Sunday, 22 May 2011

Why I believe:

I am a 23 stone virgin, with the social skills of a drunkard. I am innumerate and severely dyslexic and dyspraxic. I have been bullied and mocked most of my overly long life and sometime because of my faith but yet I still believe. I believe in the full Christian doctrine; not only in some vague distant God but in a personal saviour who loves me and shed his mortal life for my salvation so you may ask why?

Well I want you to remember a film; the 1950 version of “war of the worlds”. In this the female lead explains to her eventual hero that when she is scared she runs into a church, indeed her uncle a minister tries to make peaceful contact with the alien and dies at the very start of the film. When she is separated by a crazed crowed from her protector and he goes in search of her, she is found in a church. Other church’s full of the injured and faithful are destroyed but theirs is just spared as germs kill off the Martian threat.

The point of this forgotten moment is that the church is a place of safety if not for the physical from then for the more important spiritual aspect of it. It asks and answers a key question. If you were dying or some disaster was befalling you and those around you where would you go? If you could no longer run away where would you make your stand?

I know where I would run to, I would run to Caversham Heights Methodist church and I pray my beloved minister would be there and I know what I’d choose to be doing, singing the old hymns and looking after the scared, faithless and injured. In these day of utter darkness I would shine at my brightness and the light of the Lord would shine from every church in the land as a beacon of hope maybe not for the salvation of the mortal world but salvation in the best world, God world.

Oh brothers and sisters I would die just as you will but I will die in faith and joy not hiding or zoned out on drugs, sex or booze. My death will be no less painful or horrific but then reward of a life spent in God’s service and the protecting hand of God will make it all the better when I go onto the choir immortal whilst others in the fear and desperation sell their souls cheap for the illusion of physical security and survival.

It may not be the best reason for faith in God but it was my first step along the path of salvation and redemption. The knowledge of the eternal church is a great joy to me, it is my faith in time of trouble and in the end we must all have somewhere and I can think of no better place than a temple to the Lord of love and mercy. I can think no brighter place to confront the darkness then in the house of the Lord.

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

A noble sprite

A noble sprit embiggens the smallest man:

If you know which town hold this as there motto then you can probably already answer the following question?

What longest running show has a female character who is the mother of three children, one of whom shot a man and another of whom was imprisoned in juvenile detention for fraud. She herself has a gambling addition, has a conviction for theft and DUI and even has had a mental break down and a semi dalliance with a bowling instructor whilst married. Still confused, well if I were to tell you she has a tall blue plume of blue hair and her surname is Simpson you may guess what this piece is about: “The Simpsons” (please add in signature theme tune).

There is one program I hold above all: “The Simpsons”. I have every episode of DVD, I own every book explaining every episode of every series and I have written a blog and every episode of every series of “The Simpsons”. To me the Simpsons is not just a show it is a real family, they really are a part of my life.

So why do I love the Simpsons so? First they are a Christian family; they have a minister and go to church weekly, just like me. Secondly they have a less than perfect life, in a less than perfect world rather like the world we live in and of course I adore the surreal adventures and snide comments on a world that has lost its direction.

What make the Simpsons the Simpsons and what it has lost a little in its latter years, is the side jokes; which are often funnier and more biting then any which are part of the main story arc and yes all Simpsons have a proper story arc, the characters are believable and endearing and they are also just as flawed and debased as we all Are. Indeed Reverent lovejoys flexible faith and rocky marriage, reminds me of several ministers I have known and Ned Flanders clearly studier and more devoted faith is another aspect of church life I have experienced. Indeed it is often true that the congregation is more orthodox then the minister.

Yes, I know what you’re thinking, jeeze this is only a show; well it maybe to you but to me it’s a whole world of people all of whom I know everything about . I have watched faithfully since it began and I will remain loyal until the bitter end because in the end who of us can see hurricane Neddy episode of the Simpson and not reflect on our place in the world and are views on faith and God and how many shows can say they achieve this?

Sunday, 8 May 2011

Save the UK

With the march of the Nationalist in Scotland and the growing regionalist sentiment running rampant in this country, as embodied by the EDL and the English democrats; it is time for those of us who love the union, to do anything we can to defend it and hopefully strengthen it .

The first and the most important thing is that devolution has failed, all it has managed to do is exacerbate existing nationalist movements in Scotland and Wales and empower those voice in England obsessed more with tax revenue then national unity. Added to this the main parties have been eradicated in Scotland, which is exacerbating the West Lothian question and our political elite has no answer to this question apart from appeasement, slowing down but not ending the slow drifting apart of our beloved nation and union, So what is the solution?.

