I'm considering suing the Disney Corporation in the matter of pigeons.
I concur wholeheartedly with Mr Banks, that woman has chaos in her wake. Every time she warbles about 'feeding the birds' some child acquires the life-long belief - not shaken by any evidence to the contrary - that their "children" are hungry and their nests are so bare.
This simply isn't true as one glance at the feathered varmints will confirm. They are so fat they can barely get themselves off the ground, but they do so just well enough to evade our increasingly slothful cats and dogs who, like our regulators, are too busy sitting in front of the fire and licking their own behinds to get out there and scare them off.
I believe Ms Poppins did not act in the interests of the Banks household, the Bank or society generally in her determination to confuse legitimate business, as so ably demonstrated by her "friend" Burt, (prop. "I'd Sweep Her Chimney ltd, part of the Strike A Light, Guv group), with the fake charity sector in which little old ladies receive a subsidy not just for doing irrelevant things such as knitting socks for pianos, but actively damaging the fabric of the city by sponsoring it to be covered in acidic guano. A guano for which I might add there isn't even a secondary market.
I'm prepared to admit that Ms Poppins had only the very best intentions, particularly towards the Banks children, although scattering their wealth, helping to put their dad out of work, and stymmying their mother's political career (and ultimately Jane's own emancipation) was precisely the opposite of what we would hope a responsibile nanny would achieve.
I understand Ms Poppins, like the pigeons, flew away just quickly enough to avoid being brought before a proper enquiry in to her activities, insisting she was an utterly respectable person and would sue anybody who said otherwise.
Heres my contribution....from a misspent youth listening to US doowop groups...I bring you The Clovers and Your Cash Ain't Nothin But Trash.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddnDuR8QG-s
Mrs Raft, you are my favourite blogger on the entire Inter-Web. If I recall that nanny left hurriedly after a visit from social services.
Sec/4a - Tea on ceiling without adequate safety provision or satisfactory risk assessments.
Sec 23-34c - Forcible ingestion of liquids ..{see case notes - medicine go down. Further evidence of using drugs like C6H12O6 'sugar + glucose'on minors.
Forcibly demanding chores completed, with fear inducing unspecified threats if menial tasks not completed by children {see case notes of care worker 'Swafibina Asumugha' - The place was like a sweat shop. children were virtual slaves to the nanny - }
Case continues ..children taken into care 2/4/1912.
Sean: Haven't listened to that damned song since if was about 16.
Easy peasey: Money - The Beatles.
ReplyDeleteI'm considering suing the Disney Corporation in the matter of pigeons.
ReplyDeleteI concur wholeheartedly with Mr Banks, that woman has chaos in her wake. Every time she warbles about 'feeding the birds' some child acquires the life-long belief - not shaken by any evidence to the contrary - that their "children" are hungry and their nests are so bare.
This simply isn't true as one glance at the feathered varmints will confirm. They are so fat they can barely get themselves off the ground, but they do so just well enough to evade our increasingly slothful cats and dogs who, like our regulators, are too busy sitting in front of the fire and licking their own behinds to get out there and scare them off.
I believe Ms Poppins did not act in the interests of the Banks household, the Bank or society generally in her determination to confuse legitimate business, as so ably demonstrated by her "friend" Burt, (prop. "I'd Sweep Her Chimney ltd, part of the Strike A Light, Guv group), with the fake charity sector in which little old ladies receive a subsidy not just for doing irrelevant things such as knitting socks for pianos, but actively damaging the fabric of the city by sponsoring it to be covered in acidic guano. A guano for which I might add there isn't even a secondary market.
I'm prepared to admit that Ms Poppins had only the very best intentions, particularly towards the Banks children, although scattering their wealth, helping to put their dad out of work, and stymmying their mother's political career (and ultimately Jane's own emancipation) was precisely the opposite of what we would hope a responsibile nanny would achieve.
I understand Ms Poppins, like the pigeons, flew away just quickly enough to avoid being brought before a proper enquiry in to her activities, insisting she was an utterly respectable person and would sue anybody who said otherwise.
Where's my writ?
your writ runs large !
ReplyDeleteHarsh but fair Mrs WoaR. It was the room tidying that got me.
ReplyDeleteMick Hucknall might be a knobhead but:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrUB0g8Vjgg
Money is a little bit in short supply, rather.
Pink Floyd
ReplyDelete(but not the obvious one)
Welcome to the Machine
Heres my contribution....from a misspent youth listening to US doowop groups...I bring you The Clovers and Your Cash Ain't Nothin But Trash....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddnDuR8QG-s
How about creative destruction in the form off smash it up by the damned?
ReplyDeleteThanks all. Some oddities there.
ReplyDeleteMrs Raft, you are my favourite blogger on the entire Inter-Web.
If I recall that nanny left hurriedly after a visit from social services.
Sec/4a - Tea on ceiling without adequate safety provision or satisfactory risk assessments.
Sec 23-34c - Forcible ingestion of liquids ..{see case notes - medicine go down. Further evidence of using drugs like C6H12O6 'sugar + glucose'on minors.
Forcibly demanding chores completed, with fear inducing unspecified threats if menial tasks not completed by children
{see case notes of care worker 'Swafibina Asumugha' - The place was like a sweat shop. children were virtual slaves to the nanny - }
Case continues ..children taken into care 2/4/1912.
Sean: Haven't listened to that damned song since if was about 16.
A bit of reverse psychology:
ReplyDeleteMo Money Mo Problems - The Notorious B.I.G.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twkh0YiInPM
If I was a Rich Man suits my circs perfectly.
ReplyDeleteI'd have to go with Floyd as well - fits so well.
ReplyDeleteScritti Politti
ReplyDeleteBam Salute
larr; test
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete