If I offered you a cocktail which included in its ingredients formaldehyde, aluminum phosphate, ammonium sulfate, washed sheep red blood cells, embryonic fluid from chickens and thimerosal, what would be your initial reaction? Would you gladly accept this concoction of animal byproducts, heavy metals and chemicals without question?
"Chemicals"? Ooh, how fucking scary. Your entire body is made of "chemicals", you fucking moron.
For example, how would you react if I said that you have large traces of adenosine triphosphate in your body? Would you think, "fuck me—triphosphate? Phosphorus? That can't be good, can it? And adenosine? That sounds a bit suspicious." Well, you'd be wrong.
Adenosine-5'-triphosphate (ATP) is a multifunctional nucleotide, and plays an important role in cell biology as a coenzyme that is the "molecular unit of currency" of intracellular energy transfer.
In fact, you wouldn't exist without adenosine triphosphate because it is what allows your cells to live.
What if I told you that you had chloride ions throughout your body? "Fuck me! Chlorine's a poison—they put it in swimming pools to try to prevent growth of bacteria and algae! Shit! How long do I have to live?"
Once again, you'd be wrong: chloride ions and sodium ions drive the potentials that create the electrical currents in your nerves. Once again, they are absolutely essential.
So, by all means have a debate about immunisation but why not get someone who knows something about the subject to write the fucking article, you Labour morons? Having a debate is all very well, but to have a meaningful debate, you need to start with correct premises; if the facts on which you base your debate are wrong from the very start, then the debate is self-evidently pointless.
Seriously, one of the great things about blogging—and it is one of the things that is going to kill comment pieces in the MSM—is that there are people out in the blogosphere who actually know something about the subjects on which they are writing.
This article, though, is absolutely typical of the way in which politicians in general—and NuLabour in particular—tend to make policy: a whole bunch of idiots who are utterly unaware of the background or facts involved in the subject at hand get together in a room, wank each other off, and come up with a policy which at best is completely fucking useless and, at worst, actively damaging.
Generally speaking, the Tories are no better, but over the last twelve years, NuLabour have demonstrated an utter unwillingness to listen to anyone with any knowledge of the subject at hand—including doctors in hospitals and teachers in schools—and instead made facile policies on the basis of ignorance, tribal loyalty, prejudice, bigotry and spite.
This is why NuLabour have so comprehensively fucked up this country—because politicians and their advisors are generally ignorant of anything other than politics. Plus, of course, the politicians involved in the NuLabour project are quite outstandingly baleful and spiteful.
This will not change under the Tories; state interference is nearly always a disaster, and the only reason that Labour governments have been so outstandingly disastrous is because they are far more in favour of increased state interference than the Tories.
And, since state interference fucks things up, it follows that more state interference fucks things up even more.