Sunday, 21 September 2008

Hairy Posterior And The Bung Of Desperation

Ordinary former destitute single mum (aah) and now £560 millionairess J K Rowling has given Gordon Brown and NuLab £1 million as a token of her thanks for doing so much to alleviate child poverty. I don't think she'll have to shop at Aldi as a result of giving the money away.
Now, I would normally make some jokes based on the books that J K Rowling wrote but as I've never read any nor seen a minute of the films made from them I will refrain on grounds of complete ignorance.
Instead , may I suggest that if I had £560 million and felt so passionately about child poverty I would use it to set up schemes to alleviate it myself in a similar way to Carnegie and Nuffield in previous centuries. Giving away a tiny fraction of one's wealth to assist the re-election of a political party with a proven track record of spending other people's money (including that of poor married parents and single people with better foresight and judgement) not very well is, I believe, a rather selfish action. But I'm not a half-billionaire so ignore me.

7 comments:

James Higham said...

I have neither read the books nor seen the films, nor have I any intention of doing so.

Gallimaufry said...

And if more people make that pledge La Rowling's wealth will stick at £559 million.

Wolfie said...

This story had me fuming and ranting for hours, I nearly wrote a swear post of mammoth proportions on it. What got me apoplectic was her rationale that conservative plans for tax breaks for married couples were unfair on single mothers. What a stupid, small-minded nasty little woman! She can take her shitty children's books and shove every shoddy edition up her ignorant bitter arse. Bitch.

Anonymous said...

Of course were the country more equal and more socialist non billionaires would not be ignored- its precisely conservative policies which strengthen the position of billionaires relative to the rest of us.

Furthermore the idea that people are defined by their politics is not an idea I'd associate with the party of liberty- more with the kind of Stalinist parties on the left who demanded that you agree to their political doctrines before they could respect the other things you did in your life.

Lastly I'd try reading- if you can- her books- they require a reading age of eight, given the quality of this post you might just about cope!

Gallimaufry said...

Anon 10:28: Many thanks for your comments. After reading them I checked the post against the SMOG, FORCAST, Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kinkaid and found that reading age ranged from 14-18.
I hope you will forgive me but I then subjected your comments to the same MS Word analysis and found that they were of a similar reading level and readability to my text. However, you wrote bollocks.

UBERMOUTH said...

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I immediately wondered if it would go into Brown's Spin Account...which must be getting rather low.

UBERMOUTH said...

Personally, I think anon IS Harry Potter.