Saturday, January 31, 2004
THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC CONSERVATIVES
For a little laugh, I thought I'd look at the British Conservative party's web site, on Hutton:
Michael Howard has made a dramatic call to Britain's press and media to stand up to bullying by the Blair regime. . .
. . . Addressing a Kent Journalist of the Year awards ceremony, Mr Howard said: "When all is said and done, no-one should underestimate the vital nature of the role of the free press, broadcast and print, in sustaining a vigorous and healthy democracy. If they were ever to become Government puppets, our democracy would be truly in peril.". . .
Where in heaven's name has Conservative leader Michael Howard been since at least the autumn of 2002? The above utterly misses the point. Freedom of the press is in no danger in this country. (Unless one is Robert Kilroy-Silk, of course.)
Howard manages to overlook the salient point: the BBC is not just any ordinary news-gathering or media service; it is the only one that is taxpayer-funded.
One would think that Howard, supposedly being a conservative, would appreciate any government's choosing to express its disgust at this BBC. After all, it is an entity that increasingly, and openly, behaves not so much as a broadcaster that has been granted a privileged, taxpayer-funded position, but more like an independent political actor all its own.
In fact, the BBC is also one that (at least until last Thursday) appears certain that it has the unchallengeable "right" even to abuse that role. Such smugness has caused the BBC finally to reach the point where it is often broadcasting garbage -- and is proud to do so! Someone at the Beeb might want to step back a moment, dig up a Bible -- they must have one around someplace -- and find Proverbs 16:18: "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall."
Overall, the Blair government's biggest problem is it is a Labour government. Labour remains at its heart a big spending, socialist party, which rejects the notion of democracy as an end in itself. On the contrary, Labour grandees underneath everything loathe voters who don't fall into line with socialism's premise that the masses were placed on this earth merely to pay increasingly burdensome taxes, in order to fund the socialist revolutionary vanguard's dreams of societal perfection.
Within that framework, the Blair government has made varied domestic missteps an agile and imaginative opposition should have had little trouble opposing and even exploiting. Yet instead of targeting such, for idiotic reasons that remain unclear, the Conservatives -- like too many Democrats in the U.S. -- for example cannot bring themselves to commit themselves fully to the blindingly obvious on one of the major issues of the day: "The liberation of Iraq was correct, and if we [Conservatives] had been in power, we would have done exactly what the Blair government did. However, on other issues -- from taxation, to education, to defense spending, and so on -- we disagree with the Blair government. And if we were elected, here's what we'd do instead. . ."
On Hutton, and increasingly on Iraq, rather than being conservatives, the Conservative Party has inexplicably chosen the same side of the fence as the screwball, Liberal Democrats. Indeed, the Conservatives might consider at last just merging with Lib Dems. The expanded party could simply re-style itself the Liberal Democratic Conservatives, and be done with it.
Doing that will put to rest at long last the silly notion still held by many -- that Britain doesn't already have three leftist parties.
As for real conservatives? Their last major sighting in Britain was some 15 years ago. ¶ by Robert, Saturday, January 31, 2004
For a little laugh, I thought I'd look at the British Conservative party's web site, on Hutton:
Michael Howard has made a dramatic call to Britain's press and media to stand up to bullying by the Blair regime. . .
. . . Addressing a Kent Journalist of the Year awards ceremony, Mr Howard said: "When all is said and done, no-one should underestimate the vital nature of the role of the free press, broadcast and print, in sustaining a vigorous and healthy democracy. If they were ever to become Government puppets, our democracy would be truly in peril.". . .
Where in heaven's name has Conservative leader Michael Howard been since at least the autumn of 2002? The above utterly misses the point. Freedom of the press is in no danger in this country. (Unless one is Robert Kilroy-Silk, of course.)
Howard manages to overlook the salient point: the BBC is not just any ordinary news-gathering or media service; it is the only one that is taxpayer-funded.
One would think that Howard, supposedly being a conservative, would appreciate any government's choosing to express its disgust at this BBC. After all, it is an entity that increasingly, and openly, behaves not so much as a broadcaster that has been granted a privileged, taxpayer-funded position, but more like an independent political actor all its own.
In fact, the BBC is also one that (at least until last Thursday) appears certain that it has the unchallengeable "right" even to abuse that role. Such smugness has caused the BBC finally to reach the point where it is often broadcasting garbage -- and is proud to do so! Someone at the Beeb might want to step back a moment, dig up a Bible -- they must have one around someplace -- and find Proverbs 16:18: "Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall."
Overall, the Blair government's biggest problem is it is a Labour government. Labour remains at its heart a big spending, socialist party, which rejects the notion of democracy as an end in itself. On the contrary, Labour grandees underneath everything loathe voters who don't fall into line with socialism's premise that the masses were placed on this earth merely to pay increasingly burdensome taxes, in order to fund the socialist revolutionary vanguard's dreams of societal perfection.
Within that framework, the Blair government has made varied domestic missteps an agile and imaginative opposition should have had little trouble opposing and even exploiting. Yet instead of targeting such, for idiotic reasons that remain unclear, the Conservatives -- like too many Democrats in the U.S. -- for example cannot bring themselves to commit themselves fully to the blindingly obvious on one of the major issues of the day: "The liberation of Iraq was correct, and if we [Conservatives] had been in power, we would have done exactly what the Blair government did. However, on other issues -- from taxation, to education, to defense spending, and so on -- we disagree with the Blair government. And if we were elected, here's what we'd do instead. . ."
On Hutton, and increasingly on Iraq, rather than being conservatives, the Conservative Party has inexplicably chosen the same side of the fence as the screwball, Liberal Democrats. Indeed, the Conservatives might consider at last just merging with Lib Dems. The expanded party could simply re-style itself the Liberal Democratic Conservatives, and be done with it.
Doing that will put to rest at long last the silly notion still held by many -- that Britain doesn't already have three leftist parties.
As for real conservatives? Their last major sighting in Britain was some 15 years ago. ¶ by Robert, Saturday, January 31, 2004
