Coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; working together is success- Henry Ford

 

Can we all just get along now? Not on the British Press' watch...

 

The quote above from the little known Nazi sympathizer does highlight key problems in not just politics, but war. Yes, Jeremy Corbyn is at it again. After the unfortunate events last Friday in Paris, the world stood in solidarity over Facebook in mourning those who had lost their lives and our determination to bring the full force of the law to those who were responsible. Well, we all did, it brought the world to it's knees (and crying about why other terrorist attacks aren't publicized enough) with perhaps the most touching moment coming from the England vs France game only 2 days ago, players from both sides respecting the minutes silence and paying their respects. However Labour in this scenario would be the sort of person to say "Which side am I on?"

Hello? I would like to apply for the Scottish Labour
leader. No I'm not Nicola Sturgeon.

Perhaps I'm a bit late posting the blog on this subject, but that just explains how confused the Labour party are in their direction of foreign policy, and defence, and the economy etc.... I'm almost certain there could be two parties at this stage, I can imagine Corbyn just packing his bags saying "Screw this" and going up north to Scotland with his tweed jacket fitting in quite well. However the world isn't perfect, which means it's good news for Labour who are the least perfect. This is surprising as well, as Corbyn did everything he needed to after the Paris, say that it was an atrocious act of war, sympathise with France and the victims, then condemn the terrorists. Dust your hands off, shut the door, and say something controversial about defence policy. Wait, what? I can see why Corbyn has offered an alternative, but then I can also see why the "shoot to kill" policy exists, as I don't want to be on the receiving end of a terrorist attack, now if you don't mind I'm off to go and start bombing the monkeys out everyone for no discernible reason. If the Paris attacks were repeated in London, the first thing I would try to do is save those in danger, and if the terrorists are holding them hostage then I don't think your pink fluffy handcuffs are going to help.

Maybe I'm exaggerating, but then again when has Corbyn not exaggerated? Many people have told me that they like Corbyn because he talks straight, not beating round the bush as it were. So him directly saying he supported the "shoot to kill" policy and then  backtracking is straight talking? Well I'm even putting that in emphasis, I quote Corbyn : "of course I support the use of whatever proportionate and strictly necessary force is required to save life in response to attacks of the kind we saw in Paris" so by not referring it to "shoot to kill" policy he must be beating round the bush. So he's a normal politician after all, another human being with flaws, perhaps more than others mind you.

But at least other politicians held their stuff together, or more specifically their party. Even Ed Miliband could achieve that, and I figure he can just about cook an egg, as his face has gone past the stage of having egg on it, it's now a fully fledge omelette. And you know you're in trouble when your own Chair of home affairs is asking you what the hell you're talking about, some Labour MP's even said the PM did a better job than him, which I'm sure will mean that 1) David Cameron is confident on winning a vote on airstrikes in Syria and 2) those Labour MP's might not want to say hello to Corbyn's little friend: Nicola Sturgeon.

Jordan Ifield (yes, Henry Ford was a Nazi sympathizer, dam those American capitalists)

It's weird: The leader of the Conservative Party in England is two years younger than me, and I still don't feel like a responsible adult- Jarvis Cocker

Conserv... (Title cut to save money)

In life the same two things are guaranteed: taxes and death. But if you're living under the Tories, you can certainly add cuts to the mix. Apparently Mr. Osborne has secured 4 government departments cut 30% of their spending over the next 4 years, which is just enough to cover the cost of child protection insurance David Cameron buys to make sure he gets money back if he leaves his kids in a pub again. But I guess the Tories aren't that stupid, admitting that "boom and bust" is still a problem, but then again this is from the same man that got humiliated by a lot of old pensioners with walking sticks over tax credits. So what's the catch? 

The same catch the Tories have had since day one. Iain Duncan Smith may have infamously cheered at the idea of a "living wage", which couldn't be more inappropriate named if you had slapped the name "free money" on the policy, but this time he'll be crying into a pool of his own tears. Like a true politician, he's standing his ground in his department and shouting "You shall not pass", well, that's what I hope anyway. Universal credits isn't even offered by half of job centres in the UK at the time of writing, and the Tories are wanting to cut it further to save welfare, about as familiar to the Tories as riots on Trafalgar Square.

