Bottom Gear
I had the misfortune to see part of a repeat of Top Gear yesterday. It was even worse than I remember it, as it seems to have turned into to some kind of party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party. First of all Gordon Brown gets compared to Stalin, then we have the three witless presenters extolling the virtues of the then newly elected Tory council leader in Swindon for his irresponsible plans to remove speed cameras from the town. Once again the tired old bollocks about fines raised from speed cameras being a 'tax' on motorists was trotted out. I really am sick of hearing that shite. If you don't want speed cameras to make money, then don't break the fucking law. It really is that simple. Speed limits are mandatory. They are there for a good reason - public safety. Whether the likes of Clarkson and his moronic cronies like it or not; speed kills. The facts speak for themselves - in those areas monitored by speed cameras road fatalities and accidents have declined significantly.
I hate to say it, but if Clarkson's Mini Me, sorry, Richard Hammond, had died in that rocket car accident, then it might have helped ram this message home. Surely then even the likes of Clarkson couldn't possibly deny the dangers of excessive speed. Sadly, though, his survival seems to have reinforced the moronic view that there's nothing really dangerous about reckless driving. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not sanctimonious enough to say that I never exceed the speed limit myself. However, I do try and observe it and, if I break it, I fully accept the consequences - a fine and points on my licence. I certainly don't go whingeing on about 'police states' and the like. The fact is that if you break the speed limit, you are breaking the law. I just don't understand why people like Top Gear's presenters have such a problem with this. Getting back to the original point - as a TV license fee-payer, I really don't see why I should be subsidising right-wing propaganda like Top Gear. I thought the BBC was a public service broadcaster and therefore politically neutral? I also thought that Top Gear was meant to be a motoring programme. In the interests of balance, can we have a motoring programme presented by socialists who actually know something about cars?
I hate to say it, but if Clarkson's Mini Me, sorry, Richard Hammond, had died in that rocket car accident, then it might have helped ram this message home. Surely then even the likes of Clarkson couldn't possibly deny the dangers of excessive speed. Sadly, though, his survival seems to have reinforced the moronic view that there's nothing really dangerous about reckless driving. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not sanctimonious enough to say that I never exceed the speed limit myself. However, I do try and observe it and, if I break it, I fully accept the consequences - a fine and points on my licence. I certainly don't go whingeing on about 'police states' and the like. The fact is that if you break the speed limit, you are breaking the law. I just don't understand why people like Top Gear's presenters have such a problem with this. Getting back to the original point - as a TV license fee-payer, I really don't see why I should be subsidising right-wing propaganda like Top Gear. I thought the BBC was a public service broadcaster and therefore politically neutral? I also thought that Top Gear was meant to be a motoring programme. In the interests of balance, can we have a motoring programme presented by socialists who actually know something about cars?
Labels: Celebrity Cretins, Musings From the Mind of Doc Sleaze, Rise of the Idiots
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home