Letters Pray

It's been well over a month since I've looked at some letters into The Shropshire Star, and the papers I've saved especially for this reason have begun to fester a little bit and really need binning. So, let's cut the small talk here and go go go. I'm treating you by lining up a Val Duncan DOUBLE-BILL first!

==================================================================

Cameron says: "If I was running a Conservative-only Government I think we would be making further steps on things like immigration control or making sure that our welfare reforms were absolutely making sure that if you're not prepared to work you can't go on welfare. I think we'd be tougher than that."


Right.


A very bad statement to make because Cameron is already known as Mr U-turn and this confirms we have a very weak Prime Minister who will give ground for an easy ride. Time to change the leader and put someone in place who has a backbone.


Who? I don't agree with Val's opinion here, but let's run with this last sentence. You get rid of D-Cam, and you replace him with....who exactly? Gideon? Michael Gove?

*little devil on Ewar's shoulder* "Don't you like David Davis and think he'd be a good leader?"

SHUT UP, YOU!

Also, Val seems to be criticising the fact that a leader operating in a coalition Government is making it very clear that he's the leader of a coalition Government. Boo! Send him to the stocks!


The Prime Minister made a speech a few months ago enthusiastically welcoming Turkey's 78 million into the EU, which of course means unfettered access to England which is already chronically overcrowded. That's how serious he is about mass immigration.


Of course it does. That is, OF COURSE, what it means. All of these Turkish people are now able to come over here now that they've joined the EU. I'm looking forward to meeting a Turkish person! We've never had one in this country before, of course.

Now please just excuse me whilst I go and get a kebab. Lovely guys down at my local kebab house. No idea where they come from!


We could virtually stop immigration in its tracks if we stopped the benefit system (but I suppose this isn't allowed by the EU!) 


Lol!


David Cameron is the biggest disaster ever. Need I add more?


"The Biggest Disasters Ever - A List by Val Duncan"

5 Hindenburg
4 Munich Air Disaster
3 Titanic
2 Pompeii
1 David Cameron


Val Duncan
Wellington


================================================================


Europe wants to raise the percentage of reduction of carbon footprints from 20% to 30%?


That is a brilliant idea.


What a brilliant idea.


I know! Good, isn't it?


Let us send all manufacturing and wealth creating to China or even India...we can all sit back and let China and India send us financial aid. 


Hmm?


Can I ask just when our Prime Minister is going to start thinking about Britain? Please Mr Cameron will you stop looking in the mirror and practising looking important on the world stage and start looking at the state of our country instead.


This is really annoying, as Val wrote this BEFORE Cameron decided to stay on his holidays rather than come back to the UK once the looting started, so reading this now it appears that she has a point. Damn you D-Cam! Nevertheless, I like this paragraph a lot more when you take it literally, and imagine our Prime Minister taking a few moments every day to look in the mirror and "practice looking important".

Whilst I'm here - "Europe wants to..." suddenly becomes all about Cameron and Britain. Far be it for me to try and wade through Val Duncan's thoughts and make some sort of sense out of them, but I'm not sure this really makes any sense whatsoever. As we've seen in the past, she HATES a federal Europe, but now she wants Europe to keep all of it's profitable manufacturing going whilst banning David Cameron from looking in mirrors.

I think?


We are under-educated and under-defended;


Speak for yourself.


unemployment is abysmal; we are cutting everything and paying more for essentials. Either get a grip or stand down. You are not up to the job.


I for one welcome our new David Davis led overlords!


Val Duncan
Bratton


Seriously, you were from Wellington a few minutes ago. What's going on?


===============================================================
There's only so much Val Duncan a man can take, so let's move on.


Is Nato finished?


No.


One good reason it will not survive - it is costing America too much.


Wrong.


Allan Tucker
Oswestry


Thanks Allan!

To be honest, I secretly like Allan Tucker. If you're going to be wrong - and he ALWAYS is - it's better to be wrong in about 12 words then 1,200.


================================================================


I have just been in a local shop and asked where was the fat (very helpful and efficient) girl -


This is going to be a boring letter. Does anyone want a cup of tea? I'm just on my way to the kitchen, so if you want anything shout now or forever hol...hang on, what? Can you repeat that?


