Vox cani

Prison-boxing movie? Nope, really, it’s going to happen. You’ve got to love this sport; though if I were the prisoner, I think I might just ask them to honour my human right to pole-vault…

Who’d have thought that cold own-brand Ready-Brek wth maple syrup would make a nice lunch when feeling a tad nauseated from lack of sleep? I’m going to make a cup of tea, and then I might just be able to write the essay.

That the BBC needs huge amounts of reform is kinda evident. I switched off a debate on R4 the other day in which someone had accepted that the only way of campaigning against a politician was ridicule, but was arguing with the proponent of said premise that people ought to be ridiculing policies, rather than David Cameron’s drug use. That standards droop similarly at ITV may or may not be news; or maybe they are in fact noticing the real modernisation of the Tory party…

The deer seem to like Can I kick it? by A Tribe Called Quest. At least, they’ve come near the window with my playing it. They were kinda noisy last night themselves, so it makes sense I suppose that they haven’t been put off by JC Chavez’s All day long I dream about sex. I’ve been warned that I’ll be annoyed with their noises before long, but they’ve not been too bad thus far…

So Casthillo’s weight carried on rising up until the bout, and then he knocked out Corralles with a big left hand, no bloody wonder. It’s ridiculous, of course they’re drawing up terms for the rematch, but not to make the weight by so much is bloody cheating. It’s like someone fitting rockets to their car in Formula One, or something, and being let to compete with just a slight fiscal penalty. Guy was over the weight in my fight, which annoyed me, having tried so hard to get down to it. Grrr… (he beat me on points after I ran out of energy and could hardly box the last round, so I wouldn’t attribute it to the weight, he had trained harder). I can’t call Castillo’s a legitimate win.

Without the wonders of our network; I probably would never again have heard Whigfield’s non-seminal non-classic “Sexy Eyes”. It really does deserve a listen to give one a smile. It’s astonishing the way she tries to imbue completely meaningless lyrics with emotion, as if it meant so much to her to sing “Sexy Eyyyyeeeyyyeeesss”. She sounds most sincere when singing “num-num-na-num-num-na-na-ney”, over and over again.

Looking at the html on this, which I’m not bothered to fix, Word with pasted web content does produce awful stuff even with the Blogger tool….

Witness, though elyrics.net actually get this wrong…

This first verse doesn’t happen here in the version I’m listening to…

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
I'm gonna take you to paradise
Hey hey my my look at me
You got me feeling (bugger, we need a rhyme, what rhymes with “me”, but doesn’t quite scan correctly?) free (there we go, ooh, and deliciously meaningless)

Sexy eyes

On the one I’m hearing, we start here, the true opening of such a true song.

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
I'm gonna take you to paradise
Hey hey my my can't you see
You were born to dance with me

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
You know I'm never gonna tell you lies
Hey hey my my look at me
You got me feeling free

Na na na ... sexy eyes (elyrics.net actually get this very wrong, it is, as I mentioned above, a definite, and more catchy, “num-num-na-num-num-na-na-ney” × 3 “num-num-na-num-num-na-na” × 1; “num-num-na-num-num-na-na-ney” × 3 “num-num-na-num-num-na-na” × 1; with narey a “sexy eyes” in sight, maybe this mix was from someone who felt the eyes were sexier…)
Na na na ... sexy eyes

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
I'm gonna take you to paradise
Hey hey my my can't you see
You were born to dance with me

Ooh ooh aah aah hold me tight
Yes I guess you got me hypnotized
Hey hey my my don't you know
I'm gonna love you so - oh yeah

Sexy eyes “with your sexy sexy eyes; (EMOTE! Sexy eyyyyeeeyeyeyesss, with your sexy sexy eyes, Sexy eyyyyeeeyeyeyesss, with your sexy sexy eyes, Sexy eyyyyeeeyeyeyesss, with your sexy sexy eyes, Sexy eyyyyeeeyeyeyesss, with your sexy sexy eyes”
(“num-num-na-num-num-na-na-ney” × 3 “num-num-na-num-num-na-na” × 1) × 3, maybe? Maybe more….
Na na na ... sexy eyes
Na na na ... sexy eyes

That bit never happens….
This next bit happens quite a lot, before Whigfield goes back to familiar territory……

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
Sexy eyes
Hey hey my my look at me
You got me feeling free - ooh aah

And yes, as the song closes, she’s happily num-num-nahing away, back in her true vein (“num-num-na-num-num-na-na-ney” × 3 “num-num-na-num-num-na-na” × 1) this rest I don’t think happens, maybe it’s on the album version…..

