Way back in 1987 Ron Paul said:
"The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people."
Now substitute 'Westminster' for 'Washington'..........
Protect our liberty: European Union? Not coddle the world: overseas aid? Precipatitating no-win wars: Iraq, Libya? Bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil: EFSM, IMF, PFI, Socialism, EU membership?
Well, Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron - what say you........?
Now can we change the bloody system of democracy under which we live........?
6 comments:
A small error there, should it not be "substitute Westminster for Washington"?
In fairness I suppose we should admit that UK politicians never actually say they are there to do the will of the people, well they do, but they mean it in the sense that they have deduced what the will of the people is, regardless of what it may actually be, which is they are elected to do what they think is best. Notice they never actually say best for who either.
PC: Thank you and amended....... *blushes*
As to the rest of your comment - agreed!
Funny how Party Machines cannot control Leaders. Harold Wilson had no end of trouble with Eric Heffer, Ian Mikardo and the NEC; but a modern Labour leader has no problem and can wage illegal wars without being hanged like Keitel for the same offence.
Cameron goes ahead and does the same thing - even leaving yellow cake unguarded in Libya as Blair did in Iraq; even letting SA24 missiles get to the Gaza Strip and weapons ooze out of Libya.
Noone can control him. Funny these parties; it will be like those Apologists in 1947 saying "We resisted Hitler...internally and secretly....we didn't agree with that policy..."
It is simply amazing how politics has slipped free of its moorings, kind of reminds me of the 1980s and "There Is No Alternative"........but of course there is....."God made Big People, and God made Little People; but Colt made the '45 to even things out"
as they say.....
Except that Blair removed the right to bear arms, especially the like of Sam Colt's "Equaliser" from the UK citizenry.
Of course the reason he did so was to stop people shooting burglars and other criminals, but the reality is they were terrified of an armed uprising!
Off topic I'm afraid but I've no other vehicle to express this. Has Jeremy Paxman turned eurosceptic? On Newsnight he has just said that the only answer the EU Commission seems to have to the euro crisis is to give itself even more powers. He spoke in a disparaging way to the EU Commission spokesman and also gave Peter Obourne a free reign to ridicule the spokesman.
Blair removed the right to bear arms
Licensing was introduced in latter-19th Century, controls in 1920s fearing Uprising, and prohibition on handguns under Blair after severe restrictions under Jenkins......
So why can rights be removed from the English and not from the Americans ? Ah...the British like rights to "be granted by law" the Americans seev them as "inalienable".....difference between Serfs and Citizens I guess !
Post a Comment