I have just been in a local shop and asked where was the fat (very helpful and efficient) girl -


Wow. And I mean that.


a perfectly innocent comment! Not a slur!


When I get to about 70, can someone just put me down, please? I don't want to end up like this person, or like my Gran, who goes to church several times a week yet is the biggest racist I know.

The thing is, she doesn't do it deliberately - it's just the attitude that she's grown up with, and now times have changed she can't adapt. But that's a race thing. Surely there's never been an acceptable time to flippantly describe someone, in a social context, as "the fat girl"?

It reminds me a little of Father Ted, the way that Matthews and Linehan named their characters - "The Dancing Priest", "The Boring Priest" and so on.


I was told by the obviously educated lady serving that I should not say such things etc.


If there's one thing I fucking hate - and which we need less of - it's educated people. Fuck off, learned people! Take a hike, socially aware, diplomatic, courteous and kind folk!


What a narrow-minded nasty little world the politically correct brigade have brought about!


And......I'm bailing.


J H Price
Madeley


I read the letters page every day, yet I've never seen this name before. That, combined with the last sentence, makes me think that I'm being had here.

Because this is a wind-up, isn't it? It has to be. I don't want to exaggerate my power and influence(!) but I do get readers landing on these blog entries often having Googled a letter writers name. There's a danger that combing through the letters pages, I've set myself up for a right merking - someone has seen this blog and tried to reel me in with a letter like this.

JH Price from Madeley. My eye is very much trained on you. Fat boy.


==================================================================

One more.

I cannot believe the content of Val Duncan's letter (July 4th). While I am concerned about the way some immigrants seem to get benefits, it's obvious that most of that letter is untrue, very inflammatory and intended to stir up racial hatred.


Ron Jones
St Martins


Ooof! It's Ron Jones 1-0 Val Duncan!

Can Val equalise?! Join us next time to find out, kids!

OMFG Football!!

Alright?

It was the Community Shield on Sunday, and what a game it was. Regardless of the result however, the match signalled one very important thing - that the new Premier League season is just days away. Exciting, huh?

So allow me to now subdue all that excitement by giving you my Premier League Guide - a quick look at every team before a predicted table which will be thought up off the top of my head. I started writing this on August 8th, finished it on August 10th. The transfer deadline closes at the end of the month. Bear that in mind when I ponder why Chelsea/Arsenal etc haven't signed a midfielder/defender etc yet.



ARSENAL - How long can this continue? For the Gunners last season, it was the same old story - good football, big attendances, stylish players, mental fragility, lack of leaders, a player pining for La Rambla, poor goalkeeper, poor centre halves, stressed manager.

You'd cry if you didn't laugh. Has one game EVER summed up a team as much as Newcastle 4-4 Arsenal did? The really funny thing is that EVERYONE outside of The Emirates know what they need - A goalkeeper. A hard as nails centre half. A spiteful bastard in the middle of the pitch. A miracle to keep Robin van Persie fit.

They'll be Top 4. They'll play, at times, sensational football. They'll blow away teams lower down the league. They'll not win a sausage. Again. How much longer?

ASTON VILLA - When a manager is appointed whom the home crowd instantly dislike, it's very VERY difficult for the man in charge to get them on board and win them round. Alex McLeish has a real job on his hands at Villa, you feel. The Villa fanbase just don't do "solid, steady, defensive" - the things that McLeish preached at their neighbours - and would it surprise anyone if he was sacked 3/4 into the season with the team languishing in about 14th? They won't go down, and N'Zogbia is a nice replacement for Ashley Young, but Villa fans shouldn't get their hopes up.

BLACKBURN ROVERS - As I said to my father the other day: "Blackburn. Now there's a team who are going down." Because they are, aren't they? There's no argument I can make for them staying up, to be honest. Who's going to score their goals? Their forward options:

Nick Blackman. Who? Mauro Formica. Who? David Goodwillie. Who? David Hoilett. Promising, but still raw. Nikola Kalinic. Really? Jason Roberts. Meh. Ruben Rochina. WHO?

