What chance have they got against a tie and a crest?
With that in mind, many of those currently following David "direct" Cameron's first prime ministerial trip to strengthen trade links in the Middle East, would be well within their rights to be somewhat taken aback by the rather frank nature of his comments. Not least in India where where he spoke of neighbouring Pakistan "promoting the export of terror" and being allowed to "look both ways" on the issue. Crikey!
So, none of the delicate, carefully chosen language of international diplomacy here. Many, including a number of Pakistani dignatories, have been angered and saddened by Cameron's tone of voice and his choice of words. And just as many seem to find his style a refreshing, if surprising, change.
I'm no Tory sympathiser, by any stretch (believe you me), but I must grudgingly admit that I have developed a slight, sneaking admiration of Cameron's willingness to be so upfront. Whether he's making a dreadful mistake, or paving the way for some courageous conversations remains to be seen, but to paraphrase Jeremy Hardy in Blackadder Goes Forth, I've got to admire his balls.
Anyway, what's your take on all this?
Perhaps this might be an opportune moment to remind ourselves of the time Cameron was completely lost for words during an interview with Gay Times (Lazy YouTube Embed alert!). Anyone for a Brokeback Coalition? I think the common parlance here is... LOL LMFAO etc...
4 comments:
Cameron's a prick. But he's refreshingly happy to be a prick on the global stage. Is that an improvement? I don't know. The last PM was a prick too. Same meat, different gravy.
I think he's been advised to show leadership and strength from the beginning and this is his way of doing it. I suspect he may be a very good Prime Minister of the type that transcends politics. Judging by last night's documentary, even Mandelson seems to like him at the moment.
Cameron reminds me of the privately educated kids I knew at university, who'd cruised in with a combination of top A-level results and supreme confidence, only to realise that away from the support networks of Harrow or Rugby or Marlborough they were in possession of a pretty ordinary intelligence, and also had some quite startling gaps in their knowledge and experience. In an Indian restaurant I had to explain to a guy who'd been Head Boy at Stowe that one didn't usually ask for jam on one's naan bread.
Anything's better than "New" Labour surely? Sad but, yes, it's time to get back to reality I'm afraid...
Top A Level results with "pretty ordinary intelligence" - surely you're not suggesting their support networks allowed them to cheat?
Toffs are just like us really, except they generally have loads of money and can pretty well do what they want - but hey, that's life...
A good socialist like Tony Blair though, he earns millions on the back of being Prime Minister and pretty much keeps it to himself...
So who's the real villain?
Is it the person with no principles or the person who states their principles and then systematically betrays them - or is it the businessman in his SUIT and TIE?
Post a Comment