Fascinating assertion, from a principled tory journalist, who ought to know, that what passes for the current Conservative party (with a joke like Liz for a pretend-premiere) is a travesty, which has been captured by a small coterie of super-rich manipulators. Twits who really thought that the Quasi-budget presented by Truss and Quarteng, with the universally-unpopular tax cuts just for them, was a jolly good thing; to the extent that they thought a Truss-gov could work, and could deliver.
Super-villain Illuminati? Or just prattish little farties like all the rest of us? Certainly theyâve screwed up royally with this scam. Some super-villainsâŚ!
She doesnât seem up to the travails of the job, but she has people around her advising her next mistake. It kind of makes sense that she mainly represents the super rich Gatsby minority. Though she was the party members choice over the MPs - probably on the basis that for them the more right wing the better. Theyâd probably do the same again if it was opened up on the same basis, though wiser heads would surely opt for Richie Sunak.
Confirming exactly what Peter says, hereâs a slide from UK Column of Wednesday. It depicts the membership of the advisory committee that will be steering Jeremy Hunt. Though probably not for very long as the whole house of cards is about to collapse.
At the end of this little diatribe PO says, âwe live in an era of client journalismâ. Too right, and PO offers his own services to that cause and effectively provides scaffolding for the broken and crumbling paradigm. It seems that no matter how bad things become, no matter how exposed is the charade, jobbers such as PO reflexively continue to to support the status quo - - here, PO is no fan of Starmer (why does PO say Schtarmer? - is that like, edgy?), but hopes he becomes PM âwith a huge majorityâ - - really - Trilateral/WEFoid Starmer?! Isnât it obvious that in the wake of Project Kill Corbyn a genuine impulse to âserve the peopleâ is nowhere to be found in Parliament - at least within the coterie of those bought schmucks that are likely to get a whiff of power.
Ditto POâs comments about Ukraine - does PO really believe Truss âhas her finger on the nuclear buttonâ - - isnât that idea for the birds? As far as I can tell the UK has no independent nuclear capacity. And who exactly are those âcalm heads with some experienceâ that PO hopes to see ascending? I mean, is there a single Tory, or Labour creep for that matter, with even a scintilla of a chance of gaining âhigh officeâ who doesnât go along with the wonky Ukraine narrative?
Why is it that tiny outfits such as UKC are the only ones attempting to talk sense and point to the those that are actually calling the shots. Sorry, itâs just not good enough that PO just vaguely waves his hand in the direction of the âsuper richâ - - why isnât he really drilling down into what that means, and how it plays-out?
Similar thing last evening listening to Kathy Gyngell talking to Mark Steyn on GBNews - - KG was quite insistent that the Tories are now nothing but âtechnocrats, theyâre apparatchiks - theyâre operating in their own interests, not in the countryâs interestsâ. Again, instead of trying to unpack KGâs comments MS reflexively steered the debate back onto safe ground and specifics of âsocial conservatismâ and âfiscal conservatismâ - - that despite MSâs own frequent references to technocrats - - - we see this all the time - outlets such as GBNews often features risque commentators offering realistic appraisals about that which afflicts us, yet no sooner has discussion ended then thereâs default back to some kind of acceptable suite of opinion.
Canât really disagree Si. Iâd be the last to suggest that Oborne is faultless - as would he, I dare say. But the stuff he was saying was useful insight into not only what the pols are saying, but what their usually-supportive journalists are saying just now. âWhen thieves fall out, honest men may prosper.â Thereâs a fair bit of useful light-letting in POâs spiel. And yes âSchtarmerâ is odd. Is PO implying some Germanic connectionâŚ?
Yes, I take your point, Rhis. Though itâs so very frustrating - what will it take for these journos to wrench their attention away from its fixated gaze though the Overton window.
Perhaps we should start calling the next prime minister but - one? two? - Der Schtarmer. Canât see it catching on though; not for Woodentop. Der Holz Schtarmer, perhapsâŚ?
The Schtarmer thing looks like a piss take. Keefâs main achievement has been creating a party fit for non-Gentiles, no?
Remember how Corbyn was excoriated for pronouncing Epstein with a Yiddische h before the t. Evidence of his antisemitism.
Keef was posturing at some Pink News prize-giving earlier this week to signal his trans-friendly credentials, demonstrating how the prole party is now something fit to be supported by Fine Arts lecturers and students alike.
Meanwhile I gather one of the seats in Sheffield looks like a shortlisters wet dream come true: in the pink corner Paul Mason, in the rainbow corner Edie Izzard.
Iâll just chuck into the mix that while all this stuff is going on Steadfast Noon is happening. It will end next weekend.
Donât you just love the John Wayne connotations.
With everything on hair-trigger alert itâs perhaps not a good idea for NATO to hold a nuclear war exercise right on Russiaâs borders.
As we all know, these âexercisesâ often turn into the real thing. This ties in with my own (hopefully wrong) belief that the dying American Empire/NATO are going to use nukes against the Russians.
These people in Washington and the West really are batshit crazies.
