From today's Daily Telegraph comes more cringeworthy, sickophantic (deliberately mispelt) writing that passes for journalism by Benedict Brogan.
Leaving to one side the vested interests of Andrew Witty, head of GlaxoSmithKline - who will no doubt be featuring in a Birthday Honours List within the next year or two - it is important to see just how low Brogan will grovel to the CamGod.
Brogan writes:
"A recent survey of Tory members by the ConservativeHome website found that as Mr Cameron’s aid policy was explained, opposition fell away."
That opposition is most likely composed of the idiots who still believe that now Cameron is in government, his Eurosceptism will surface!
Still on this subject of foreign aid, Brogan continues:
"What’s more, we gave our word. The last government, and then this one, put its name to the pledge to raise UK aid spending to 0.7 per cent of GDP."
What is more important, Cameron keeping his word to those that actually have a vote in this country or those that don't? In respect of keeping our word, what happened to the rule that one parliament cannot bind its successor? What is more important, Cameron handing out 'goodies' to the Third World or fulfilling what should be his main duty, namely ensuring the miitary safety of our nation? In respect of Cameron keeping his word, the fact he doesn't and can't is exemplified by the plethora of 'U' turns - 'U' turns now so frequent, Cameron must truly be dizzy - hence the reason he has no idea in which direction he wishes to proceed.
Brogan writes about "national shame", saying that it would be just that were we to resile from our commitment to provide foreign aid. No, Mr. Brogan; the national shame the people feel is that Cameron and his fellow politicians still forget they are representatives of the people and as such it is their duty to do that which the people want, instead they continue their belief that they are elected to tell the people what the people want.
On this subject a wise politician, now unfortunately no longer with us, said:
"Have you ever wondered, perhaps, why opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold are, if anyone dares express them publicly, denounced as 'controversial, 'extremist', 'explosive', 'disgraceful', and overwhelmed with a violence and venom quite unknown to debate on mere political issues? It is because the whole power of the aggressor depends upon preventing people from seeing what is happening and from saying what they see [.....] We are told that the economic achievement of the Western countries has been at the expense of the rest of the world and has impoverished them, so that what are called the 'developed' countries owe a duty to hand over tax-produced 'aid' to the governments of the undeveloped countries. It is nonsense—manifest, arrant nonsense; but it is nonsense with which the people of the Western countries, clergy and laity, but clergy especially—have been so deluged and saturated that in the end they feel ashamed of what the brains and energy of Western mankind have done, and sink on their knees to apologise for being civilised and ask to be insulted and humiliated."
4 comments:
As you say, stomach turning sycophancy, and as Enoch Powell said, 'nonsense — manifest, arrant nonsense.'
But the explanation is, I think, quite simple, the Tory party is starting to panic and they are trying to shore up confidence. Cameron is not simply doing u-turns, he is spinning in place, terrified of a bad press. Quite why I don't know, I suspect he has a pathological need to be liked, with a consequent fear of bad headlines. That would also explain why he is constantly putting his hands into our pockets and showering largess on any and every bleeding heart cause he can.
In truth we are at that point in the electoral cycle he can do anything he likes, no one will remember in three years and if his policies work no one will care even if they do. If his policies don't work he's finished anyway so he would be better off sticking to his guns. This constant spinning in circles is the worst thing he can do. The only other rational explanation is he expects the LibDems to cut and run in the near term, or Clegg is blackmailing him by threatening to. If that is the case any sensible person would laugh like a drain and tell him, 'go for it kid, I dare you.'
I too have always valued Enoch Powell for his incisive intelligence and ability to dissect an argument like a scalpel, a strength I found truly humbling, and his belief in patriotic duty to the country.
PC: It would have been more honest of Cameron if the by-line had actually read David Cameron!
Re Enoch, will we ever see another of his calibre?
WfW I saw the words 'Tory principles' and gave up reading the rest of the article.
TBF: Heh! Keep watching - just about to have a go at another 'richard-head', one Peter Oborne who has the op-ed in tmrw's DT!
Post a Comment