The Evil Nature of the World's Thieving Wealthy

Today the BBC online posted a story in which the Archbishops of Canterbury and York spoke out abut the greed of the city. They made an interesting point that ‘The US Treasury has proposed a fund worth up to $700bn (£382bn) to buy back much of the bad debt held by banks and other financial institutions.’ Dr. Sentamu the Archbishop of York noted that ‘"One of the ironies about this financial crisis is that it makes action on poverty look utterly achievable. It would cost $5bn to save six million children's lives.

The story went on to state:

"World leaders could find 140 times that amount for the banking system in a week. How can they tell us that action for the poorest is too expensive?"

This stinks! People, we are all going to be held accountable for our actions. Imagine – there is no real practical reason why anyone should be going hungry or without water. There are more than enough resources to go around. But in spite of this fact those that have the most just don’t want to share with those that have the least. And I’m not talking about handouts either. I’m talking about using money to put in place a fair and equitable system whereby those who’s labour and resources have been pillaged over the centuries are able to conduct their affairs in a free market in addition to real and immediate help being given on the spot to those who need it until they can catch up. But this isn’t done. Money, it seems, can always be found for things people want to spend it on. When it comes down to it, the wealthy nations just don’t want to spend it on their fellow man.

Sickening.

Why is the Gap so Small?

You have to ask yourself the question: Why, if the majority of Americans feel that the Republicans have made such a pig's dinner of things - is there such a small gap between the candidates when it comes to points?

A poll in today's issue of USA Today has the sad answer. It says that what it calls 'deep rooted racial issues' could cause the Democrats to lose the White House. What they mean is so many people in the US are so racist that they would rather vote for their ideological enemy than for a black man who agrees with them on almost all the important issues.

That this is the case has been proven on many occasions sadly - many so-called democrats have freely said that if Obama won the primaries they would vote for McCain. Be honest. How many times in past elections have you heard democrats say they would rather vote for the republican candidate - even if they aren't particularly happy with their own?

This is disgusting and anyone who says that racism isn't so bad now is a moron. If racism wins and we end up with McCain in the White House (and Palin God help us) the world is screwed. Anyone with a brain can see that. Racist have made millions suffer for centuries. Are they going to continue to make the world suffer just because they are mad enough to determine that our future and the future of our kids should be decided not by policy positions but by an imagined negative connotation they have attached to black skin?

Time will tell.

Stewards are Wrong

The stewards are wrong. Lewis Hamilton followed the rules on Sunday. He let Kimi take the lead after he went off the edge and then using skill regained that lead. Why on earth should he therefore be penalised?

Even Ferrari agrees. Let's hope the appeal goes through in his favour - but it's a shame to have it hanging over his head. I hear the appeal may not be heard for a month - meanwhile there are other races. Well it's not like Lewis to be distracted by this kind of thing - he had to deal with worse with the *****bwoy Alonzo.

Here's a story on the penalty issue. What do you think? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/sep/08/formulaone.lewishamilton