Solution one, national federalisation: The subtler nationalist voices our asking for a federation of nations, now there was only one country in recent history with such a set up and that was Yugoslavia. Indeed all nations where the federal structure mirrors large almost national divides (Switzerland, Belgium) either act as disparate nations or are themselves in danger of drifting apart. Federation at the national level for the UK is not a solution to the problems, a federation based on national boundaries is doomed, especially when one nation is so much larger and so much more powerful both electorally and economically then the three smaller nations.

Solution two: appeasement and greater and greater devolution. This solution is the current solution and I say solution out of sheer politeness. As we have seen, as our political elites (and I mean the Tory party and the labour party) have either retreated to their safe places or ignored Scotland. Scotland has turned to its own nationalist party and our nation is increasingly divided between its regions, with the political elite unable to claim to truly represent that nation anymore. This is not a solution, it is surrender, and it is an end of our nation as a meaningful concept and the end of the union.

The true solution: We and I mean hear the Tory party and the political elites and also the nation as a whole, we must adopt a radicle view, in the name of saving our nation and union. First we need to create a political system removed from the national boundaries. We need a system which empowers are historic, sub national regions. We need to push power to the people, empowering g the parish level and the community. The full detail of my personal plan is found hear: http://piemandmu.blogspot.com/2010/10/yorkshire-as-federal-state.html but the point here is not to adopt my ideas but to put those of us whom wish to save the union into thinking mode. We need a solution which empowers people and a new solution for our regions, which threats them with respect and entrust them with powers.

Friday, 29 April 2011

dating

I am a committed Christian but still quite a joker I love to laugh and hang out with friends and family. I do not drink, smoke or gamble of course, but I still know how to have a good time. I must admit I do have a very dark sense of humour but I enjoy most forms of comedy. I am always honest but always kind to those around me.
I like to socialise with friends and you can often find me on a social networking site, but some time I also like to kick back with a good book.
The kind of women I am looking for: a fun honest feisty who respects my beliefs. I am looking for a long term relationship but would accept simply increasing my circle of friends

Monday, 25 April 2011

What we want from our electoral system:

It seems to me that one of the issues with any reform of our electoral system (beyond the facts that is duller then dirt) is we don’t know what we want. So I have decided to outline, briefly the various and sometimes contradictory aspects we would like to have.

1st: We want a system that ensures effective government; we are often not entirely certain was gridlocked government means in effect but we know it is bad and everything it brings is bad.
2nd We want a system that has the checks and balances between it and no longer overly empowers the executive. In short we want and end to electing a dictator

3rd We want a system that means MP’s work hard for their constituents and that all constituents have an equal voice.

4th We want the national vote to be reflected more in the arrangement of are legislature. No more majority government with 38% of the national vote

5th We don’t want any system which would help extremist parties

6th We want expert in our legislature

7th All members should be elected

8th We want a greater popular voice in are electoral system, more use of referenda – recalls and direct democracy

9th We want responsible and well thought out, long term government

10th We want parties to stick to their manifestos and serve our interest

11th We don’t want to fund parties

I could go on and on and on but I feel I have made my point. We cannot have it all, we cannot have a proportional – equal waited system which give the populace a voice and ensure there are safeguards against extremist parties and that we still have a powerful politics. We cannot have more popular participation and ensure sensible and decent laws. We have to make a choice and as no one beyond the political world really cares I doubt we will

Monday, 7 March 2011

Giving up

I am leaving twitter for forty days and forty nights; I am also giving up chocolate for the same period (the later will be far hard then the first). Great you may say; forty days without your holier then though preaching, misspelt and often insane tweets and you may loose some weight in the barging. Why should I care what you do?

I suspect none of you will care, less read the bible passage about Jesus and thus Christianities first lent “Mark 1: 12-15”, for those interested and I do not intend to expound of the symbolism or temptations Jesus faced. No this piece is not for the faithful but the; well lets call them the rest.

We live in a world where consuming is seen as a good, often even selfishness is seen as a good (“because you worth it”) and where the market actively sells temptation. There are too few voices raised against this obsession with self indulgence and almost none that proclaim the virtues of self restraint and of less but there is one: the voice of lent.

As a Methodist I do not “have” nor am I encouraged into giving anything up for lent and yet I do. I do it to one remind myself of sin but also as an act that reminds me that a balanced life is a life of restraint and of forging today’s pleasures for tomorrows lesser but deeper pleasure. I also do this because I want to give something up, I want to acknowledged that my life is not perfect and that it is too full and often too busy and that it would not kill me to drop a little of it.