When you combine their weak squad with their inexperienced and no-name manager, and then mix all that in with their laughable owners, I can't see anything else than the drop. And once they go, you fear they won't be back for a while.

BOLTON WANDERERS - This is a big season for Bolton. With an ambitious, confident and enthusiastic young manager at the helm, they could push on and improve on their 14th place of last season. OR they can go back to being over-reliant on the thuggery of Kevin Davies for their goals and continue being...well...decent, but not exactly scintillating. Their football now is a million miles away from the nonsense dreamt up by Gary Megson though, and that should be applauded. They'll be fine.

CHELSEA - 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 1st, 2nd. That's Chelsea over the past five seasons, so you know what you get with them. They have the leaders and the toughness that Arsenal lack, and their first XI is still powerful, strong and on their day dominant. But the squad is ageing, and let's not even mention the Torres headache. Can they win the league? They can, but you feel the answer to that question boils down to the senior players and their relationship with the new manager, Andre Villas-Boas. Their home form however means they are still a lock for the Top 3.

EVERTON - How long can this continue? Everton are absolutely skint, a fact which can be used as evidence when extolling the virtues of their manager David Moyes. What more can he do at the club? Nothing - certainly nothing with the current ownership in charge. Bill Kenwright is a good man, and a good owner, but he can't cope with the money that's thrown around the league nowadays. Midtable is where they will be, probably after a slow start.

FULHAM - "What on Earth happened with Mark Hughes?" is the thing that springs to mind with Fulham. Before his strange exit, Fulham were being Fulham - strong at home, poor away from home, playing nice football and generally being everyone's second-favourite Premier League team. Martin Jol should carry that on, but you get the feeling an awful lot rests on Bobby Zamora's shoulders.

LIVERPOOL - I have to talk about them? I do. Hmmph. Well, they massively overpaid for Jordan Henderson, and Charlie Adam is SHITE. Luis Suarez is top quality, but how tired will he be after a lengthy Copa America? They'll score more than last season - look out for the Downing/Carroll combination - but their defence is susceptible. How much longer does Jamie Carragher have left? Top 4? Possible, but I'd bet on 5th being their final position.

MANCHESTER city - They're getting noisier, let's not pretend otherwise, but the key question is this - can
city win the league under Roberto Mancini? On the outside, he's the calm and elegant Italian, but you can tell that inside he's unsure where to turn. Great job, great squad, but the pressure and the nonsense that goes with it must be a nightmare for him. And that's just Mario Balotelli.

Going back to the question - they've got a great chance, and you can't help thinking that a league title will be theirs sooner rather than later. But this season? So much depends on Carlos Tevez - not just his goals, but his workrate up front. If he stays, they'll get close. Real close.

THE GREATEST FOOTBALL CLUB IN THE WORLD - Wesley Sneijder.

Good, that's his name out of the way. What a shame that an excellent pre-season for the 19-times champions has been eclipsed by the torturous, endless "will he, won't he" W.S. saga. It's got to the stage now where whatever the outcome, just get it over with already. It is exhausting, and thoroughly dull.

Whether he comes or not, the size of Sir Alex's squad does pose a few questions. Where does Danny Welbeck play? Who starts on the flanks? Tom Cleverley - what do you do with him? Kiko Macheda? Michael Owen? Where does Phil Jones play? What about Dimitar Berbatov, for Gods sake. He was top scorer last season! Who starts as #1 goalkeeper? Why the hell is Darron Gibson still here?

But there's one other issue on my mind. I have to whisper this very quietly, as he's hugely popular - but Patrice Evra had a really poor season last year, an issue that wasn't really helped by the nonsense in the French camp at the World Cup, and then Sir Alex's desire to play him as much as possible. I'd love to see Fabio get more games at left-back this year, if only to give Paddy some sodding rest.

Chances this season? United go in as favourites, and it'd take a brave man to bet against them all the time Sir Alex is at the helm. If they improve their away form, they will be celebrating title #20 next May.

