Print Story A Glorious New Day!
Love
By Breaker (Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 11:13:49 PM EST) (all tags)
O how the birds sing, each mote of sunshine glimmers with promise, and how food becomes ambrosia.


I have excised all wrongthink websites from my bookmarks, and embrace our Glorious Leader Gordon Brown as my Lord Master and Saviour.

I have burnt all the books by those so-called economists who seek to denigrate our Glorious Leader and His Talentful Cabinet.  I hear only truth and love when our Beloved party speaks to us.

I roundly condemn those fools who dressed up, went walking and got detained for search; how dare they presume to affront our magnificent Party?

There, isn't that better?  I am so much happier now I love The Party. 

In other news, our Great Leader faces a test in Glenrothes today.  Usually PMs don't hit the campaign trail for by elections but the presence there of our Most Glorious Leader and His Most Gracious Wife Who Is Not Ginger in the last couple of weeks surely shows us his dedication to our Noble Cause.

And here is my predictions for the outcome tonight (note to Theo Escargot / R Mutt etc this is deliberatly posted as diary not hole so you may point and laugh in 2009).

If Labour win, there will be no General Election until it absolutely has to be called in 2010.
If Labour narrowly lose, there will be no General Election until it absolutely has to be called in 2010.
If Labour get hammered there will be a leadership contest before Christmas and a General Election in the second quarter of 2009

But of course, the Glorious Party of the People will be welcomed back into Greatness by our Scottish cousins.  
< So it begins | Thursday >
A Glorious New Day! | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Guy Fawkes walk thingummywossit by gazbo (4.00 / 1) #1 Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 11:41:51 PM EST
OK, I see what they're doing, and personally I am concerned with erosion of liberties etc.  HOWEVAR:

All this "It's not a protest, it was never organised, we were just walking" stuff is just childish.  Seriously, all I can think of is "Nuh-uh! I'm not punching him, I'm just spinning my arms round and walking forward and he's getting in the way!"


I recommend always assuming 7th normal form where items in a text column are not allowed to rhyme.

True by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #4 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 12:22:52 AM EST
But you have to wonder how we got to this point with so little protest up until now.


[ Parent ]
So if you excised all the wrong think by Imperial Mince (4.00 / 1) #2 Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 11:50:46 PM EST
How come you're linking to "leg-iron" who posts on idiot old holborn. Their argument that they're not on a protest or a march is not at all compelling. Saying something frequently doesn't make it true, unless you're saying it to bankers and economists. You called me apathetic the other day, I think that's several times better than the pathetic self-pitying self-martyrdom of 10 people who all coincidentally went for a walk dressed up in costume as  a fictional terrorist on the 5th of November at exactly the same time, all somehow carrying nothing to identify themselves.

As for the elections, surely the people of glenrothes will be too busy celebration the coronation of the new leader of the free world to vote.

--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
Copy and paste from google search by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #3 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 12:20:20 AM EST
I can manage my own bookmarks but deleting them from google is beyond me.

Those walkers were rightly stopped; in the Glorious Socialist Utopia that we have, the ability to protest outside the seat of power is clearly unneeded and these wrongthinkers should be sent to bed with no supper.  That they should think to draw attention in this manner to the Party is truly unforgiveable.

I think you are being a little harsh on the good people of Glenrothes; they will answer the call in droves to bring Our Glorious Party candidate to power, regardless of what is happening in our former colony.


[ Parent ]
I knew they would be stopped by Imperial Mince (4.00 / 1) #5 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 12:59:41 AM EST
You knew they would be stopped. They knew they would be stopped. My 3 year old nephew knew they woud be stopped. So what did they achieve by being stopped? Did they highlight some important failing of the mechanism of government that had previously gone un-noticed? Have they awkened the populace to the awful injustices being carried out in their name? Have they ignited the fires of revolution in the commonality? Or have they just made themselves feel important in their little corner of the internet that their circle jerk occupies?

--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
[ Parent ]
What would you have done by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #7 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:17:07 AM EST
Instead then?  Stayed at home?

Perhaps the gesture was futile in many eyes, and self aggrandising.

Would you say the same of a black woman who refused to give up her seat on a bus some years ago?




[ Parent ]
What would I have done if I was who? by Imperial Mince (2.00 / 0) #10 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:43:38 AM EST
Would you say the same of a black woman who refused to give up her seat on a bus some years ago?

I guess I missed the part in the Rosa Parks story where she tried to claim she was just a dirty white woman and therefore entitled to sit on the bus wherever she wanted, and then when back to her middle class suburban home and job to boast to all her friends how clever she was, consequence free?

--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
[ Parent ]
The point I am making by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #11 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:51:15 AM EST
Is that at some point, a protest begins small and gathers momentum.

Are we at that juncture?  I am undecided but you seem to have dismissed the actions of these people outright.

If you wanted to draw attention to erosion of civil liberties in UKia, how would you go about it?


