Thursday, October 27, 2005
Insomnia
Start with this - evidently old news. What was all that about life and art and imitating. I'd not seen Spector recently. My apologies for rehashing old jokes. It goes straight in with the Saddam in the infant court imagery that The Daily Show picked up on straight away, stealing even more of my thunder (I'll be living in a spooky world of incessant silent lightning soon). Dead parrot dead please For the first time in perhaps 30 years, people might be able to say "Dead Parrot" without there being some back-reference to that appallingly overwrought Palin/Cleese sketch. And about time. There were many funnier things they did, even along the same lines such as the Cheese Shop. Even at the age of 7 I wished wholeheartedly upon first listening to some tape in the car across Europe that I should never hear the Parrot Sketch again. However, the Independent's headline the other day beginning "Dead parrot" caused a great deal less giggling amongst my co-workers than I thought it should - I'm far too obsessed... H5N1 OUT! Foot and mouth IN! Bumping into Rob and Giles last night, I got embroiled in a very simple discussion of politics with them (YAWN, but we enjoyed it, so shut up, but I decided I'd mention it because Giles' thoughts on Bush' financial prowess were pant-pissingly terrifying). That's beside the point though. What I enjoy tremendously about Rob's company is the frequent opportunity to tempt his own foot into his mouth. For example, in discussing the relative health of Giles' parents, I suggested that Giles' mother's prostate cancer was most definitely a discriminating factor, at which Rob took me to task in an appalled diatribe: Rob: How could you say such a thing?! I mean. She might really have it?! His other great clanger, admittedly no more than a verbal typo, brainfart, or whatever you want to call it, was the delightful "When Hitler declared war on Germany", which if you think about it might have made for a very very different latter 20th century, but people have written enough bollocks on the "What if Hitler..." theme that we shall leave it at that this minute. Briefly whilst on the subject of Giles, via his very fine site, a link to a story on the US embassy and Congestion Charge fees from the beeb provides this gem from an embassy employee: "We wouldn't impose it on you and, likewise, it's not appropriate, nor is it allowed, for your government to impose it on us."Shut up you whining little bitches, and pay like the rest of us. Given the way the US reams everyone, especially foreigners (expats) for anything it possibly can, I think that's a bit rich. Perhaps they're realising that they've blown their year's budget on petrol and porkie pies... I've a good mind to go down there and shit on their eagle. Law in ass shocker Yet again, we see evidence that the law is little more than a hee-hawing equid, not because of the decision, but because of the reasons for that decision and the palming off of the case to a higher court. "The smell of ripe strawberries is stable and durable," Eden said. "That smell is well-known to consumers who will have memories of it from childhood."That quote alone conjures up images of a post-fuckwittian futuristic society where legend tells of a time when children could smell strawberries for real. Arsefaces. Think of the children. Smoke On that note though, how long do we think it will be until smoking is regarded as a fond romanticism in the same way as we read about opium dens in Victorian literature? 30 years? 60 years? 100 years? Perhaps that's not fair - maybe smoking is already a romantic notion, given that we all know it murders us from the inside yet still tend to love watching old Bogey chuffing at it. No, when will it be the stuff of history books? The stuff of folklore? Children will stare wide-eyed and drop-jawed at their grandmother when she tells of a time her parents could smoke in the street. AND WOULD! Even worse, you could buy a packet of cigarettes for the cost of a bus ride. The Grauniad referred to comments by Ash warning that a selective smoking ban for pubs which sell food would widen the health imbalance in this capitalist shambles of a country (my words, mixed with theirs, but there's none of mine here): The anti-smoking group Ash said ... [the smoking ban] would add to health inequalities, since pubs in poor areas tend not to serve food.Now, if we bring up a generation of children to associate smoking with poverty, what is that going to tell them about the rest of the world where people can smoke without prejudice and who haven't a hope of implementing a smoking ban? Probably what they're being told now, only again it'll widen the divide, not close it. Flu season my arse, it's now a permanent state of being. Doctors could more usefully let me know when to expect the next no-flu season, but what do they know? | |


