Events in the United States once again occupy the mind at the end of the first month of 2022.
The Los Angeles Rams have come through the season not only as champions of the NFC West Division, but as champions of the NFC. They will face the Cincinnati Bengals in the Super Bowl on Sunday the 13th February at the So-Fi Stadium in Inglewood Los Angeles.
The Rams have only been to the Superbowl on 4 occasions. As the Saint Louis Rams they won it once (2000) and lost in (2002). As the Los Angeles Rams, they have played in two; the first time in January1980 against the Pittsburgh Steelers, losing 31-19 and the second time in February 2019 against the New England Patriots losing 13-3. As a team they are W1, L3. The Cincinnati Bengals have been to the Superbowl twice against the San Francisco 49ers, losing the first time 26-21 in January of 1982 and 20-16 in January 1989. The Patriots have 6 wins and 5 loses, the Steelers have 6 wins and 2 loses and the 49ers 5 wins and 2 loses. It would be fair to say that the Bengals and the Rams go into the game with similar credentials. The Bengals, one might say, given the history, are probably hungrier than the Rams. This might give them an edge; however, the Rams are playing on their home ground, which most assuredly would give them the edge.
Given the current history, the game will either be a low scoring slug fest or a free for all high scoring game. It is unlikely that one team will run away with it, but it could happen. In any event it would appear that the betting odds favour the Rams to win, so to win any serious money on a small bet it would have to be placed on the Bengals.
Meanwhile Donald Trump continues to rant and seems to be offering to produce pardons for the insurrectionists who have already pleaded guilty or are on trial, and still he persists with his obsession over the 2020 election. His rhetoric is still off the spectrum of normal behaviour. I have been told I must not use clinical terminology when referring to his mental state or self-perception. His legal difficulties also continue, and I wonder if someone will ever issue some writs or actually produce a long overdue indictment and get him in front of a court. Just get on with it. The evidence is there for all to see and hear, on video, on line and he continues to add to it with every appearance he makes. He is continually inciting his followers to violence. He does not let up. Do we need to wait for it to actually erupt again before taking action? What is law enforcement in the United States but a complete shamble. Officers indiscriminately firing off weapons, armed idiots who deliberately parade the streets allowed to claim self-defence, the usual multiple school shootouts or would be assassins, gun carrying waitresses, deranged congressmen and women, and the catalogue of folly seems to go on and on.
I was recently sent, by an old High School friend. now living in New York, an on line pamphlet or manifesto entitled The Blueprint to End Gun Violence. It can be found here:
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/home/downloads/pdf/press-releases/2022/the-blueprint-to-end-gun-violence.pdf
It is an initiative by the Mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, a one time serving Police Officer with the NYPD.
|
Eric Adams
|
It is certainly worth a read. Nonetheless, until the mindset of the American people can be turned away from the worship of the second amendment of the Constitution, the initiatives to control guns, not just illegal guns (whatever that actually means) has little chance of success. There are other initiatives in the blueprint concerning mental health and issues of bail for offenders, which deserve equal consideration.
Back in
the United Kingdom, Sue Gray has made limited comment in reference to her ‘investigation’.
She has stated that she has found failures of leadership. There was a serious
failure of officials to observe what has been asked of the public. What leader
can she be referring to? There is no longer any justification for anyone to
support Boris Johnson or keep on finding excuses for his lack of leadership or responsibility.
He fails on every level and should do the decent thing and give way, but the
Tory Party no longer has any idea of the meaning of decent. A misleading prime
minister who cannot be trusted to be straight with his own government and
persistently breaches or assist in the breach of ministerial codes, can hardly
be trusted to negotiate or deal with any other government who will see him for
the charlatan that he is. He no longer has any international standing and consequently
should stand down. There is no hiding behind “failures of leadership and
judgment” or trying to pass the blame on to others. It does not work. Well I
say that, but with this ridiculous parliament full of MP’s too frightened of losing
their jobs and shuffling to find excuses and keen to move on, I would not be
surprised if they do in fact carry on with Boris Johnson.
There is
no United Kingdom in effect, it has completely lost its way and flounders under
the stupidity of a majority elected by a tiny minority. There used to be a
system of honour, which may at onetime have made up for the deficiencies of the
system, but now, how democracy works in the UK is clearly a sham. The various
polls seem to indicate that Mr Johnson and his party has some 30% support. What
about the rest of us, the 70% who do not support him? Where does one go for
redress? The system is in serious need of overhaul if this is the best that can
be. A group of MP’s shouting resign, representing the majority of the
population of this country, yet considered to be a minority in Parliament, so
can be ignored. Send in the clowns? Of course they’re here.
It seems a clear case of misconduct in public office and when Sue Gray says act now it is an instruction to MPs.
ReplyDeleteThat is before the Police frag the Prime Minister through the mud. Its something to do with dignity in office and the common injunction to resign before that dignity is threatened.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/958527/Misconduct-in-public-office-WEB11.pdf
I would agree on the face of it, it looks very much like a cse of misconduct in public office, but the December 2020 report by the Law Commission may have been looking at activity causing financial loss or gain, or harm causing such lossor gain, and very inappropriate sexual offences. The breaches in this instance, although serious, may not fall withing the categories contemplated by the commission, although the wording of some of the suggested offences could well bring the prime ministers behavious within its sphere of offences as being contrary to the public interest. I say this on a cursory glance at the report. Thank you very much for bringing it to my attention. It is certainly worth a read as well as a letter to one's MP.
Delete