You should NOT read the Daily Fail, and if you must, you should especially NOT read that vile hag. That piece, which I read, but I'm supposed to check out what I laughingly refer to as "the competition" wasn't even a success on Daily Fail terms. (You may loathe Melanie Phillips - I rather like her, ekshally - but at least she wouldn't even think of going there.) It was stupid, unfocussed, trying to be an equal-opportunity bit of sneering, and did not succeed on any level. As it happens - well, if this still comes as a surprise, I want some of the stuff you've been smoking all this time - I think Nick Clegg is an unprincipled flash in the pan, and a Lib-Con alliance would play on Cameron's and Osborne's worst shilly-shallying instincts. (A Lib-Lab alliance I would regard as one more sign of the impending apocalypse.) I still thought the jibes at the Clegg family low and stupid, the one at Sarah Brown possibly the most misogynistic of the three, and the one at SamCam evidence of Moir's innate rancid envy. But the campaign is NOT Glenda Slagg Moir - you probably need a lot of chocolate if you've been losing sight of that.
Oh, and I love what you're saying about the Railtrack people, because I know similar types at SNCF, and they are wonderful. They were semi-renationalised only because infrastructure in a long-term, loss-making proposition, especially if like in Britain NO investment was made in it practically for thirty years after he war, which wasn't he case at all in France.
I know. But it's not just the Daily Fail and it's not just that vile hag. Cristina Odone has proved magnificently that she has no concept of the internet - or actual facts - with her attacks on Dr Evan Harris in the Telegraph blogs.
And yes, Ms Phillips is not someone I would normally agree with (any more than I'd agree with, for example, Ms Toynbee) but you're quite right. I've seen her write some dodgy stuff, but she does keep a level above this. Ms Moir's (gosh, aren't I being formal?) diatribe was at such an unconsidered level that even Liz Jones would be embarrassed to have written it.
On the other hand, as a print journalist, I find the inability of many newspapers to get their heads around the fact that the media has changed when it comes to politics to be utterly hysterical to watch. Stuff that people like you and me have been saying for years is finally coming home to roost.
To be honest, what worries me the most is the Conservatives. As you know, I'm not likely to be a Conservative voter, but the current political system needs a strong balance and I'm not seeing Cameron and especially Osborne providing that. I don't think it's in anyone's best interests - even the most die-hard anti-Tory - for there not to be something solid on the other side, and I don't see that in the Tories. Individual Tories, yes, just as there are individual Labour people and individual Lib Dems. Apart from anything else, as a voter, if it were just the two parties, there's no way I could choose the Tories at the moment. And I think that's a shame - as I've said above, I really do think about these things seriously, because even if I know my vote won't actually make a blind bit of difference in my constituency, I do believe that I have an ethical obligation to vote for what I genuinely believe is best for the country.
I'll disagree with you on Clegg, but I actually don't have strong opinions on him. I do have strong opinions on other Lib Dems though (will you make an "ewww" face if I mention St Vince of Cable?) and I'll pick them on those grounds.
Interestingly, since the Daily Fail can be a rather good barometer on some issues, did you see their poll the other day asking who would be best as Chancellor? They offered three options: Darling, Cable and... Ken Clarke. No mention of Georgie Porgie at all.
Aargh, St Vince of Cable, aka "Wireless". What a bloomin' hypocrite.
And yes, I am entirely with you on the Cameroons. I have a longtime friend (and former editor) who's a dripping wet Tory, and he's been all about the Cameroons for years, without stirring even a breeze in my book.
BoJo would be a first-rate PM. Superb intellect, cuts through the waffle, understands instinctively a lot of things about what I'll call decency (Cameron probably does, but it's reasoned; Osborne hasn't a clue), can put his foot down even when it's in his mouth. And he has a sense of humour, which I find essential in a politician. (Hey, Maggie was a lifelong fan of Yes, Minister and Yes, PM...)
As opposed to the towering respect formerly afforded the newt-fancying serial deadbeat dad with his little Islamist friends, you mean?
But actually, I live in the "rest of the world", and most of the time, it doesn't especially think of London. The last time it looked at all, London won the Olympics, so as far as my own city (Paris) is concerned, we were rather envious, if anything.
It was the deadbeat serial Dad who initiated, fought for and drove the Olympic bid in the face of derision from most Conservatives and the allied press.
The deadbeat serial shagger stepped in very late to claim the credit and stick his name on the posters.
Ah, but us furriners aren't making the difference. You were talking of London's image abroad. Bojo, Blair and Princess Unne publicly put one over Chirac and Delannoë...
(Personal disclosure: I used to be a colleague of the DSS. V. good journalist, v.good editor.à
I think that was a comment further upthread than mine?
In terms of Olympic bid success, the Parisians with whom I was working at the time seemed to have very mixed feelings on this - relief at not being stuck with the bill v piqued pride at losing, double pique at losing to London. A direct mirror of the likely reaction in London had the verdict gone the other way.
Personal disclosure: also have experience of DSS, journalistic or academic skills are not enough to make him a good PM; 'instinctive decency' and 'GSoH' usually translates as 'shared views on such things' rather than an objective measure.
