Wednesday, 13 March 2013

UK Drowns its Sorrows

In line with most other national papers, we start today with the news that in another amazing u-turn the Prime Minister is expected to announce his flagshit proposal to introduce a minimum price per unit of alcohol is to be dropped or 'kicked into the long grass.'





The cabinet has successfully(?) argued with the Prime Minister Dick Cameroon that this proposal will cost the Tories the next election and needs to be dropped.

Whilst most nationals announce this news with particular glee, Choughworld being a more unbiased and balanced news outlet has to question whether the proposal should have been dropped. Here are some opposing consequences to the news.

If we consider what some of the impacts the proposal could have had, should it have become law:

  • It could have been another 'nail in the coffin' for the Tories as their popularity amongst pensioners would have plummeted as a result of pensioners sobbering up and seeing what is really happening (cataracts permitting,)
  • It may have shut up the health Tsars for a few weeks, and
  • It would have given Moanchester's Health Supremo Patrica Carnival an excuse to 'appear' in our shite rival the Manchester City Centre News, to claim a victory.

However, now the proposal is likely to be dropped it could have the following impacts:
  • Pensioners can continue to remain in a drunken stupor and keep believing the Tory promises not to hurt them through any Welfare Cuts,
  • It will allow the health Tsars the opportunity to complain about another 'nail in the coffin' of the NHS, and
  • It will give Moanchester's Health Commissar Pracktika Carnival an excuse to be in our rival rag to complain about the Tories letting the children of Moanchester down, forcing them into  poverty due to the excessive drinking of the people in the City Centre.
Whilst we at Choughworld have our own views, we would like to hear from you -our long suffering readers, should the proposal be dropped?
Posted by at

12 comments:

  1. Anonymous13 March 2013 at 10:03

    Bottoms up

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown13 March 2013 at 10:39

    There's too much information in this article. We should be using standard cliches to make it easier to digest.

    Binge Drinking
    Nanny State
    Champagne Socialists
    Drunk Scotchmen

    If we're to emulate our diminishing rival we really need to keep meaningful content to a minimum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. scratching my head13 March 2013 at 10:54

      I thought I had followed their tried and trusted formula of filling out a story with bullshit. However, cliches it is from now on

      Delete
    2. Unknown13 March 2013 at 14:56

      MEN readers - whom we're trying to attract - don't read the articles, they simply scan them looking for key words.

      When they see them, their blood ignites and they start ranting and raving.

      We want more of this.

      Delete
    3. Booze o'lot13 March 2013 at 15:37

      That is because their education was somewhat lacking and they cannot read much

      Delete
    4. Unknown13 March 2013 at 15:46

      I do miss them though. I was looking wistfully at the Daily Telegraph comments page yesterday...

      Delete
    5. scratching my head13 March 2013 at 18:34

      Showing your true colours now, Tory boy

      Delete
    6. Infirmus Cygnus13 March 2013 at 19:26

      It's the Daily Bile readers who really rise to the bait their journos chuck out. You can almost imagine the redfaced right wing keyboard thumper, verging on a thrombosis as they vent their spleen on illegal immigrants over here to
      take our jobs while simultaneously claim benefits,
      occupy hospital beds, commit all manner of crimes and get off scot-free courtesy of the HRA/soft judges/limp-wristed laws,
      marry our women and import their kith and kin at the drop of a hat.

      Delete
    7. Unknown13 March 2013 at 20:00

      I think I've boasted about this before, but I was once the second most unpopular poster on a Daily Moan discussion about terrorist suspects.

      Delete
    8. Peter Pann13 March 2013 at 20:35

      Yes, but I can claim to be the first person banned from the MEN since it forced FB onto commentators !

      Delete
    9. Unknown13 March 2013 at 21:37

      Did they tell you why?

      Delete
    10. scratching my head14 March 2013 at 09:36

      No, I did ask but they never responded.

      I wrote 2 posts the day before.

      One correcting their article on councils 'allowing' their residents to pay their council tax over 12 months instead of 10 and criticising Labour councils for their implementation of the scheme.

      The other was a question concerning the apparent funding bias between men and womens cancer charities, specifically prostrate and breast cancer.

      A friend thinks she heard a report on Granada News concerning the FB fiasco with an MEN spokesperson saying people had to login with their real names now, but the Granada person saying 'what about your 'commentator' Peter Pann?

      I had also declared on this blog my pen name, have they been watching us?

      Take your pick.

      Take your pick

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)