this is the caring guy we need to help our children

@sarc Education Minister David Willetts, and in the painting, just Dave

a glowering technocrat, with a painting of his vainglorious boss.
Really approachable and down-to-earth bunch... for Oxford, anyway.

What is he really saying? Here's an American translation:

"One way or the other, you're kids are screwed."

From the interviews I've seen of Willetts, he does not really care to engage in debate. He shuts down any kind of real discussion of his policies, and notice how he's not even invited to the BBC anymore. That's democracy at work.

What he should be doing is smoothing the progress of students into university, especially into the courses that the UK needs, like engineering, visual arts (e.g. video game technology), sciences. You never know what advanced education will bring to the UK. As it stands, because kids are not well-educated and have few role-models for the above subjects, and ZERO encouragement, this has created a problem. It seems kids here need encouragement.
However, Oxbridge graduates don't really care, as long as they get to rule the roost in Westminster. They've never really worked in their lives before. So, there's your education ministry. Ministering to sycophants and the rich only.

Prime directive:
Arrangements for their buddies kids to work at Finnish banks,
like the one Clegg-er worked for.

Finnishing school! AHAAHAhahAhAhAHAhAh
xD

-Cosine67 ~~

corruption needs a puritan response

I'm working on a cycle of British history which arrives once every 500 years or so.
When the populace is so displeased with the sleaze and corruption of government,
that they get off their barstools and take things into their own hands.
The last time it happened was in the 17th century, with the English civil war.
Cromwell's puritans took over government.
They were a bit severe, though. They wanted to cancel Christmas.

The King they beheaded was Charles I.

Today, we're seeing the government allowing the bankers to run roughshod over the
whole economy and doing nothing while thousands lose their jobs and benefits.

Also, there's the issue of a weak, unpopular heir to the throne, Charles.
I watched "would I lie to you", a tv game show. I'll explain when I can get the URL.
the humour used means that Chuckles is not going to have a good time, once he takes
over from the Iron Queen.

Is it the name, Charles, which causes me to expect a repeat?

more later

maybe Dave isn't so useless after all

If you were a selfish leader,
how could you double-cross your coalition partners
most effectively?
Make them go back on their most important
promise to the populace.

And you can make them work for it.
They were singing one way
before the election,
and now they've got another tune.
Because you convinced them that Labour's mistake
is the reason why the economy has failed,
they'll take your medicine.

The BBC guy said, last night, 'I wonder why Cameron's
made Clegg work so hard, with no support?'
Do you, really?

-cosusbelly67

The carbon footprint of a pair of lightweights

Now that Mervin King’s Wiki-pinion is added to that of Obama, it is well-known that Cameron’s passable presentation of himself as a leader may be being aided by hired Communications types.
He and his oik henchman, Osbourne, are indeed the private-school lightweight sons of millionaires who have never worked a hard day in their lives. Therefore,

it is their £9000-tuition university policy,
and they’re clueless,
as are the ranks of their party and the Liberal Democrats,
if they can’t see what these plans are doing to UK society.
Ya, it’s that big an issue!
[I assure you that British politicians, on the whole, are
either protesting unfair policies,
or they’re stupid, lazy and corrupt.
So that means about 60 Labour, 30 Liberal members and a smattering of Tories
are on the good side, out of 700. Haircut, anyone? Financial, that is.]

This says a lot about their plans for universities. They see it only short-term-wise as a boost to private universities, and have just about said it that clearly. They want to boost fees so that 3-year degrees cost £27 000 (with interest). Cranfield U, a private shop, for example has fees of £8500. Pretty competitive, and Cranfield didn’t even have to get their marketing team’s feet wet. The dynamic dodoes did it for them. But, I think that Tweedles Dee and Dum should go back to the drawing board, because Cranfield’s degrees, all legal, approved and everyfink, are completed in two years, not three. So, the private uni is truly the better deal, and the quality is decent, I guess. But, you gotta pay up front. The ‘Good for the economy’ mantra reminds me of Gordon Brown and his take on the Iraq war; stepping over bodies to help their rich friends, as they all are.
If they wanted to make it less obvious that they were helping out their Oxbridge buddies to start up universities, they could have made the rise in fees 20%, to £3600. By raising them 200% (they’re not Business grads, I’m certain), to £9000 pounds, they’ve raised a poll-tax-size ire in the public, and split the society clearly into haves and have-nots. And that’s only one piece of legislation, and they want, or Nick Clegg wants, 5 more years of this tripe.
If Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences courses don’t cease altogether, there will be a flood of kids going into Political Sciences or Public Administration, just so that these youngsters can plan to someday stick their foot up those fluffy, lightweight arses in the government that is saddling them with debt, and then keeping them from qualifying for a home loan (which is hard enough already) unless they pay off the 27000 as soon as possible. That’s their goal, perhaps. Make ‘em scramble to pay it off.
Or perhaps the goal is to get students learning foreign languages, because the only universities they’ll be able to afford will be those on that Continent that they love and hate
so much.
-Cosusbelly67

no, no, take 10 years, Sire

The Apprentice (UK show)
Alan Sugar: "You're fired"
"You need how long to get your job done?" "5 years!"
"Nick Clegg, you're fired, and you make me sick."
"If I let these boys run my company, I'd be fl*6&ked."

The Guardian's Patrick Wintour wrote a fulsome 3-centimeter article about one of the most important aspects of our democracy in the UK:

The length of a government's reign.
Up until now, a government could call an election whenever it suited.
So, our new coalition wants to take choice out of the matter
in the interest of fairness, you see,
and set a time limit.
Of course, it used to be 4 years, maximum, and he wants to make it
5 years, over 1800 days without democracy.
Democracy is voting. One vote every 1820 days is
something less than democracy.
Is a government required to listen to anyone during this time?
Protests, letters, media, starving people in the streets?
Exactly! Therefore, that's not democracy.

In quoting Nick Clegg, VP,
he said
"a four-year parliament would not give an administration
time to govern in the national interest"

Allow me to interpret this. Clegg, VP, likely meant:
"It'll take us 3 years to pay off all the Labour bureaucrats to go away,
install our own boys and start siphoning off money, bigtime."
"We Lib Dems may never get into government again,
and we've got two parties
full of democrats to satisfy."

-Cosusbelly67

a million reasons to be afraid

apparently, according to the Daily Mail, 23 of the 29 ministers are worth more than

1 million pounds.
Maybe this is the reason why the two parties get along so well.

DAILY MAIL MONDAY 24/05/10

The coalition of millionaires: 23 of the 29 member of the new cabinet are worth more than £1m... and the Lib Dems are just as wealthy as the Tories By Glen Owen Last updated at 9:45 AM on 23rd May 2010

It is the £60million Cabinet. David Cameron’s coalition Government may have adopted ‘fairness’ as one of its defining slogans, but his team of Ministers has been drawn almost exclusively from the ranks of the financial elite – leading to accusations that politics is once again becoming the preserve of the wealthy.

Of the 29 Ministers entitled to attend Cabinet meetings, 23 have assets and investments estimated to be worth more than £1million.

-cosusbelly67

for more. frankly it makes me ill:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1280554/The-coalition-millionaires-23-29-member-new-cabinet-worth-1m--Lib-Dems-just-wealthy-Tories.html#ixzz0osCrzjXj

a suitable epitaph for Gordo's career

soon
a taste:
no more boom and bust
the Iraq war is good for the economy
Poisoned chalice of Blair
tax the poor, they're too lazy and illiterate to apply for their state aid