On the other hand, as a print journalist, I find the inability of many newspapers to get their heads around the fact that the media has changed when it comes to politics to be utterly hysterical to watch.
But they are far from alone in being slow to grasp the impact of increasing digital access on their business models. The media industry in generally is bad at grasping this, worse than most industry sectors I've dealt with which I find deeply ironic.
Mind you I also see irony in Ken Clarke as potential Chancellor. For me it is not just Georgie Porgie's inadequacies than but more Ken's latter day comments on banking deregulation. I seem to recall that as Chancellor himself he was a strong advocate of banking deregulation and implemented a great deal of it under the prevailing Thatcher culture.
Oh and whilst I'm whining about MPs, I don't have much time for the variety who love my constituency so much that they want the safe seat, but apparently don't deem it good enough to live in themselves or impose on their families. The previous incumbent was miles from me in any political sense but he lived in the constituency, was active within it and used the local schools and services.
Oh, and I love what you're saying about the Railtrack people, because I know similar types at SNCF, and they are wonderful. They were semi-renationalised only because infrastructure in a long-term, loss-making proposition, especially if like in Britain NO investment was made in it practically for thirty years after he war, which wasn't he case at all in France.
Reply
And yes, Ms Phillips is not someone I would normally agree with (any more than I'd agree with, for example, Ms Toynbee) but you're quite right. I've seen her write some dodgy stuff, but she does keep a level above this. Ms Moir's (gosh, aren't I being formal?) diatribe was at such an unconsidered level that even Liz Jones would be embarrassed to have written it.
On the other hand, as a print journalist, I find the inability of many newspapers to get their heads around the fact that the media has changed when it comes to politics to be utterly hysterical to watch. Stuff that people like you and me have been saying for years is finally coming home to roost.
To be honest, what worries me the most is the Conservatives. As you know, I'm not likely to be a Conservative voter, but the current political system needs a strong balance and I'm not seeing Cameron and especially Osborne providing that. I don't think it's in anyone's best interests - even the most die-hard anti-Tory - for there not to be something solid on the other side, and I don't see that in the Tories. Individual Tories, yes, just as there are individual Labour people and individual Lib Dems. Apart from anything else, as a voter, if it were just the two parties, there's no way I could choose the Tories at the moment. And I think that's a shame - as I've said above, I really do think about these things seriously, because even if I know my vote won't actually make a blind bit of difference in my constituency, I do believe that I have an ethical obligation to vote for what I genuinely believe is best for the country.
I'll disagree with you on Clegg, but I actually don't have strong opinions on him. I do have strong opinions on other Lib Dems though (will you make an "ewww" face if I mention St Vince of Cable?) and I'll pick them on those grounds.
Interestingly, since the Daily Fail can be a rather good barometer on some issues, did you see their poll the other day asking who would be best as Chancellor? They offered three options: Darling, Cable and... Ken Clarke. No mention of Georgie Porgie at all.
Reply
And yes, I am entirely with you on the Cameroons. I have a longtime friend (and former editor) who's a dripping wet Tory, and he's been all about the Cameroons for years, without stirring even a breeze in my book.
BoJo would be a first-rate PM. Superb intellect, cuts through the waffle, understands instinctively a lot of things about what I'll call decency (Cameron probably does, but it's reasoned; Osborne hasn't a clue), can put his foot down even when it's in his mouth. And he has a sense of humour, which I find essential in a politician. (Hey, Maggie was a lifelong fan of Yes, Minister and Yes, PM...)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
But actually, I live in the "rest of the world", and most of the time, it doesn't especially think of London. The last time it looked at all, London won the Olympics, so as far as my own city (Paris) is concerned, we were rather envious, if anything.
Reply
The deadbeat serial shagger stepped in very late to claim the credit and stick his name on the posters.
Reply
(Personal disclosure: I used to be a colleague of the DSS. V. good journalist, v.good editor.à
Reply
I think that was a comment further upthread than mine?
In terms of Olympic bid success, the Parisians with whom I was working at the time seemed to have very mixed feelings on this - relief at not being stuck with the bill v piqued pride at losing, double pique at losing to London. A direct mirror of the likely reaction in London had the verdict gone the other way.
Personal disclosure: also have experience of DSS, journalistic or academic skills are not enough to make him a good PM; 'instinctive decency' and 'GSoH' usually translates as 'shared views on such things' rather than an objective measure.
Reply
You might think that; I couldn't possibly comment.
Reply
Worse than Liz Jones? This must have been bad...
(IMO, Liz Jones has one redeeming feature, namely that she likes cats. Apart from that, can't stand the woman!)
Reply
Reply
But they are far from alone in being slow to grasp the impact of increasing digital access on their business models. The media industry in generally is bad at grasping this, worse than most industry sectors I've dealt with which I find deeply ironic.
Mind you I also see irony in Ken Clarke as potential Chancellor. For me it is not just Georgie Porgie's inadequacies than but more Ken's latter day comments on banking deregulation. I seem to recall that as Chancellor himself he was a strong advocate of banking deregulation and implemented a great deal of it under the prevailing Thatcher culture.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment