There’s a hole in my #Brexit, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude (or #Catch50)

The UK trying to leaving the EU may turn out to be like Captain Yossarian trying to leave the air force, in Catch-22.  I have written a song about this, entitled, “There’s a hole in my Brexit.”  Here are the lyrics.

.

may-feministjean-claude-junker

There’s a hole in my Brexit

The people have voted, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  The people have voted, dear Jean-Claude.  They’ve voted.

For what have they voted, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  For what have they voted, dear Theresa.  For what?

 

They’ve voted for Brexit, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  For Brexit, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean Claude.  For Brexit.

But what means this “Brexit”, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  But what means this “Brexit”, dear Theresa?  What’s “Brexit”?

 

Why, Brexit means Brexit, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  Brexit means Brexit, dear Jean-Claude.  Br-exit.

Then do it, dear Theresa, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Then do it, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Just do it.

 

But how shall I do it, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude?  But how shall I do it, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude?  How?

Give notice, dear Theresa, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Give notice, dear Theresa.  Dear Theresa, give notice.

 

What is this “notice”, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude?  What is this “notice”, dear Jean-Claude?  What notice?

Read Article 50, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Read Article 50, dear Theresa.  Read it.

hourglass

It mentions “requirements”, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  In paragraph 1, dear Jean-Claude.  “Requirements.”

What kind of requirements, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  What kind of requirements?  Requirements?  What kind?

 

“Constitutional requirements”, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  Constitutional requirements, dear Jean-Claude.  Dear Jean-Claude, constitutional.

Then meet the requirements, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Then meet the requirements, dear Theresa.  Meet them.

 

D’you know what they are, in Britain, dear Jean-Claude?  The Brit constitut’nal requirements are what?

You tell me, dear Theresa, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  You tell me the requirements, dear Theresa.  Tell me.

 

A vote in our Parliament, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  Well, actually, several.  An Act, to be frank.

Then ask them to vote now, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Just ask them to vote now, dear Theresa, just ask.

 

But they won’t vote for Brexit, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  In fairness, they cannot.  They simply can’t.

Why can’t they (or won’t they) dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  Why won’t they vote Brexit, dear Theresa?  Why not?

 

They don’t know the terms yet, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  They don’t know the terms yet, dear Jean-Claude.  The terms.

Then tell them the terms now, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Just tell them the terms now, and ask them to vote.

 

I don’t know the terms yet, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  I don’t know the terms yet.  Don’t know them myself.

Why don’t you know them, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  Why don’t you know them, dear Theresa?  Why not?

 

They’ve not been agreed yet, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  They’ve not been agreed yet, dear Jean-Paul.  (The terms.)

Then negotiate terms now, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Negotiate terms now, dear Theresa.  Negotiate.

 

With whom shall I negotiate, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude?  With whom shall I negotiate the terms?  With whom?

With me, dear Theresa, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  That’s my job, dear Theresa.  Negotiate with me.

 

But you won’t negotiate, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  You can’t negotiate.  Remember?  You can’t.

Why can’t I negotiate, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  Why can’t I negotiate, dear Theresa?  Why not?

 

Try Article 50, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  (We haven’t given notice of Brexit just yet.)

Then give notice now, dear, dear Theresa, dear Theresa.  Give notice of Brexit.  Negotiate with me.

 

I’ve told you I cannot give notice, dear Jean-Claude.  The constitutional requirements to do so aren’t met.

Then you’re snookered, aren’t you, dear Theresa, dear Theresa?  You can’t do your Brexit, dear Theresa.  You’re stuck.

 

But the people have voted, dear Jean-Claude, dear Jean-Claude.  They all think that Brexit means Brexit, their vote!

Leave a comment

Filed under Political, Satire and humour, Songs and poems

The UK still has important work to do inside the EU

I voted Leave in the Brexit referendum.  However, even as I voted Leave, I knew that I wanted the UK to remain in the EU temporarily after a victory for the Leave campaign.

I want the UK to remain in the UK until the work is done, in order to lead a campaign within the EU, for the reform of the procedure for a member state to leave the EU, to make it safe for the UK and any other member state to leave the EU.  The present procedure for a member state to leave the EU, isn’t compatible with the need to negotiate the terms of leaving the EU first, and only then to give notice of leaving, knowing what one is letting oneself in for, so to speak.  The UK’s historic mission now, is to change the procedure for leaving the EU, before being the first to use the newly-changed procedure ourselves.  Giving notice to leave the EU should be the final step in the leaving process, not the first.

Notice that a member state will be leaving the EU should be served only when the negotiations of leaving terms are complete, and the member state considering leaving the EU has accepted the terms that its government has negotiated on its behalf.  In the UK, that means a Parliamentary vote to leave, on known terms.

Parliament is able theoretically to delegate that decision to a second referendum, but Parliament is perfectly competent to take that decision itself, permitting the executive to serve notice to quit, on leaving terms that the executive has negotiated, and which Parliament has approved in a division.

I anticipate that the UK acting according to this counsel, would benefit every member state.  It would make it safe for any other member state to consider following the UK out of the EU.  The UK would have blazed a trail, and would become a natural leader of the post-EU Europe that would take shape if leaving the EU was made less risky for every member state, and became fashionable.

2 Comments

Filed under Political

Gagged dad to appeal private hearing ruling

Gagged Dad has posted the following comment on

Parent vetted for political correctness – should the trial be in private?

I would like to thank the 21 who wrote to the judge and the 17 who attended the hearing, of whom four or more, three of them journalists, addressed the court. I would like especially to thank Stephen Green for his coverage before the hearing, in Christian Voice.

The hearing was bedevilled by the following problem: That the application for a private hearing was founded upon (I say) a false premiss, that my case was an attempt to have reconsidered family court proceedings that were properly held in private, in which the Defendant had played an expert witness role. I have not impugned in this case the outcome in the family court. It was said that the Defendant could not defend my claim without referring to those other matters, which ought not to be aired in public. The judge appeared to me to be taken in by this protestation, and to have insinuated that there was far more to this case than John Allman had brought to public attention.

Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under Children's Rights, Family Rights, Human Rights, Law, Persecution of Minorities

Parent vetted for political correctness – should the trial be in private?

CORNWALL SOCIAL SERVICES WANTS A SECRET TRIAL IN GAGGED DAD CASE

Please act now.  Hearing is on 23rd October 2015.

Question 1:  Should social services separate a child from his mum or dad, when mum or dad openly opposes a government policy that he or she considers to be morally wrong?

Question 2: If social services does this, and that parent sues the council under the Human Rights Act for interference with his family life and discrimination on the grounds of his beliefs, should the trial be held in secret?

The court in A v Cornwall (case number A88YJ875) will hold a three day trial in December to decide Question 1, as it applies to Gagged Dad.  He disagrees with same sex marriage and abortion.  Cornwall Council has therefore prevented Gagged Dad from seeing his son for just short of two and a half years.  Cornwall didn’t want Gagged Dad to “indoctrinate” his two year-old son in his own pro-life and homophobic beliefs.

Continue reading

4 Comments

Filed under Children's Rights, Family Rights, Law, Persecution of Minorities

Did painted lady Charlotte Proudman learn the tricks of her trade by watching the Feminist Makeup Tutorial?


CharlotteProudmanBarristerCharlotte_Proudman

 

 

 

 

 

Alexander-Carter-SilkI bet Alexander Carter-Silk wishes he had watched the Feminist Makeup Tutorial, before he got caught!

 

 

Q. What do you call it when a woman thanks or lambastes  those who make compliments about her appearance, on the basis of their gender or age?

A. Discrimination.

 

New-Twitter-Bird-LogoPlease follow me on Twitter – and please follow this blog too, to be informed of new posts by email.

 

Other posts you may like

Masculism, Feminism and the Euro Tunnel

Abolish rape!

Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives

Children screaming to be heard

Let every child have both parents

2 Comments

Filed under Feminism, Men's Rights, Satire and humour

Bush and Obama make Putin look good

9/11 anniversary guest post by Dr Chuck Balwin, Montana

.

www.ChuckBaldwinLive.comBig Government toadies can pooh-pooh the existence of a conspiracy by elitists to create a global government (aka a New World Order) all they want to, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are. Over the last several decades, proponents of global government have been quite outspoken about their intention to create a New World Order. In fact, former President George H.W. Bush (NOT so-called “right wing conspiracy nuts”) was the one who popularized the term “New World Order” in modern times.

For those who haven’t taken the time to educate themselves on the reality of the elite’s intention to create a New World Order, please take a few minutes to review this documentation:

A Chronological History: The New World Order

That pastors and Christians would question the existence of a modern conspiracy to construct global government is somewhat surprising to me, as such a conspiracy can be traced all the way back to the story of the Tower of Babel as recorded in the Book of Genesis. Plus, the Biblical record is replete with examples of ancient empires that embarked on world domination.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Gospel, Guest posts, Islam, Political, Reblogged

# And then you go and spoil it all by saying something stupid like “God hates you”

Affectionate parody of Westboro Baptist Church’s own witty parodies of popular songs.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gospel, Homophobic, Satire and humour, Songs and poems