NEWCASTLE UNITED - To be perfectly honest, I don't have a clue with this one. I really don't. Most of the time I'm pretty certain that Newcastle United themselves don't really know what's going on at Newcastle United. They finished 12th last season, which was a fabulous effort, but you do wonder if they can get close to repeating that this time around. Amongst all the silliness however, there's some decent players. Hatem Ben Arfa is highly skilful, Yohan Cabaye has done well in France, Jose Enrique is one of the league's underrated players. The problem is that regardless of the squad, madness is always just round the corner at St James Park. Will letting Kevin Nolan and Joey Barton go come back to haunt them?

NORWICH CITY - Back to back promotions see Norwich back in the Premier League, a rise masterminded by promising manager Paul Lambert. Can they survive? It's going to be very, very difficult - you can't help thinking that they're totally reliant on Grant Holt for their goals, and their squad doesn't read very impressively on paper. Urged on by a strong home support, they might....might....just do it.

QUEENS PARK RANGERS - Ah, and it's a welcome return to Neil "Colin" Warnock back to the Premier League. Haven't we missed him?

Would it be unfair to pin all their hopes on Adel Taarabt staying? Perhaps, but it's clear that he's the stand out talent in that squad. Last season QPR were strong defensively and they'll need to continue that in the top division, particularly as you can't see DJ Campbell and Jay Bothroyd scoring a bucketful of goals. Whatever you think about him, Warnock is a canny operator, and his rapport with his players goes a long way. It should be eventful.

STOKE CITY - Sigh. For the past three years I've hoped and prayed that the rugby team will get relegated, but alas, nothing has been doing. So, this season, I'm going to confidently predict they'll be mid-table in the hope of a jinx.

What can we expect this season then? Dare I suggest it will be a lot of oohing and ahhing over someone throwing a football a long way? An over-reliance on set pieces? The centre halves hoofing the ball upto Kenwyne Jones at every available second? Thuggery from Andy Wilkinson and Ryan Shawcross?

Maybe Stoke City will surprise me. Maybe they'll play like Brazil 1970, and if they do then I'll be the first to applaud them. I shan't be holding my breath though.

SUNDERLAND - Now here's a funny one. On paper, everything looks very rosy for the Mackems - they've improved their league position year on year for the past three seasons, they've just signed players with excellent experience such as John O'Shea and Wes Brown and have tempted promising young players such as Connor Wickham to join the club. But after the exit of Darren Bent, Sunderland went on a dangerously bad run, not winning a single league game in February and March and damaging fatally their quest for Europe which had looked good at Christmas.

Steve Bruce is a good manager, who's made good signings. They'll be fine, certainly, but how high can they go?

SWANSEA CITY - Is it lazy to call them "the new Blackpool"? It is, but you can't help doing it, as there's so many similarities between them. Looking through their squad, the stand out name is Danny Graham, the £3.5m signing who was so highly rated at Watford. It's a big ask for him to keep them in the division, however. Don't be surprised if Swansea are Top 6 after 10 games, top half at Christmas, bottom three in May.

TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR - Harry? Harry, are you there? What's going on? It's August 10th and you've signed three players, two of which were on free transfers. What's happened to the "fackin' wheeler dealer" you pretend you're not?

Tottenham still have a Top 6 squad, and without the distraction of the Champions League they look well placed to challenge once again for the Top 4. Can they do it, though? At the time of writing, you wonder if they have the firepower to do so. They may have to settle for 6th.

WEST BROMWICH ALBION - Well done Jeremy Peace. In possibly the boldest move of last season, the chairman of the Midlands club decided that although they weren't in the relegation zone, Roberto di Matteo's brand of football was too open and too risky for staying in the league which is so financially crucial. He gambled, and he got it right. The appointment of Roy Hodgson was a masterstroke, and Roy will keep things very stable there this season as well.

WIGAN ATHLETIC - On the field, the Premier League need more teams like Wigan - teams ran by bright young managers who demand good football and an emphasis on flair. Off the field, Wigan Athletic are the last team the Premier League wants. It's a rugby town - always has been, always will be - and you wonder just what exactly is needed to get more people attending games at the DW Stadium.