[ Parent ]
The point I'm making is that not a lot of people by Imperial Mince (2.00 / 0) #14 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:11:00 AM EST
are going to join up to the popular judean peoples front.

I have dismissed the people you're "undecided" about, they're a bunch of spoiled children playing in the sand.

I did write more, but when I realised I was going to have to rewrite it make it make sense, I also realised you can organise your own revolution.

--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
[ Parent ]
But by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #16 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:18:52 AM EST
I hear good things about the People's Popular Front of Judea!

I also realised you can organise your own revolution.
If I did, would you join it?



[ Parent ]
Currently comrade Breaker by Imperial Mince (2.00 / 0) #17 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:34:14 AM EST
You're presenting a persona that would imply you'd simply create the Judean Front for Popular People, so no.

--
This space reserved for whining like a little bitch and being sanctimonious.
[ Parent ]
Brother comrade by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #19 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:36:58 AM EST
Are you calling me a splitter?


[ Parent ]
Glen fucking Rothes? by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #6 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:08:55 AM EST
I think you need a more international outlook mate

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

Is not Scotland by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #8 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:21:12 AM EST
A different country?

Yes, Glen fucking Rothes.  I think the result there will have a disproportionate impact on Westminster.


[ Parent ]
Yeah, I suppose it is by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #9 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:42:00 AM EST
The SNP are pretty much clearing up in Scotland now so I'm not sure if this one will have that much effect, especially seeing as the Glasgow East by-election was a much bigger upset.

A safe seat in industrial England would be a different matter, and there's every chance that could happen.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
SNP do seem to be a juggernaut by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #13 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:04:03 AM EST
Looking at the electoral map, if the SNP eat Labour's lunch in Scotland, the seat majority they enjoy in the HoC is going to be cut drastically.  Which means there will be many eyes focused on this election and any other by elections that may eat into Labour's lead.

So on the face of it - a minor province in Scotland.  But it'll be used as a barometer for the next GE by the Labour campaign team.




[ Parent ]
I think the election will be delayed as long as po by R Mutt (2.00 / 0) #12 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:55:30 AM EST
As long as possible, whatever happens.

There was an old but still interesting Matthew Parris article on how backbenchers see this sort of thing.

First, for the great majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party with no job in government, you can largely discount the issue of Labour losing power. So long as they retain their seats they keep the job they have - that of a backbencher...

Few will have much confidence that, after the spring of 2010, there will be any kind of employment that would pay better than the £90,000 or so to which a backbencher's salary effectively amounts, including expenses. 2010 is the wall, the void.

From an outside perspective, it's easy to see elections as a winner-take-all contest. Winning party gets to run the country, losing party gets nothing. From that perspective, it seems like the rational course if behind would be to take gambles -- like a new, late, leadership election-- in the hope of shaking things up.

From the PLP view though, losing by a small or moderate margin isn't a big deal: you probably still keep your job. Damage limitation is an acceptable strategy. If you take a gamble on a divisive leadership contest and then a gurning Miliband taking over, then you risk a complete wipeout as your party loses all credibility.

The press is bored and restless and wants a new Labour leader to play with. But it's much more likely that Brown will hang on to the last minute.

I've a feeling by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #15 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:14:29 AM EST
The recession is going to be really biting by 2010, which in turn will likely put negative pressure on support for Labour.  So will the backbenchers take that risk, with less generous sinecures being offered on company boards?  Or will they want to take the pain now and get their places on the board, snouts into the trough, or hope that their constituency still wants them as MP?

I don't know, but I'd bet the timing of the next GE is a matter of constant and furious debate amongst Labour MPs.  And the outcome at Glenrothes might be enough to bring about some changes.


[ Parent ]
Generous sinecures for Labour backbenchers? by R Mutt (2.00 / 0) #18 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:34:40 AM EST
Seems very unlikely. For ex-ministers, yes, but backbenchers aren't a lot of use.

I get the feeling that the political battle being fought at the moment is whether the Tories will win by a majority of 30 or a majority of 200. That's a pretty boring battle for most of us, but massively important if you're a back-bench MP.

Couldn't see UK figures at a quick Google, but in USia, the average post-war recession lasts 11 months, and the longest lasted 16 months. We entered recession in the third quarter of this year, which was reported this month. So the recession is most likely to be over by October 2009, and at worst by March 2010. While the consequences will still be biting, they'll probably be able to point at the figures and say "Gordon fixed the recession".

[ Parent ]
I suppose by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #20 Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 02:40:00 AM EST
It's all about who they've got to know over the years; Labour has been very business friendly (currently reading Who Runs Britain by BBC journo Peston - interesting reading).

If the Tories actually got off their arses and started behaving like an opposition, surely they'd have no problem pointing out whose watch it was that so many banks had to be bailed out...


[ Parent ]
A Glorious New Day! | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback