's something shameful in working for a living? Do you think it's easy going to Hollywood and making it as an actress? Would you like to encourage her, give her your support, applaud her for having the balls to try and for rolling up her sleeves and making a go of it?
No; you're a bunch of miserable, misanthropic, jealousy-ridden sourpusses, doing your bit to trivialise women, feed their insecurities, laughably preening yourselves on the moral highground.
11 comments:
But to be fair, she probably wouldn't get much selling her..
I think I'll just leave that one there..
I think you should.
Awesome post
I'll never ever forget your quip on ATW to wothisname about the Mail. I laughed like a kid!
I only found out recently that the DM editor is best BEST buddies with Gordon Brown. Sigh.
BTW Norman Tebbit gave me a shout out on his blog today! It was very sweet.
Merci, t'es trop gentille.
My quip? Remind me, please, if you don't mind flattering my ego.
Good old Norm. It makes a big difference when such people are approachable.
Bisous a toi! (Keep up the common sense!)
:)
Im coming round to your pov on everything as it goes..! Except a Constitution :D
You quoted someone - "a wave rose up and engulfed him.." I only wish I could recall it better...in response to his wailing on and on about life and how only the Daily Mail could save us..
Hey btw this week in 1765 the British parliament passes the Stamp Act, a tax on American documents that ignited the revolution! Spooky eh given what's going on there.
Excellent news, and we're probably closer than you'd guess, as I've gone cold on the written constitution thing, at least for us now.
Can you imagine what an abomination our politicians and pundits would make of it? I'm sure you can, so that plan's on hold, unless we can get your mate Norman to write it!
As for America, I hope that this terrible healthcare bill marks the point where the tide turns.
That's exactly what scares the shit out of me. Who would write it, with what motives..it would end up like the Human Rights Act and we would be forever held to ransom. Plus the Constitution seems to be used to pervert as much as it wants to protect and because it is unflexible in that it is written down... issues go round and round in circles without resolve. And often the constitution itself is ignored.
My mate Norman is in danger of being forced out of the Lords by the current move from Jack Straw to make the House of Lords electable. Labour are determined to corrupt what was a noble institution. I fear the worst.
If only her Majesty's position had not been so watered down in the name of "democracy". She could step in and stop it all. It's so sad.
Hmm. Inflexibility is not itself a problem, as long as it is written wisely, as the US Constitution was. It contains a mechanism for its amendment, the Bill of Rights being the first ten, all of which strengthen the limitations on the national government.
We do have a Constitution, founded on good principles, but, like in the United States, it is ignored and violated, often in the name of democracy, as you point out. As Jefferson said; 'democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper' (or something like that). Constitutionally, neither we nor America should be democracies, in the proper sense of the word. Sure enough, the name of democracy is always invoked when the government wishes to violate our rights, but both our country's systems of law (coming from the same origin) natural law principles, that we as individuals have rights that are not granted by the government, but rather are inalienable. It matters not a jot that such things as natural rights cannot be proven by science. Just as history rests on a foundation of legend, reason rests on a foundation of presupposition, and it must ever be the case. If we don't accept that one plus one equals two, we'll never count to ten.
As for the Queen, I wish we knew more about the Privy Council and how the royal authority is exercised. The whole question of where the monarch sits in the government of this country has purposefully been made obscure over the last century. Now everything is veiled. We see only shadows on the wall.
Syntax a bit messed up above, should read;
"both our countries' systems of law (coming from the same origin) are based on natural law principles, that we as individuals have rights that are not granted by the government, but rather are inalienable."
Brilliantly put! I totally agree
Im going to quote you in a post on this soon :)
Feel free.
Post a Comment