It's really difficult to know what to predict with Wigan. They've survived - just - the last two seasons, which suggests that they'll be in trouble again. But Roberto Martinez wants a Top 10 finish, and they're a side who can get on a hot streak and boast a dangerous striker in Hugo Rodallega. For Wigan, it could be going down to the last day of the season again.

WOLVERHAMPTON WANDERERS - You know what you get with a Mick McCarthy side. They'll battle, they'll compete, they'll be a tough opponent in their backyard, and they'll have a splash of quality, but not much. They beat Manchester United, Manchester city and Chelsea last season, so they're no mugs, and in Matt Jarvis, Kevin Doyle and Jamie O'Hara they do have some good players. Roger Johnson is a big signing for them, although you do wonder if they overpaid when splashing out £7m on the tall defender. I think they'll stay up, but you wonder how much further McCarthy can take them.


1 Manchester United
2 Manchester city
3 Chelsea
4 Arsenal
5 Liverpool
6 Tottenham
7 Sunderland
8 Everton
9 Fulham
10 Stoke
11 Aston Villa
12 Bolton
13 West Bromwich Albion
14 Newcastle United
15 Wolverhampton Wanderers
16 Wigan Athletic
17 Norwich
18 QPR
19 Blackburn
20 Swansea

How Very Interesting

Over on the right hand side of the screen (if you scroll down a bit) you should be able to see a graph entitled ''My Political Views". Now I know you, reader - I understand that you can read - but just for the sake of reference, allow me to just write here what the graph said about me:

'I am a centrist social moderate. Left: 0.8 Libertarian: 0.63'

When I was messing about on here the other day, I noticed the graph and realised it had been a wee while since I had actually done that test. A quick rummage around my archives (steady) confirmed that - it had been late August 2009, almost two years ago, when I had given my opinions on two pages worth of statements. So, I did it again. The results surprised me slightly:

My Political Views
I am a left social moderate
Left: 4.04, Libertarian: 0.95

Political Spectrum Quiz

So I've gone from being a Centrist to a Lefty. Naturally this appals me, so here's my comprehensive plan to sort myself out:

1) Stop being corrupted by The Vole
2) Devour all the Clarkson books I haven't got round to yet
3) Look at more pictures of Nicola Blackwood
4) Play more golf
5) Hope that time does its thing and I get more right-wing as I get older, as most people do

How difficult can all that be?! Not difficult at all, so I'm now off to find a friend called Tarquin. I'll be having affairs with Jodie Kidd before you know it!

Tally-ho what!

In Memoriam

It is Monday morning, and I am spending the day chillaxing (sorry) after a weekend away which contained little sleep, lots of fun and an excellent lunchtime meal. When I'm at home I love to stay informed and up to date with the news via my laptop/TV/phone/radio, but that wasn't really an option for me these past few days. In the car we only listened to the cricket, I didn't bring my laptop with me, we didn't turn on the hotel TV and it's not really good etiquette to check your phone all the time.

So when I checked Twitter just before bed on Saturday evening, I was desperately sad to see the news about Amy Winehouse. Desperately sad not because I was a huge fan of hers (I'll get to that a little bit later) but because it was all so depressingly predictable. Was anyone really surprised by the news? There was another thing that made me sad, though. Whilst perusing my Twitter timeline, a theme quickly began to develop which I found very odd - the inclination for people to automatically connect Amy's death with the atrocities in Oslo. Please let me take a moment to just briefly talk about both:

What happened in Oslo demonstrates quite clearly the abhorrent and despicable depths to which a human can sink to, and has made me despise the human race just a little bit more. Nobody - except the scumbag himself - can say what has been going through Anders Behring Breivik's mind in recent times, but it seems he is close with Neo-Nazi far-right organisations and has spent time co-ordinating and planning these attacks based on some sort of political protest. At the time of writing, over 90 people are dead, roughly the same are injured. The date of these atrocities - Friday 22nd July 2011.

