Peter Rhodes: Who are you calling bigots?

By Peter Rhodes | Peter Rhodes | Published:

THE Left's obsession with race, the bad-breath diet and a lizardy centenary

Harry and Meghan in Nottingham

OUR changing language. A London councillor said the capital's new housing policy of allowing people to build homes in their gardens to increase the number of homes per acre would "densify it up a bit."

TALKING of language, I used the term "lounge lizard" a few days ago. If the New York Times is to be believed, this was first used 100 years ago in 1917. The great thing about "lounge lizard" is that it doesn't have to be explained. If you see one, you know one. Another drinky-poo, sweetie . . ?

WHY is the Left so utterly obsessed with the notion that Britain is racist? This is the Guardian's lofty headline on a column about the Harry / Meghan engagement: "From now on it will be impossible to argue that being black is somehow incompatible with being British." And when, pray, did anyone last make such a claim? I recall some rabid leaflets raging against "mongrelisation" of the British population, but that was from the National Front way back in the early 1970s. Today, according to the official Census, the fastest-growing racial group in Britain is multi-racial. And the only way you get multi-racial babies is by folk of different colours and cultures falling in love.

IF you want to know where Britain stands on race today, see the welcome given to Harry and Meghan ("She's a little gem," exclaimed one local) on their first official outing, to Nottingham. That's the England I live in. The Guardian, and so many on the Left, appear to occupy a much nastier place, and seem to relish it.

I REFERRED recently to research suggesting that flossing our teeth and using mouthwash may do us no good. A reader points out that a popular new diet involves eating nothing between supper and lunch. So that's no flossing, no mouthwashing and no breakfast. We may not become the fittest people in the world but we will certainly have the worst breath.

IF you have ever been with a driver with a hands-free phone system, you may be surprised how much the hands are used. And you may have witnessed hands-free users thoroughly immersed in phone conversations at 70mph on the motorways, waving their hands to make a point. It has always been a nonsense that folk are prosecuted for driving while using older mobiles but hands-on users are not. (You might suspect - heaven forbid - that our MPs, Lords and lawmakers have been particularly well lobbied by the mobile-phone industry). Anyway, the party may be over. After a fatal crash in Lincolnshire, a judge has ruled that "the fact that using a phone is lawful does not alter the fact it is a distraction" and told the driver to expect a jail sentence.

SOME versions of last week's column on 1957 being the happiest year ever were illustrated with a 1950s picture of two girls. I should explain to younger readers the indentation in the girls' midriff area. It was something called a waist.

Peter Rhodes

By Peter Rhodes

Award-winning columnist and blogger. Keeping an eye on the tribulations and trivia of a fast-changing world


Top stories


More from Shropshire Star


UK & International News