LABOUR GETS BIG MONEY BACKING
Last week (or maybe the week before, time does fly) we charted the reinvention of Sir Keir Starmer through hundreds of Guardian column inches. Your favourite Deep State-backed paper is getting right behind this particular sock puppet. And now others are too.
The Guardian reports that “Big Labour donors returning to party under Keir Starmer”. And they seem to be happy about it.
It’s an odd choice of headline because, while a few big-money donors are apparently returning, you’d think the bigger news is the working class people leaving:
Big private donations dried up almost completely under Jeremy Corbyn, although the party’s huge membership and union support put it in a strong financial position without the need for funding from wealthy backers. However, Unite, Labour’s biggest union backer and a major supporter of Corbyn’s leadership, has issued warnings over future funding.
But who cares, right? Good riddance to them I say. The last thing a political party needs is grass-roots support, and nothing spoils a working-class movement like unionising.
Don’t even bother reading the internal report claiming Labour insiders threw the 2017 election.
The corruption is as sickening as it is obvious. Labour, so long a lost cause, almost became something worthy under Corbyn, and now it’s being torn apart in front of our eyes.
We have the disgusting spectacle of a notionally “progressive” paper praising the knighted leader of a “working people’s party” for winning over the big-money donors who moved to Switzerland to avoid paying UK taxes.
This really is clown world.
DON’T PANIC: THE COVID CAT MADE A FULL RECOVERY
This is technically from last week, but we missed it and it’s too good to ignore. “Owners warned not to kiss pets after first cat infected with coronavirus in UK”, the headline tells us.
By “after”, they mean three months after, because the cat was sick back in May. Which means owners have been kissing their pets willy-nilly for weeks with no cat plague in sight. The author doesn’t seem up to this simple piece of logic.
There’s almost too much to break down here. As a piece of comedic writing it borders on genius. From needlessly supplying us the cat’s gender, place of birth and age, to the throwaway reference to the fact the cat is fine, and that they found out by accident because the Glasgow Centre of Virology Studies is apparently devoting its money and time to randomly testing cat blood samples.
The scientist is a nice find too. It’s not many professionals who would have balls enough to put forward the hypothesis that “fluffier” cats might be more likely to catch the virus, but Prof Margaret Hosie is such a person:
maybe fluffier [cats] would be more ready to catch any sneezes or cough droplets.
I don’t know if “fluffy” is a scientific term, or what – if any – studies have been done correlating the amount of fluffiness with immune system response. Prof Mosie is obviously unclear on that too, hastening to add:
You can’t draw any significance from that.
No kidding.This Week in the Guardian #12