Amy Winehouse was a musician, but also a very troubled young lady. I'm not into music, hugely, so it is not up to me to say whether Amy was wonderfully talented or not. To be honest, I could only name two of her records - one being a cover and the other being 'Rehab' which I never really liked. However, I've seen enough tributes from music journalists over the past two days to recognise that she was hugely talented, and is a desperate loss for the British music industry. The date of her passing - Saturday 23rd July 2011.

I have referenced the dates for one reason and one reason only - they are the only things even remotely plausible to cite when comparing these two events. In ten years time, perhaps we can look back and say "Yes, these two events in history happened on consecutive days" - but let us be very, very clear on this one. The comparisons end there. Why then, on Saturday night, was Twitter (and later Facebook) riddled with tweets/status updates bringing the two events together?

From a dickhead on Twitter - "Alright, Amy Winehouse made a good song once, but how is her self inflicted death more sad than the terror attack in Norway? 92 people died."

From a dickhead on Facebook - "5 days ago a true British hero was killed fighting for our country. Did you know this? Do you know his name? Did you care? A singer addicted to drink and drugs dies and its all over the news, Facebook and Twitter in minutes!!! RIP Corporal Mark Anthony Palin from 1st Battalion The Rifles!"

One more - "okay I know its sad about Amy Winehouse dying but what about all of the 92 people who have been shot and killed in Norway? Oh yeah that's right, they are not famous!"

People. Seriously, what is this? What on Earth is compelling people to write stuff like this, or think this? Am I completely alone in being able to feel sad for different people in different countries? Can we all not just think like this:

• I'm very sad that many people have died at the hands of a madman in Norway.
• I'm very sad that a talented young woman has died.
• I'm very sad that a soldier has died doing a very difficult job in Afghanistan.
• I fully understand that these events are in no way connected - other than perhaps time frame - and shouldn't really be talked about in the same sentence, never mind compared and contrasted.

Or is that seemingly too difficult? 

I'd like to finish this post on Amy. What some people don't know is that before the heavy drug use, before the silly hairstyle, before the horrible and odd tattoos, before the "out of it" stage appearances - she was actually a very beautiful young woman, and one who has gone far, far too soon. Don't do drugs, kids.

Uppal in Arms (Again)

Alright? Alright at the back?

Followers and long-term readers of TRAROTL may remember that a few blog posts ago (scroll down, you'll find it) I expressed my displeasure at the Conservative MP for Wolverhampton South West, the Rt. Hon. (Arf!) Paul Uppal MP. If you want daily critical analysis of the Uppalster, obviously Voley is your man, but once again Uppal has infuriated me so much I just cannot let his ignorance and stupidity slide. He's not the only Tory MP who's caught my eye in the past few days, mind. In the case of Mark Pritchard MP, I'll get to him at the end of this post. But how about Nicola Blackwood, eh lads? Eh? Eh? Know what I mean?! I wouldn't mind showing her my Black Rod, geddit?!

I'm not black, just to clarify that one.

ANYWAY, yes. Paul Uppal. On Wednesday our leader, David William Donald Cuthbert Pontesbury Blythe Cameron made a statement on "Hackgate" before answering any questions (lol) that were fired in his direction. Let's see what question the great man asked our leader, eh?

'There are very few places in the world where the leader of the Executive would subject himself to two hours of questioning.'


Really, Paul? I heard someone say the other day that all of this furore is our equivalent of Watergate. Now, I don't know whether it's that big or not, but it's pretty damn big right now, isn't it? It's seen a 160 year old newspaper brought to its knees. It's seen the (pretty scary) revelation that very, very senior people in the Met are incompetent, and perhaps worse (please don't sue me). It's seen Rupert Murdoch turn up to a Select Committee/episode of Tiswas. It's seen Rebekah Wade-Brooks leave News International.

You know what I'm saying? Now when it comes to Cameron, the pressure is on a little bit, due to his (rather cosy, it seems) relationship with Andy Coulson and everything that's entailed. As the top man, it was absolutely right that Cameron faced the questions of his peers (even if he dodged most of them) and it's absolutely right that he rode it out for as long as it took. Two hours? That's hardly a ridiculously long period of time, Paul. 'Very few places'? We all know the naughty boys of the world's political stage - Gaddafi and Mugabe and President I'm A Dinner Jacket and those lads - but most countries have accountable leaders. I think 'very few places' is a tad OTT. Anyway, let's have a gander at Uppal's question:

'One thing that shames our democracy, though, is that there are elements in the House that seem to want to make political capital out of the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone.'