Sexy eyes
Na na na ... sexy eyes
Na na na ... sexy eyes

Sexy eyes - without your sexy eyes
Sexy eyes - without your sexy eyes
Sexy eyes - without your sexy eyes
Sexy eyes - without your sexy eyes

Ooh ooh aah aah sexy eyes
I'm gonna take you to paradise
Hey hey my my look at me
You got me feeling free

One of the most-anticipated fights of the year won’t be a title fight, cos Jose Luis Castillo hasn’t made the weight in time. What’s the reason from Bob Arum, his promoter? He says his fighter hasn’t had a trainer for two weeks after he was fired by the doctor… WTF? Can anyone imagine another sport where this would happen? This was a fight not anticipated so much like Rahman-Klitschko, and Byrd-Williamson, because it was for the title and the future of the heavyweight division, but rather because their last meet was greatly entertaining, and people hoped for another possible fight of the year.
Over at Audley Harrison’s forum, we’re all lamenting how a possible “future of the heavyweight division” might be able to box anyone useful, cos his name isn’t big enough to mitigate the risk of names losing to his great talent. One needs the matchmakers to think of one as a big name, but one that is over-hyped and really very beatable, so that their fighters can add rep by winning a fight that really isn’t that hard, whilst everyone knows that Audley has great talent (albeit in a not particularly TV-friendly style, focussing on winning, as we said about Sven this afternoon), and yet where it matters in the US, his is not a massive name that will make people hugely anticipate a fight. Ironically, some of the guys with such names are also famed for being very boring to watch, yet still, there is more incentive to fight them… What’s Audley’s problem? Well boxing is so corrupt that he decided to be self-promoted so as not to be sucked into that corruption, and so he has been continuosly resented by promoters (see Frank Warren), and he has never had a manager with fighters to put in with him, in the way Don King can make one of his champions bigger by having him beat another of his champions, and thus can match the two without worrying so much that his fighter will lose (as his fighter must also win). Lastly, without one of the big promoters, one doesn’t have even the contacts and the network to find out fights that could be made, or the position of being someone to whom others must answer the phone, and are obligated occasionally to say yes.
It’s a frustrating game: the best sport there is, and yet run worse than no other so popular…

Wow; Captain Scarlet is back on TV, but he’s bloody computer-generated, as if the show were somehow about excellent characters in any medium, as opposed to the excitement of toys fighting… Any dignity that remained in this shot disappeared when the bloke proceeded to kiss the image of the woman in green. Captain Scarlet didn’t seem to notice.

Wow; there’s now a Word-based blogging tool. It’s very cool; I had to test-drive it…

What did we need? celebrity spelling for a week? well I hadn't realised...

Someone asked Question Time about the really dumb Dr Liam Fox flag idea.
David Starkey, a revelation of stupidity so far in the programme, supports it of
course. Anne McElvoy says she's glad that in Britain we needn't do such stuff.
Francis Maude, whom I've always rather respected, says that reclaiming the flag
for Britain is a good idea, but that we needn't do the policy, emphasising that
Liam Fox isn't leader of the Tories, and having earlier said that he was neutral
as chairman in the leadership debate, he really did reject the policy. Good on
you; it's one of the worst ideas I've heard in a very long time. Lib Dem and
Labour MPs Jo Swinson and Douglas Alexander also say that forcing schools to do
so would be silly.

Meanwhile, Sinn F�in skate a little bit on thin ice in the degree to which
they celebrate IRA heritage. It's important to many supporters, but isn't this a
tad dodgy of a new product to be launching?

There we go; David Cameron is the Eton-schooled (along with most of his
forefathers) son of a stockbroker, with ancestors who were also Tory
politicians. He's talented I'd say, bur he's a Tory boy through and through, and
that may be a big handicap.
--Update-- Vernon Bogdanor has good words to say about him on Newsnight; that's a good endorsement, though I would expect either endorsement or a refusal to talk. Still, Bogdanor says that he's a centrist, in tune with most people in the country; this guy gets more formidable. The kids on Newsnight like him too.

Well I've watched the Tory leadership speeches. Liam Fox (mentioned
Blair 0 times, and Brown 0) suggested he might be alright and then was
crap, but no great wonder there. What was a wonder was that he mentioned
suggesting "recently that all schools in Britain should fly the Union flag as a
symbol of what unites us". It was to complain that people had said he was stupid
and perhaps racist. I was astonished that he wouldn't be trying to hide such a
stupid, stupid suggestion. Thank goodness someone who seems never to have heard
of the North of Ireland shan't be PM.... even if he meant Britain and not the
North by "Britain" (most mean the UK), then it would put the Unionists up in
arms rather than the Republicans. Can anyone imagine what it would be like if a
Tory government were telling Catholic schools there to put up the Union
flag?

Rifkind (Blair 3, Brown 4) should withdraw anyway; if he is a good idea then
Clarke is a better one (in terms of electoral success, I guess he would be
better at party unity, but a united opposition isn't really the point).

