Monday, May 01, 2006

The Last Days of the Tonan Empire.

'What I find fascinating is the complete lack of perspective the BBC has on this. In the dying days of Major's government (which were really just a warm-up for ZanuLabour anyway, policy-wise) the BBC were going ape-shit over every possible hint of "sleaze". Yet, within months of Labour entering office I recall tiny hints of possible bad behaviour being reported in the newspapers, but quickly brushed over - and simply ignored - by the BBC. Labour started out bad and went downhill. Over the years we've seen Labour ministers involved in affairs (practically orgies if you believe some accounts), bribery, corruption and general nastiness, yet barely a peep of criticism from the national press. And, behind all that, we've had Prescott re-organising the country, bypassing the county councils with his regional development agencies and his new Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (which gave itself planning permission to knock down thousands of houses in the north and build thousands more in the south, without consultation), the Home Secretary's office pushing ID cards, the ministry of transport pushing for a universal road camera monitoring system, the MAFF destroying our ability to produce our own food, the MoD removing any ability to cooperate with the Americans in military matters by fording the procurement of European equipment that works on different standards, the ministry of "Culcher" destroying just about any culture we have, and all of it with the expressed aim of harmonising us with the EU. Thhis government has had one aim from the beginning: destroy the country. And they're succeeding. A truly impartial BBC would have picked up on this and pointed it out a long time ago... but the BBC isn't impartial about this. They want european harmonisation as well, because it guarantees their existence.

And for the record, the boy king Cameron is nothing more than Blair MK2. If the tories win, it'll be in spite of him, not because of him. It should worry people that he's toeing the BBC line so closely these days. They won't get my vote until he's gone.'
- the views of Archronix in Biased BBC comments, who blogs infrequently here.

I thoroughly agree, except that in my analysis of New Labour I'd replace their aim of destroying the country with their contempt for its basic character, such that they wished essentially to re-shape it in an an alien mould.

Ian Dale meanwhile has a list of New Labour scandals, rounded down to 50.

And Richard North has an account of the career of John Prescott, the most blatant dark horse one could imagine, with the bully's knack of getting away with it.

Me? I think there's a sense of sick fulfilment about this Labour Government. What Archronix says about the cover up of Labour sleaze from the earliest times is absolutely right, and Ian Dale demonstrates it well. I noticed an immediate shift, while the dew still rested on Tony Blair's forelocks, to appease and perpetuate the public mood of political indulgence post 1997.

One thing I think is interesting is the adulation of Tony Blair which occurred in America. There's no doubt that Blair was capable of papering over cracks better than any painter-decorator. I think I observed back in the early days that Blair and co. were masters at social appearances and networking, at using momentum to overcome a lack of substance. Like Clinton in that respect; and it's curious how someone like Prescott turns out to strongly resemble Clinton in one respect at least.

What Americans like, or liked, about Blair, was that he had Clintonian vibes while definitely not being like Bill. Must be safe, they thought, and on top of that he had the presentational skill lacked by a certain W. Yet that fact that Tony's not Bill- and I doubt that British politics could produce a Bill Clinton- doesn't mean that the tactics and standards by which Tony Blair operates are any higher than the gutter which was Clinton's natural habitat. Perhaps there's more to Tony than meets the eye, too.

Google Custom Search