Now I don't want to criticise Voley, but in his post about this nonsense, I cannot believe he missed this. It's basically left an open goal for me, yet one that's made me very angry. Because what Paul Uppal is thinking when he says this - and remember that this man represents 60,000 people - can be simply boiled down to this:

"This is good. I now have an opportunity, live on TV, in front of my exalted leader, to make petty political capital out of petty political capital."

Because that's what that is, no? Just sheer, blatant hypocrisy. "They've shamed our democracy with their political pettiness!" he cries, whilst shaming our democracy with his political pettiness. Once again, I'm left astonished by this man, and not in a good way.

And as for the question? There simply isn't one. Now I know I'm stressed at the moment, and I know I haven't slept much recently, but I find this pretty fucking poor. Once again I'm left reading something from Paul Uppal and thinking "Dude? Really?" before getting pissed off with him. Happily, I'm not the only one, as Margaret Curran, the Labour MP for Glasgow East wasn't too impressed either:

'May I ask the Prime Minister, in all sincerity, to dissociate himself from the comment of Paul Uppal?


Naturally, Dave duly dodged that question.

One final thing - I was reading a VERY interesting webpage the other day which listed and detailed MPs remunerations and sponsorships. Did you know that Diane Abbott receives £800 for every 'This Week' appearance? Or that Ed Miliband was sponsored by Lord Sugar in the lead-up to the Labour leadership election? If you fancy a browse yourself, it's here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/regmem/?d=2011-07-06

It was perusing that page that led me to this interesting little titbit about Mark Pritchard, the MP who stands in my constituency:

Payment of £500 for article for News of the World newspaper, 1 Virginia Street, London E1 9XR. Hours: 5 hrs.(Registered 24 January 2011)

Having not hassled the letters page of The Sloppy Star for a wee while, I thought firing off a quick, rather smug letter based upon this information was a good idea. Sadly, it seems the editorial people don't agree - letter was sent via e-mail on Monday, at the time of writing (Friday) it has not been published, and I suspect it won't be considering how Conservative leaning the rag is. But I shall not be silenced! Here is the letter in full. I'm tempted to write another version and send it to Mr Pritchard directly in the vain hope of a reply.

Sir,


The allegations against the 'News Of The World' have made for depressing reading over the past fortnight. From a murdered schoolgirl to victims of terrorism, there were, allegedly, no depths to which this deplorable rag wouldn't stoop to when hacking into phones. These revelations have been brought to light recently, but the allegations against the paper on this subject have been simmering for at least two years now. How interesting it is to read then that Mark Pritchard MP received a payment of £500 for an article in the paper registered on 24th January, 2011 (information taken from TheyWorkForYou.com http://www.theyworkforyou.com/regmem/?d=2011-07-06) - just two weeks after it had suspended associate editor Ian Edmondson over the hacking allegations! I trust Mr Pritchard will be giving this money to charity, if he has not already done so?

Editing Does Not Get Tougher Than This

Hallo folks. I know I haven't blogged for a while, but right now nothing is really jumping out at me in terms of what I can write about. As you can probably understand, so much has already been written about the News International saga - and by more intelligent folk than myself - that adding my voice is a bit pointless. So, let's have a change of pace. I try to mix things up here at TRAROTL, so instead of lengthy blocks of text, how about we all sit back and enjoy a nice video?

I don't really watch 'Masterchef' - I'm more of a 'Come Dine With Me' man, to the chagrin (great word) of Cynical Ben. But I've seen enough of the programme to know that this is pure, pure genius - particularly the last 20 seconds or so. Now, good luck getting it out of your head...

Uppal in Arms

If you're a long term reader of this fine blog, chances are you also read the tremendous blog by professional Stoke City fanatic The Plashing Vole. Ever since the General Election, you may have noticed that Voley has had it in for the newly elected MP for Wolverhampton South West - his constituency - Mr Paul Uppal MP, a Conservative.