David Davis wasm as widely reported, pretty under-whelming. His style wasn't
awful, "statesmanlike" was a kind of decent suggestion of what he was going for,
with the opening about the terrorist attacks and all. He stated though, "prison
works. But too few criminals are in prison." That kind of right-wing trash isn't
exactly one-nation conservatism, and is a stupid sort of thing to be saying if
trying to convince that you can win PM. It lost it for me. (Blair 4; Brown
4)

Clarke's speech was rather splendidly arrogant. His ego seems as big as his
waistline, but it's an effective form of charisma. His speech was almost a chat,
in usual style, but one in which he managed to stat actually what could be a
killer argument for the next election: that government spending should go back
to his 40%, from the currently projected 42% of GDP. It's a big message,
relatively clear whilst complex, and along with the claim 'I did this and that
set up current economic prosperity', it's one that he could deliver with
credibility. The main theme of his speech didn't seem even this though, it
seemed to me that it was, 'we should win, if you want to win then pick me,
because I'd obviously do electorally best of anyone in this party. I'd say he's
right; though it's typically brash to say so in a speech. He also focused a hell
of a lot of attack on Gordon Brown, and put some of the 'it's the economy
stupid' message out there. He is clearly of the view that attacking Brown, who
should be PM by the next election, is the way for them to go. It's a testament
to Blair rather! He mentioned Brown 12 times, Blair only 3.

David Cameron, this new kid on the block (unfortunately not so cool as my
childhood heroes) delivered what I found a good performance as well; like many
of the other contenders, except for Ken Clarke, he offered some pretty detailed
policy proposals. Davis spent huge amounts of time on Home Office policy, Fox
spent time on health I think (sorry, mainly remember that he sucked, ah looking
at his speech there was actually a lot of compassionate foreign and community
policy stuff), and Cameron focused on education. They do really seem to have
been doing the homework that was advocated a while ago, of coming up with
detailed and clear policies that sound interesting ideas, and attack Labour.
IMHO, Davis spent far too much time on this though, whilst Cameron's pitches on
education were family-friendly enough in terms of allowing special schools, and
Tory enough in terms of making exams harder and putting people more often into
sets (mentioned how this helped the brightest, didn't mention the rest, hmm..
what's that reason the left likes comprehensives again? might it be that talk of
allowing the brightest to do well is all well and good except that it tends to
be to the neglect of people who could actually do with help and mightn't succeed
anyway?). He played on his youth and dynamism, strutting across the stage as he
made his pitch without notes, for about 23 minutes one of the longest as well.
He tried to look mature with thanks to the post-1997 leaders, whilst subtlely
emphasising that this class of people were to be thanked for doing that job of
leader of the opposition, implying a confidence that this wasn't the job he was
planning on, but rather that he was asking to be PM. That was v good
speechwriting I felt. He ranged across things decently, mentioning Africa like
many of them seem to have done to emphasise the old compassion point. I thought
he did well, and then he loved the applause, and got loads of it,
enthusiastically whenever he wanted it throughout the speech, and then for ages
at the end, without it looking tired. I reckon they loved him. He has the young
family and Tory wife as well I think; the latter joining him for some of the
post-speech applause and pictures, then leaving again whilst he carried on. I
think a big problem with him though is that he is and looks like a Tory boy. He
was at Brasenose I think, and though I've not found details of a Union or OUCA
career; he gives the impression, the bouffant wavy hair, that certain fullness
of skin that makes it obvious one had been well-fed for a very long time, and
which gives a rounded, smug chin, rather than a strong one e.g. Blair's is
relatively non-pudgey. Certainly they loved him, and he could win leader, but if
they've sense then they should go for Clarke with him and Osborne prominent.
Osborne's (Blair 2, Brown 5) speech wasn't half bad actually, though as he said,
like Charlie Kennedy, he's not trying to lead his party. (Blair 2, Brown 6; more
towards the Clarke strategy than any of the other leadership contenders).

So there looks to be a team there ready, Clarke leading a personal attack on
Brown, his successor who used his spending plans for two years, and who probably
no one else is as well-placed to attack, whilst Osborne and Cameron, who seem to
share his strategy of forgetting Blair as someone they never managed to beat in
the country (it's hard from the right; note where the Lib Dems have gone), and
going after Brown, who is now the real enemy. Beginning the attack now means
that it should be well underway when he gets coronated, and it's sensible
politics. As Heseltine pointed out; they needn't hope only for a victory next
time, as a hung parliament might well see a breakdown and fresh elections after
2 years. So how's this? Clarke leads, with Osborne as Shadow Chancellor, and
Cameron as Deputy leader or major Shadow Cabinet, and used disproportionately
much. If the next Parliament is hung, then the ageing Clarke gets replaced by
Cameron for an early election, and takes them back to power...

It's scary isn't it?