You have 30 seconds to make sense of this

I am laying myself open to looking foolish in publishing this, but will take this major risk. I am, after all, blessed with modesty, so making the occasional mistake will not over concern me.

I was intrigued to find an article in the Torygraph giving space to that vacuous tart Carol Vorderman. The Torygraph seems to think that her opinions carry some weight. Perhaps they do, after all, vacuous tarts are not disenfranchised in this fine democracy of ours. She has decided that the Labour party has not done a good job with regard to education.

Determined to demonstrate my tolerance, I read further. This is what I found:

"I tell you what, as soon as you lift a rock, there is snakes down there," she said.

My dilemma is that I fear that she may have been either demonstrating irony, or quoting from someone/something, but I can find no reference to anyone else speaking in such a manner. Do any of my erudite readers (aMToNW) know?

For those of you of a foreign inclination, and who have avoided news of “celebrity”, I should tell you a little about Ms Vorderman.
1) She is a vacuous tart.
2) She earned a very poor degree in engineering, albeit from a reputable seat of learning
3) She earned a fortune by doing pointless sums on a quiz show. Doing pointless sums is all very well if you are Chancellor of the Exchequer, but otherwise has no known value to humanity.
4) Outside of doing sums she has consistently displayed her air-headedness in spectacular and consistent style.
5) She won the award for “Most annoying vacuous tart” by advertising rip-off debt consolidation services on the electric television
6) She is a vacuous tart.

I tell you what, anyone who prefaces their utterances with “I tell you what” is not worth listening to. I expect she will be next prime minister but one. After all, our transatlantic friends elected a vacuous twat who also didn’t know the difference between “is” and “are”.

Having devoted some precious space on my lovely blog to lambasting some vacuous tart’s mangling of the language, I will now sit back and wait for all of you to point out the typos and gross grammatical errors here.

*******

TCM strike again. I am indebted to my friends at the Torygraph for informing me about this important scientific research. Scientists claim that rooks understand the laws of physics better than chimpanzees. No, really.

The rooks were surprised when shown an 'egg-like' object 'floating' in mid-air. They looked for longer at pictures of these impossible scenarios than possible pictures where the egg was correctly supported by a platform.
The seven adults understood not only that contact between the egg and platform was necessary for support but also that there must be a sufficient amount of contact and that the contact must be from below.
This has been shown to be beyond the grasp of chimpanzees, said zoologist Christopher Bird and colleagues at the University of Cambridge.

I would make the following observations.

• The name of the researcher gives lie to his ability to be objective.
• They talk about “understanding the laws of physics” as if this is a good thing.
• Carol Vorderman went to the university of Cambridge.