As the tirades began, I mostly ignored them. Voley is a rabid leftie, and I took his rants to be exaggerations - portrayals of Mr Uppal which were unfair and inaccurate and at times callous. Nevertheless, I was curious about the Uppalster, so I went to the (excellent) 'They Work For You' website and signed up to e-mail notifications about the great man. This basically means that when Paul Uppal asks a question or makes a speech in the House of Commons, I get an email the next morning notifying me of the content. You can do it for any MP you like, and it's cool, providing you're a nerd like me.

Here's the kicker. On Thursday morning I received an email because yer man from Wolverhampton had asked a question at Prime Ministers Questions the day previously, the full transcript of which can be found (and laid out really well) here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2011-06-22b.313.5#g323.2

It's perhaps fair to say that this question did not please me greatly. Here it is:

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister demonstrated his strength of character in talking about multiculturalism. In view of the fact that I have a Christian first name and a Sikh surname, I try to combine the best of my traditional Indian values with my core British values. Does he agree that we can learn a lot from our Indian partners in this respect, many of whom define themselves by their nationality first and foremost, regardless of their ethnic or religious background?

With all due respect to Paul Uppal MP, what a bucketful of shit that is. A thorough fisking of it can be found here but the thing that angered me about it was that Uppal seemingly felt the need to ask this probing, thorough and intelligent "question" at PMQs. Seriously. For folk like myself, who are interested in politics but not overly so, PMQs is pretty much the one time we have to watch the Prime Minister answering questions on the big national issues of the day. Some MPs don't focus on the national side of things - they highlight an issue in their area, or a note-worthy constituent of theirs, and that's fine. Uppal does neither. What he does do is ask a question which doesn't actually make a great deal of sense. I'd love to know what "core British values" are.

So at this point I've got Uppal's card marked, but sadly worse was to follow. Last week I was lounging around watching tennis when a tweet caught my attention - Tory MP Mark Pritchard was going against his own party/leader in trying to get a ban imposed on circuses employing wild animals as part of their shows. I flicked over to BBC Parliament instantly, not because I was particularly interested in circuses, but because Pritchard is my local MP and seemed to be stirring things up a bit. I proceeded to sit and watch the debate for about 90 minutes, as it proved to be rather more interesting than I thought it would be. During that time I witnessed:

a) Several Conservative MPs congratulating Mark Pritchard on his involvement with the debate, and agreeing with his viewpoint.

b) A very thoughtful and intelligent speech from Caroline Lucas.

c) A speech from Zac Goldsmith(!) where he put on record how he was pleased David Cameron had stepped down and allowed the debate to be a free vote.

d) A cross-party consensus on the issue.

During these speeches, I spotted the great man himself, the Uppal, sneaking into the Chamber. I suddenly got excited. Would he speak on this issue? Would he join Zac Goldsmith (still can't believe that) in subtly criticising his leader? Would he join everyone else in agreeing with Mark Pritchard on this issue? Well, the answers are as follows - Yes. No. No.

Those are fine words, but will the hon. Gentleman explain to the House why the Labour party did not do something about the issue when it was in power?

And now I know that Vole is right. Because this is disgustingly cheap political point scoring from someone who should know better. I appreciate politics is a dirty game sometimes, but at that moment in the debate, there was no need for an interjection as snide, unintelligent and pointless as what we see above. Mercifully, as we can see here (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2011-06-23a.548.0&s=speaker%3A24886#g579.0) Uppal was soon slapped down by Labour MP Gavin Shuker. There we have it folks. That's the mark of the man, right there. When even the poshest of posh Tory boys can admit that his leader is worryingly wrong and contributes successfully to a debate, Paul Uppal barges in with his finger pointing with nonsense that helps precisely no-one.

Will I ever blog about Paul Uppal ever again? Probably not - I know someone who will, and they do a better job of it than I ever could. But the more blogs like this which can be found when a person googles his name, the better, quite frankly. People of Wolverhampton South West - when the election next rolls round, don't tolerate this man's rubbish any longer.