RapierFugue
Posts: 4740
Joined: 3/16/2006
From: London, England
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aneirin
As it seems power corrupts even the most well meaning of people, perhaps any leader should only serve a fixed term in office to stop them becoming blase or even believing themselves god like because they were re elected, the impression I received from Bliar in his second term of office, Thatcher did the same and it was noticed, the lovers came to become haters of the monster they had created.
Bliar became a monster he forced us into an illegal war and instead of protecting the British people, he put them in harm's way for it is known what threats we had prior to Iraq were small potatoes compared to what we have now. The bugger resigned, he should not have been allowed to, he should have been forced to see out the mess he created and there reap the hatred the voter has for leaders gone mad.
Bliars resignation was well calculated, for knowing full well his 'pal' Brown was to take the reigns anything Bliar had done would fade into insignificance if his hunch was right, Brown was a twit. But Brown never had a fair run, he took the reigns of a country in Bliar instigated crisis, he was never going to win, as labour was falling from popularity very quickly, Brown's tenure took the focus of Bliar who went on to get a good job with the wealth he sought so badly, his reputation intact.
Now as a kickback we have Cameron and his pet monkey Clegg, Cameron has no idea beyond ideology, for he has not experienced much of what many of this country have to experience and his cuts/attacks on the poorest demonstrate that adequately, for I am just waiting for him to adopt the Mary Antoinette attitude when the massses start protesting with zeal.
Clegg, well, he is a dissappointment, he has sold out his beliefs in the search for the power he believes he has got, I feel that guy is a flash in the pan, he will fall away, his greed has destroyed him as a person worth anything and his party should disown him if they are to survive.
But that is it in a nutshell really, those that rise to power are not from the lower classes, they know what they know from media of the correct slant and advisors who also have never been there, so what we have in effect is a government that has no idea and in reality doesnt want to have any idea as we are nothing beyond tax payers until voting time comes when their ass holes start fluttering as to how their minions perceive them.
First off, can we please refer to the man by his name; calling him “Bliar” is on a par (IMHO) with saying “conga-rats”, or “Xmyth” – it’s one of those “net funnies” that isn’t in the least amusing after the second repetition, and makes the user sound like an over-excited 15 year-old, which (and please pardon my presumption) I assume you're not. I don’t wish to sound harsh, but it really grinds my gears.
Blair was, when he took the reins, a man desperate for power; it was what he’d worked his entire adult life to achieve, and which, courtesy of John Smith’s death, he got far sooner than he or the nation, expected or, as it turned out, was good for him. Or, as it turned out, for us. I so wonder what would have happened if JS had become the PM, as he most surely would have, and instead could have nurtured Tony as a successor. A missed opportunity of biblical (heh) proportions.
Having read several many accounts of the days leading up to war with Iraq, I'm convinced that Tony entered that war convinced he was doing the right thing. He was offered (and this is a matter of record) a chance to not join with George W and thus sit the thing out from the sidelines, and he did what he considered to be the moral thing and stood by his friend and ally. The extreme evil of that decision was further corrupted by the fact that he naively assumed that, at all times, he was being told the truth, and furthermore the fact that he was somewhat in awe of the United States as a world power, seeing in it echoes of Britain’s former colonial past. He was also, if it needs to be said, colossally arrogant, and drunk on power.
I agree that leaders should serve fixed terms, so they can’t, as you rightly point out, then pass the buck when election time comes. The funny thing is that, had he been forced to stay on, I’m 90% sure Tony Blair would have won the last election. He’s a criminally charming man, a truly gifted orator, and has a televisual appeal second to none – even Clinton in his prime isn’t or wasn’t as good as Tony B when he’s really on it.
He’s shallow, he’s upsettingly weak from a moral standpoint, but the man had charisma. Still has, if you watch the more recent interviews. At the risk of repeating the old Italian joke about “I shagga da one sheep ...”, he really only ever made one major tactical error – trouble is, it was so huge and ultimately evil an error, and one with so dramatic and costly a price, that his reputation will never recover. I can’t help thinking that, as with so many other evils besetting the world, that the heart of this lies with the individual’s reliance on religion – Tony truly believed he was engaging in a Holy War, on the side of “right”, and that arrogance and perceived moral authority blinded him to the human cost of his decisions. Score one against the sky fairy believers.
Cameron is just another Tory, albeit a clever speaking one - I won a substantial amount of money during the Tory leadership race, when David Davis was assumed as the heir apparent, and a total shoe-in for the job; I heard Cameron’s conference speech, and immediately knew exactly what I was watching – the man who would be king. Please note I don't claim to have any special powers in this respect as a rule, but I just knew, watching that speech, that he had the right bullshit for the right time. That was the last time that man benefitted me in any way whatsoever.
The Tories are a fundamentally acquisitive party – they exist to service the rich, and they do best when ordinary people either think they’re about to become rich, or are worried most about becoming less rich. Once they're in power they always show their true colours, and I agree with several commentators that this election was the one almost everyone would not want to win – the resultant pain caused to folk not present when Maggie was last in power (and who thus knew the Tory Story) will etch the Tory ethos into people for half a generation to come.
Clegg and the LibDems disappointed me the most, as you've said. They had the chance to force this lame duck government back to the ballot box, where Labour might have found an electable leader (and god knows, Brown couldn't get elected as head of the school tuck shop, so flawed a character was he, and flawed enough to not even notice or consider how very flawed he was), and some sort of balance might have been struck. But Clegg saw a moment of opportunity, a chance to trade his soul for something that might aid his party at a later date, and he sold out so fast it must have made his head spin. There is maybe an ounce of right in that, insofar as re-electing another Labour government, after the cosmic cluster-fuck they’d made of things under Brown, would have maybe been just a tad too much, even for the UK electorate to stomach.
As a parting observation, have you noticed how alike the leaders all are now? Worrying doesn't begin to describe it. We’ve finally become American, and may God, or Chance, or Reason, have mercy on our souls.
< Message edited by RapierFugue -- 10/22/2010 9:05:08 PM >
|
RE: UK Government 'too stupid for words' shocker - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread