Wednesday 29 April 2009

the bankrupt budget: a guide to settling accounts


in my expert opinion, alastair darling would have done far more for the british economy on budget day had he produced from his briefcase an uzi sub-machine gun, cut down on 646 public expenses accounts, and then, as a grand finale, detonated his own savile row semtex-suit.

now there is in fact a peculiar logic to this radical financial rescue plan...because, having liquidated parliament, it would then be much harder for this country's creditors to recover their cash; you see, 60 million people are a lot more difficult to find than 646 - especially if we all hide. of course, the queen owns everything and signs everything - so we can always refer the bailiffs to her majesty's front door and thus be rid of two millstones around our necks with one good long stretch for criminal bankruptcy.

every dodgy businessman realizes that the insolvency court is the time-honoured way to get off scot free - why doesn't gordon brown? god knows who'd take over the bailed-out wonga warehouses - but fortunately bankrupts are not eligible as directors. imagine the headlines when the bank of england goes bust domino-style? that's going to be a tricky one to explain to the taxpayers.

if only the prime minister had let the banks collapse in the first place, it would have been a great blow for social equality and the government would have saved a bundle - instead we've all suffered a free-market currency devaluation, incurred massive public debts, and given the banks a huge handout, how very conservative.

in retrospect, why didn't brown punish the bad banks by closing them down, whilst compensating the depositors with the choice of investing elsewhere - we would still have been quids in. no, gordon brown wants our shrinking notes in his banks, and he wants our taxes too - he's obviously more into big business than public welfare. gordon's buying the mistress designer lingerie and leaving the wife with holey old baggies - it remains to be seen whom he'll fuck the most.

Wednesday 15 April 2009

did messysplice slip staines mcsnide smegmails?


well don't ask me! i haven't a fucking clue! i just reckon it's a valid question, that's all; jag singh and alex hilton are having relations with the labour party...hilton fell out publicly with derek draper...the messageplacemen have vast blogging experience...it's not inconceivable that a concerned labour party member could have copied these emails to one of these splicechiks (for a cautionary glance)...and the irresistible lure of rocketing blogstats, publicity, money, and the chance to spring clean downing street, could well have got the better of him. i do however rate tim ireland's cock-up theory, wherein the emails were accidentally copied to a guido fawkes informer, perhaps jag singh or alex hilton - although the ultimate dream would of course be that the emails were indeed hacked and sent to messagespace, but the crime was craftily camouflaged to appear like a piece of classic draper incompetence...well if this was in fact the case, one can but wonder whether staines, singh or hilton were even aware that they were in receipt of stolen smut - not that i would wish to exonerate felons, mind. mmm...involuntary handling...is there a little imp at large?