In the time freed up by forsaking my beloved followers on twitter I intend to read more books on accesses in order to become better at my job but to also read more of the bible, a sort of secular & religious trade. I of course could do this any time but I find lent focuses the mind and enables and empowers the reforming and reducing if the indulgencies which have come to dominate our lives.

I will not come back to twitter a better man, beyond better skilled in accesses and better schooled in the bible but I will come back having placed it back into its proper, non essential perspective. I of course intend to keep on with both the fomentation studies after lent – reducing my time on twitter, having, hopefully, learned that my life is none the poorer with less tweeting and a lot more reading.

So I encourage you to follow suit, use lent as a time to clean out lives cupboards and reassesses the importance of those activities which dominate our modern life’s. Use lent as a spring board to a smaller but better life. A life filled not with things and activities but purpose and utility. So this lent give something you want up and who knows what may take it place.

So I will leave you now for my forty days in the desert and only my giant ego to tempt me back into the fold. So I will say goodbye and God bless.

Saturday, 5 March 2011

Q&A

Q: “I am getting seriously fed up with the Government which, when faced with
some charge of culpability, invariably picks up the same stick and beats the
previous government with it”:

A: I am confused why you’re annoyed now? Labour did this for 13 years and to some extent the unpopular policies pursued by any government our a response to the failings or misfortunes of the proceeding government. Also they say this because governments are actually powerless to control the situations in which they find themselves but have to continue the myth of their power by blaming bad situations on the last government. In the end you got to blame someone or the public simply blame you


Q: “What was their view on the regulation of banks and in particular of
their speculative investment operations? Did they make their position
unequivocally clear at the time”

A: In the words of Homer Simpson; “short answer no, long answer no”. I am unaware of any pro regulation talk (beyond some criticism of the tri partied structure – basically bashing the FSI) within the tory party (or anti regulation); it was a non-issue until the crash. Vince cable did warn of a crash unless more regulation was brought in but no more detail than that. Indeed looking at both manifestos I see almost no commitment to more regulation (beyond a lib-dem pledged to separate the retail and casino banks a pledged they shared with UKIP) and I see no more regulations being proposed moving forward – though they may separate them (along the lines of the now defunct Glass–Steagall Act in the us)

Q:“What would they have done about the failure of Northern Rock and the
near collapse of HBOS and RBS? Would they have let a bank fail? What would
they have done to protect innocent retail banking customers, who simply
relied on those institutions to look after their money prudently”

A: Right: On northern rock – official line at the time from the Tory party was let it fail (not sure on the lib-dem side) and the same was true for the others (though not for very long). As for the innocents involved with the banks even before the banks collapses any deposit below fifty thousand was protected by the state. I, however, do believe Gordon Brown should go down for almost single handily saving the international economy buy the scope of government action which forced international action to save the banks

Q: “Did they have a view on the demutualisation of what were formerly the
big Building Societies”

A: I have no idea I would imagine they had a no policy, policy but they all did – you must remember in order to do this the depositors had to vote in favour of it – so it would be indecent for government to interfere


Q: ”My point is that unless they were absolutely clear in their opposition to
the policies of the previous government, they are complicit with it. And
that brings me back to a point I raised with you on a previous occasion:
should not 'the books' be opened much more to joint scrutiny by the Commons?
Without such transparency we will inevitably encounter, at some point in the
future, further obfuscation such as we have now. 'Blame it all on the other
lot' is a feeble privilege we can well do without”

A: I am not sure what book you are referring too – all commons debates are recorded in Hansard as are the votes of all MP’s. the fact is that generally no one cares – indeed this last election was marked by a non-campaign – a campaign which went out of its way to disengage with the voters – both side purposefully avoided discussing any of the issues and descended into blaming each other.

A con:I do disagree on one point: The last government is one hundred per cent responsible for the polices it under took regardless of the polices advocated by the opposition – the opposition cannot be held accountable because they have no real power and are just playing politics in the waiting room of power. Also I do not believe the coalition are blaming the crash on the last governments banking polices butthey are holding them accountable for the deficit cause by the last governments over spend something which is directly there fault and was challenged (albeit very late) by the now government.

A con – con: So yes the entire situation we are now in is not the last governments fault but some of it is and even if the opposition did not realise this; it is not really there job to do so; it is the government job to govern the country and accept the responsibility for any failings. The blaming of the government is partly polices and as old as the hills but is also partly a true picture of who is to blame for any nations situation
.