Thursday, 29 July 2010

Balls: What A Piece Of Work

Just a short note to record my astonishment at the hypocrisy and arrogance not just of Labour but of a particularly bad Labourist about the roots of the Coalition on that Robinson thing on telly just now. I had thought, foolishly, that Ed Balls was incapable of getting any worse. I was, of course, wrong. Hearing him whine about Labour's negotiations with the Lib Dems after the hung parliament is extraordinary.

I think some cognitive malfunction in his mind, combined with some serious weakness in his character, together mean that he simply is incapable of comprehending what it means to be honest. He just lies all the time, effortlessly, and has no awareness whatsoever that his habitually revised narrative of events is just that: lies - and, what's more, is known to be lies by everyone outside his mind who has seen the evidence - and the truth - laid out, crystal clear, before their very eyes. But it doesn't stop him - oh no! - because it's pathological. He talks, for instance, about this idea that Nick Clegg about-faced on cuts just for leverage in the negotiation process. Not so (read more about that in the Speccy online here). It was a bare-faced lie, on camera, for the film - but Balls didn't care because he doesn't understand what he did. Maybe we should pity him, he's that bad. (Nah.)

Anyway, I could go on but this is, thankfully, all cold water under Westminster bridge. The right - the only - outcome for Britain came to pass, so none of it really matters to anyone other than various breeds of historian and fading BBC journalists like Robinson any more.

Apart from Balls, that is. He wants to a party leader, but his party (no doubt with him - along with Straw and the other usual suspects - the ringleaders) are about to renege genuinely on a manifesto promise for the sake of political expediency with the AV/constituency restructuring Bill. That's genuine, pathetic, grubby opportunism and it's also why I and other people who feel, for the current incarnation of the Labour party, nothing but utter contempt, would very much like to see Balls win. It would be a great day for the nation (the death of Labour).

But remember, always, there was at least one joyous ending to those strange days of uncertainty back in May: forget Balls because his rather more lunatic mentor, Gordon Brown, was gone, gone, gone! at the end of it all. And the nation breathed a heavy, collective sigh of relief because of it.

Now that's what I call "victory". So, what the hell: good luck to the Coalition deal that fashioned that happy outcome, Tory and Lib Dem members both. Hats off to the nationalists, too (a party of which I happily and tactically voted for).

And why not?


  1. I don’t think it’s any revelation that politicians lie to maximise their own political advantage. It’s a bit disingenuous of you to dress that up as if it’s something peculiarly related to the Labour party. Can you remind us what the Tories said regarding VAT rises in their manifesto? Can you remind us what the Lib Dem chaired Jenkins Commission recommended as the minimum acceptable in the UK and what that same Commission had to say about AV? Don’t you think it’s a bit odd for the Tories to dress gerrymandering up as making every vote count while at the same time preferring to keep FPTP a system that often sees more than 50% of votes wasted? Can you explain how reform of the Lords is advanced by the coalition making 250 new peers to make up their numbers?

  2. "Don’t you think it’s a bit odd for the Tories to dress gerrymandering up as making every vote count while at the same time preferring to keep FPTP a system that often sees more than 50% of votes wasted?

    What arrant nonsense. Answer your own impertinent questions (I'm sure you already have).

    You're the one who's being disingenuoius, Monkey-Penguin, in reproducing the untrue Liebour attack line chapter and verse and pretending it's your own point of view (and that its somehow true (which it isn't) - and suggesting that the Liberal/SNP line that in FPTP somehow votes are 'wasted' - they most certainly are not at constituency level.

    The only reason you mention the first untruth is because of your irrational, possibly genetic, hatred of the Tories (which you no-doubt see in your peculiar Scottish separatist way as a party of England); the only reason you mention the second is because it's SNP and Liberal policy and you are at least loyal.

    Unfortunately, that policy is in those parties' manifestos not for the good of the nation (the UK, Scotland - whatever), but for the good of those little parties, who would love not just AV (which I support, by the way), but PR so they can wield far, far more power than their status of noisy minor voices warrants.

    Proportional Misrepresentation, more like - and weak, squabbling governments. That might suit Scotland but as long as there is a United Kingdom it must never happen (and never will).

    Anyway, don't just spout your propaganda in these comments, would you? I get enough of that in the media. Tris seems to be able to comment reasonably and wittily, even though we often don't see eye to eye. Why can't you?

  3. Well at least I will keep the nonsense on here. What was all that about being true to yourself? Oh sorry that was another question and I should know by now that you never explain anything. I suppose disingenuous is better than downright rude. I could ask why you write a blog at all if you don’t want comments but then I might be told I’m an arrogant half penguin Tory hater that Britain can’t be proud of on a Friday night after all that sauce. Thanks for nothing! Do you really believe what you are saying-oh sorry another question and you’re not good with those are you? I’m sorry I just can’t help it the anti-Tory bile just pours out. Your right I just won’t comment on your eherm propaganda (only not Labour) unless its to say something positive about the Tories or the coalition. How is this “they are the very very best Tory coalition I have ever seen in my entire life bar none” more to your liking?

  4. Dear-oh-dear. Perhaps you should take a day or two off. You might find that it helps you to (re?)discover a sense of humour - and at least some sense of balance.

    Besides, if you put aggressive, politically-motivated questions on someone's personal blog, that more or less ignore the original post, you will more than likely and justifiably be given short shrift. And there's no bloody use moaning about it, or being insulting, afterwards.

    Comment is always free on this blog. Even ones I find rather stupid and annoying. That's one of the reasons why I answer them.

    But I do, ultimately, regret the way read rather than heard words sound. In spite of our apparently pretty deep poltical points of division, we're not really all that different I suspect.

    For instance, while I don't feel at home in freezing Antarctic waters, or the urge to climb trees and eat nuts, we both breathe the same air and we had mothers, of one species or another. At least there's some common ground, then - potentially.

    That's a start, possibly, Scotsman.


Any thoughts?