According to their sums, £12 billion is needed from welfare. Why you ask?
*tory puppet glove*:To cover the deficit of course!
Haven't you been promising to cover that since you came in power in 2010 and have constantly missed deadlines?
*tory puppet glove #2*: It was worse under Labour!
Yes but that wasn't Labour's sole fault was it?
*labour puppet glove*: It was only Blair's fault, now we've got a white haired old chap that understands welfare.
*blairite and sun reader puppet glove*: In the same way he "understands" war.

Nutmeg: best to score an open net or kick him in the nuts?

As demonstrated in my well balanced puppet glove argument it's a dead end. Should you favour the party keen on covering the deficit and breaking your welfare in the process, or vice versa? Well without revealing my true colours, here's a brief summary. George Osborne has lost it. And by "it", I don't mean his sanity, that'll be next year. No, I mean his tory leadership campaign. Even loyal Labour fans can't mock his deficit facts, over halving it between 2010-15, even if he did miss the time frame. But now he's lost in the Lords, erupting his mini "constitutional crisis" that no one was falling for, resulting in him having tantrum in his fancy chair. He has the factor of being close friends to his messiah Mr.Cameron, but that didn't stop Michael Gove being pegged down when it came to the time. The same can be said to Mrs. May, who as Home Secretary has a tainted record at best, and the internet privacy debate has only added fuel to the ever growing fire. BoJo is the only one falling away from the limelight, but is doing well because of it. He's the Stalin ghost of today, and he only comes out in the media if he's tackled a Japanese schoolboy to the ground.

Jordan Ifield (I want to see Theresa May's internet history in the Freedom of Information Act before passing her bill through)

"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer."- Frank Zappa

Scottish Labour- The new William Wallace?

Do you want nuclear disarmament? Do you want a working NHS? Are you Scottish? Well if you aren't a member of the SNP by now I can safely call you a miracle. The problem is that statement isn't even hyperbolic, it's true, something Scottish Labour haven't got their heads round. I can remember seeing the General Election results come through and realising that Labour got the same amount of seats in Scotland as the Tories, how badly can Labour do? Appoint another Miliband?!

Apparently Labour have got the message. The Scottish Independence Referendum should have been a big wake up call to the parties saying: HEY, LOOK AT US, WE HAVE YOUR NUKES (among other things). But Labour haven't unified themselves at all, as was demanded, itself it has decided to divide itself as 70% of Scottish Labour voted to scrap Trident, something which the English Labour (or tea drinking toss pots in the eyes of the SNP) don't support. But maybe I'm being too cynical, maybe Martyr Corbyn will save the hippy dream, driving down memory lane in a VW campervan with a strange looking gas coming out the window.

Even to the SNP Corbyn looks good as an alternative, in the same way I hold the Lib Dems as an alternative, by letting you down when you get your hopes up. The main flaw with Corbyn is perhaps not down to him, but his predecessors. Blair's New Labour may have been "new", but it changed the identity of the party beyond recognition in Scotland, why have another right wing party when they already have the Tories ruining their kilts and NHS. But at the time of New Labour there was no alternative, it was vote for Labour, plug your eyes in whilst singing and hope all the nasty Iraq War questions go away, or vote Tory and face a mob outside your front door the next day. Now the SNP are in, and they really are IN now aren't they, Labour are panicking as if Ed Miliband knocked on their door looking for his "EdStone".

So does this vote bear any significance? No, Nicola Sturgeon is still laughing at her large election win, and then crying over how it screwed Labour up so much, meaning she has much chance of changing anything in England as I do writing satirical blogs and making you pant at the length of this long sentence. With no referendum or election coming up in the foreseeable future, I'm afraid this argument will have to be shelved until the EU referendum, promised only until the Chilcot enquiry is finished by reckoning, meaning never. Scottish Labour: the New William Wallace? Yeah, sounds about right. Hung, drawn and quartered with no immediate significance.

Jordan Ifield (If Scottish Labour really wanted to make an impact they should disband)

Scrap Trident you say? I'll do it, if I win beard of the year competition again