Mad eyes, part 94.

« Nice helpful comment... | The fuss about tags. »

Mad eyes, part 94.

by The_Walrus ^Pro @ 01 Nov. 2009 – 22:44:06

$alan johnson\'s eyes$

It is clear now that Alan Johnson wants to be our next mad eyed prime minister. We already know that he does not believe in science, or actual truth, or evidence, preferring rather the views of the "one-eyed Scottish idiot" (© Jeremy Clarkson) who has been told by his god that something called skunk has actually killed people. His complexion tells us he thinks alcohol is a vitamin, don't you think?

Well, I don't think we need all these politicians. Ever since 1958, I have believed that it would be a good idea to get a committee of proper scientists to run the world. How could it be any worse, apart from anything else?
Options:
Tags:
- politicians
- mad eyes

20 Comments to Mad eyes, part 94.

Hide subcomments

- alecweston ^Pro
- 01 Nov. 2009 @ 23:07:07
"Proper scientists" Hmm. Who would choose them? And their successors? I'm suspicious of any self-perpetuating oligarchy.

Still anything would be better than Jeremy Clarkson.
- - The_Walrus ^Pro
  - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
  - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 07:02:07
  I'm closely related to a real scientist.
  - - alecweston ^Pro
    - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 07:22:22
    Your brother?
    
    I was just thinking about your Comment on my blog about Prince Charles, while I made the day's first cup of coffee.
    
    My sister, who you may have come across on the airwaves, has also met the Prince. But would still like to sting him on the nose; furthermore, my sister would not be somebody I placed at the centre of my ideal government.
    
    Funny thing, families.
    - - The_Walrus ^Pro
      - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
      - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 10:36:52
      One of my brothers, yes. Your sister certainly should sting Charles on the nose, although it wouldn't show, as he has a very red face. I assume he drinks as much as his granny used to.
      - Reply to comment
      - Permalink
- arctictern
- http://arctictern.blog.co.uk
- 01 Nov. 2009 @ 23:36:01
1958, the year of my birth. Had it happened I'd have never experienced the delights of Ted Heath, Mike Yarwood, Margar...Marg...Magg (can't bring myself to say it....) and Tony Blurgh.
Scientists? Loads of brains but sadly lacking in any common sense if my chemistry and physics tutors were anything to go by. They'd need somebody to guide them. That takes us back to politicians.
- - The_Walrus ^Pro
  - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
  - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 07:00:10
  You think politicians have common sense? Oh dear...
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- Munzly
- http://poppycock.blog.co.uk/
- 02 Nov. 2009 @ 06:21:18
Politicians work to an Agenda but this is hidden behind their published Policy. Their Agenda includes getting lotsa money and other pleasures, while their Policy is only there to fool enough people into voting for them. There are a number who do include a desire to do public good as part of their Agenda, but they are not often the ones who rise to the top.
- - The_Walrus ^Pro
  - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
  - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 14:30:17
  And that is why they should not be allowed to run anything.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink
- brokendownangel ^Pro
- 02 Nov. 2009 @ 08:20:27
Whoever we chose to run the country would eventually become corrupt - power does that. The trouble with politicians is that even if they want to do good for the country they run that involves hard choices and they have short terms and are always conscious of re-election so they rarely make them.
- - The_Walrus ^Pro
  - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
  - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 10:41:02
  I think you will find that all generalisations are false... not all politicos turn into Mugabe 20 minutes after the election.
  
  But we can't let Prime Ministers make decisions for us all, based on the voices they hear when they are kneeling by their beds. That's madness. The more democratic and scientific things get, the more likely we are to survive.
  - - brokendownangel ^Pro
    - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 11:27:18
    Perhaps not all, but most. And it is a democracy, the people do vote - the ones that can be bothered that is! My hubby is a scientist and a bloody good one at that but he would make a useless Minister - lots of his fellows wouldn't even remember to eat if food wasn't put in front of them at the appropriate times - I think they would make lousy government officers
    - - The_Walrus ^Pro
      - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
      - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 12:28:35
      But what I'm saying is that we should get out of this idea that we need ministers at all, and change the whole way things are decided... no, I don't have a fully worked out idea, but it's obvious there won't be any progress while we stick to the current ways.
      - brokendownangel ^Pro
        
        02 Nov. 2009 @ 13:52:14
        
        Oh there I do agree, the current system is not perfect, but it works after a fashion and is better than a dictatorship. One day, not in my lifetime but hopefully in my daughters there will be a better way x
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
- jenray ^Pro
- http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
- 02 Nov. 2009 @ 12:13:39
I doubt very much indeed whether any scientists would accept any post to do with governing the country...would consider it a total waste of their talents...seems only lawyers go into politics now, which is why we're up the creek without a paddle...lawyers like to control every situation and the result of translating that into the political realm is a huge reduction in our freedom...hmmm...you should make a stipulation in your new government if the scientists turn you down, Walrus...no lawyers either!... GBHs...XXX
- - The_Walrus ^Pro
  - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
  - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 12:31:12
  Definitely, lawyers should embark on the B Ark as soon as possible. I don't want the scientists to stop doing science, just decide what should be done for the good of the planet and then the civil servants can execute the plan. We could perhaps keep a very small government on a remote island for observation.
  - - jenray ^Pro
    - http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
    - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 12:35:55
    LOL...trouble is scientists tend to disagree with each other so there would be conflict as to what is the best approach to take on a whole load of subjects...the best laid plans of mice and men, Walrus, tend to founder when it comes to human beings planning anything... GBHs...XXX
    - - The_Walrus ^Pro
      - http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
      - 02 Nov. 2009 @ 14:17:50
      But the committee of scientists who advise the government on drug policy were able to produce a report that they discussed together and agreed upon. Climate scientists too have come to a concensus.
      
      Science proceeds on the basis of peer review, not disagreements. That is what politicians do.
      - jenray ^Pro
        
        http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
        
        02 Nov. 2009 @ 16:01:02
        
        Ah, you didn't listen to the News today on Radio 4, they interviewed a psychiatrist who said that Professor Nutt was wrong on several counts...and there are scientists who are doubtful whether the climate change is caused by human activities...I suppose if the majority of scientists make a particular claim, it could become the accepted viewpoint, but a majority viewpoint has been wrong before...bit dangerous for us if the wrong one is the bases for radical changes in our world...at least political decisions can be revoked, but the subjects that scientists deal with are usually on a large scale so could have devastating outcomes if based on an error...GBHs...XXX
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        The_Walrus ^Pro
        
        http://www.doctor-dark.co.uk
        
        02 Nov. 2009 @ 19:55:41
        
        Radio 4 is owned by NuLabour.
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink
        
        Show this thread
        
        jenray ^Pro
        
        http://www.jenniferhunter.co.uk
        
        02 Nov. 2009 @ 20:00:27
        
        LOL...Ray thinks it's owned by the Conservative party...I think it's owned by idiots now...has dumbed down so much now I barely ever listen to it...GBHs...XXX
        
        Reply to comment
        
        Permalink