Wind 'em up … And off they go

Been really enjoying the predictable uproar over the last couple of days caused by the Cancer’s ‘”Outrageous” lottery grant to Bristol gay teens’ group’ story.

In a fairly simple – but highly effective move – the paper wheeled out rent-a-quote Tory moron Bunter Eddy to attack a £400k lottery grant awarded to some obscure publicly funded local “charity” group, ‘Educational Action Challenging Homophobia’ (EACH).

A good boy who regularly attends Clifton All Saints, Bunter’s always available, able and willing to give good copy:

“I think this is a mistaken and misguided, outrageous waste of money.

“Sadly, it seems to be further confirmation that the Big Lottery has long since ceased to impartially distribute lottery cash to worthwhile and respected causes, instead it seems obliged to dole out punters’ money to a raft of politically correct lobbies which clearly sit within the Labour Government’s priority.”

Cue predictable uproar as crazed fundamentalists on both sides of the ‘row’ piled on to the Cancer’s website to have their say.

In the blue corner were frothing right wing males (they’re always male aren’t they?) spouting about Adam and Eve and gay people being ‘unnatural’ while in the red corner we had shrill liberal fundies labeling any criticism whatsoever of this latest example of utterly irrelevant New Labour-style social policy as ‘Homophobic’.

At the last count the article had attracted over 170 comments on the Cancer’s site including fascinating digressions into the secret gay life of penguins; an attempted angry denunciation from ineffectual Lib Dem gay accountant Stephen Williams MP; Labour’s Alderman Paul Smith labeling Bunter a “baffoon” and, best of all, ‘Charlie, Bristol’ who decided the whole debate has made him “depressed about the future of humanity.”

You’re not alone there Charlie.

Latest news is that the shrill liberals have now set up a little space all to themselves on the internet entirely dedicated to their moral outrage and, er … Cheap gags about abortion! They are also going to complain to the Press Complaints Commission about the Cancer apparently.

Although exactly what they think they’re complaining about is a little unclear. Does a lot of people publicly disagreeing with you on a newspaper’s website contravene the PCC code now?

Could someone just award them a grant to investigate rampant homophobia in the local press instead? Maybe then they’ll all shut the fuck up and get on with writing us a strategy we can all take the piss out of on the internet when it’s published.

This entry was posted in Bristol, Bristol Evening Post, Bristol West, Conservatives, Education, Labour Party, Local government, MPs, Politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Wind 'em up … And off they go

  1. DocSavage says:

    with sales down 10% the evil past needs every sensationalist piece of shit it can get it’s 6 fingered hands on.

    having sacked it’s work force I was wondering if they employ a giant computer to randomly generate stories these days?

    but as they say; if you give an infinate number of monkeys in an infinate number of rooms an infinate number of typewriters you’ll have real trouble selling your house.

  2. inks says:

    £100,000 for a beach volleyball court and mountain bike racing track in Beddie? Beach volleyball?!? That’s way gayer than £400,000 to help give some young people across four local authorities a start in life.

  3. Rosso Verde says:

    Typical of the Bristol Daily Mail, I wonder how Eddy’s comments go down with Dave C and the new “nice” supposedly gay friendly Tory leadership.

  4. Ben says:

    Just out of curiosity – why is the word charity in quotes in your second paragraph?

  5. No, they’re not always men. The two last people I heard repeating this lottery-prefers-gays accusation (months apart) were women. One was working in a shop. The shop has closed now. Hmm.

    Ben – at a guess, maybe it’s because http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/ says “Your search for ‘Educational Action Challenging Homophobia’ has produced no results.” Strangely, entering their registration number 1095665 does find them. Is the Charity Commission’s web search homophobic?

  6. Pingback: MJ Ray (mjray) 's status on Friday, 28-Aug-09 11:58:09 UTC - Identi.ca

  7. Ben says:

    @MJ

    Charity Commission search function is borked – search under EACH and they are the top result.

  8. Glenn Vowles says:

    Is it just that Eddy does not like homosexuals do you think??

  9. thebristolblogger says:

    Dunno, but he seems to hang around with enough of them up at Clifton all Saints quite happily (have we cleared this with the lawyers? Ed.)

  10. thebristolblogger says:

    ps. the reason charity is “charity” is because the organisation is mainly publicly funded. To my – and many people’s – mind the term charity is a little misleading in these circumstances.

    The organisation is better understood as an arms-length public sector organisation.

    Ironically for Cameron’s Conservatives these types of organisation are the future of public services.

  11. BristolDave says:

    ps. the reason charity is “charity” is because the organisation is mainly publicly funded. To my – and many people’s – mind the term charity is a little misleading in these circumstances.

    That’ll be another submission to fakecharities.org then…

  12. Ben says:

    “The organisation is better understood as an arms-length public sector organisation. ”

    Isn’t it the purpose, activities and constitution that make something a charitable body, rather than how it is funded? You wouldn’t describe a charity funded by grants from KPMG as a ‘arms-length private sector organisation’ would you?

    So, no, not another entry for fake charities, I’m afraid.

    Oh, and re “To my – and many people’s – mind…”

    Textbook intimation of a silent majority there. Now, where else have I heard that recently..?

  13. redzone says:

    “Isn’t it the purpose, activities and constitution that make something a charitable body, rather than how it is funded?”

    💡 ummmm, no! charity is charity, ie not funded by anything other than “charitable” donations.

    “So, no, not another entry for fake charities, I’m afraid.”

    but it’s not exactly a charity is it ? 🙄

  14. Ella says:

    Well done redzone, you miserable fool. I hope rats chew through your internet cables.

  15. paul smith says:

    Well it reminds everyone what a bigoted fool Eddy is, I think it is not just gays that he detests but his history shows interesting views on race too. Probably old fashioned views about women if he ever met any who weren’t members of the tory party, speaking of which I wonder when Charlotte ‘newspaper blogger’ Lesley is going to chip in with her views (she has them on everything else).

  16. thebristolblogger says:

    I’m told Charlotte and the local Tories don’t get on very well …

  17. redzone says:

    “Well done redzone, you miserable fool. I hope rats chew through your internet cables.”

    whatever dumb ass !!! 😉

  18. Ben says:

    “ummmm, no! charity is charity, ie not funded by anything other than “charitable” donations.”

    So any organisation funded by anything other than private donation isn’t a charity? This is, unfortunately, legally, morally and semantically incorrect. There is nothing in the word or concept of charity which insists on this definition. Historically charities have accepted funding from the state, the monarchy, business and individuals, as their primary objective is the provision of services to those in need.

    Are there some charities that I don’t think should be classed as charities – yes, of course (fee-paying schools and things like the Smith Institute come to mind) but this right-wing meme about ‘fake charities’ is unfocussed and seems to be based on an objection to the activities of various charities as much as anything else.

    If you insist that EACH (about whom I know very little, and have no attachment to) isn’t a charity – simply based on some of it’s funding – then you have to accept that none out of the NSPCC, Barnardos, Shelter and Age Concern (and hundreds of other smaller charities) aren’t charities either – and I’m sure that you wouldn’t think that?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.