In the middle of the Earth...
For Splintered Sunrise
Thanks to SS for his comment on an earlier post, which I shall quote in its entirety, because I cannot improve on it. I believe he likes that sort of thing, so the song above is for him.
Holy piss, have you seen Nick's latest? Clegg is Frodo Baggins? I'll have what he's having.
Indeed, Nick comes out with a very bizarre column, which some readers (SS and Flying Rodent almost certainly) will recognise as much of the election gossip which has been passed around via Twitter repackaged in Nick's own words. Nick doesn't like the Liberal Democrats and he says every nasty thing he can think of, barring accusing their leader of making Heather Mills fall over.
Since SS made me read Nick (I managed to forget; I should do that more often), here are couple of things I think he'll like rather more than the 'Ballad of Bilbo Baggins'. (Don't assume that I listened to it. I just grabbed the embed code and fled.) Nick appears in Crispian Jago's Skeptic Trumps series which lists his 'Nemesis' [sic] as 'The New Statesman, Peter Hitchens.' I love it when a post comes together, and as it happens Peter Hitchens has written a very similar piece: Oh dear, the Tories now face an even better Blair imitator than Cameron. Hitchens at least remembered to be funny. He attributes the following to what an honest Tory would have said:
Having stressed that youth, good looks, a cool spouse and a relaxed manner were what really mattered in a would-be Premier, we have accidentally made the case for the Liberal Democrat leader.
Their columns are not dissimilar, but I find Hitchens a lot more convincing. Not only that but he manages to describe Nick's column before it was even published:
So the only way we can hope to win this Election is by smearing and denigrating our opponents,or by avoiding politics and concentrating on personality and Mrs Cameron’s dress sense.
OK, Nick doesn't actually bring Samantha Cameron into his column, but I defy any reader to find a policy discussed. I grant you, he mentions some second hand policies, such as immigration:
The Express meanwhile stuck to its favourite theme and claimed Clegg wanted to flood Britain with immigrants. Corrupt, foolish, a traitor to his nation – no punch was too wild for the press to throw.
Yes, but what is the LD immigration policy, and how does it differ from, say, Labour's? The Express didn't say, so Nick doesn't seem to know, or care.
At their behest, Tony Blair was tougher on crime than any prime minister since the abolition of the death penalty and Gordon Brown – thankfully – kept Britain out of the euro. Nor is their journalism always wrong. Liberals who complained that last week's assault on Clegg was "propaganda" played the old trick of confusing the motives of writers with the accuracy of their reporting. Just because a story is in the Telegraph does not mean it is not true and Clegg did indeed work for a ruthless lobbying firm that defended Fred the Shred's Royal Bank of Scotland and a logging company accused of hacking down the rainforests.
Isn't this straight back to "Cruel Britannia" territory? Blair the unprincipled? The 'and' in the first sentence puzzles me: I think he means. "At their behest, Tony Blair was tough on crime. Also, Gordon Brown kept Britain out of the Euro." Certainly, it was my understanding that Gordon Brown really did believe that entering the Euro would be a bad thing, and whatever else one might wish to say against him, did not do stay with the pound because of lobbying from press barons. If Nick means "At their behest... Gordon Brown..." then he's simply talking crap. Does Nick still write for the Standard, BTW? Hurrah for the Blackshirts, old boy. Know what I mean, know what I mean...
In summary then, while Nick seems to have read quite a few papers and blogs this week, he's quite stunningly uninformed about what any of the parties think. Of course, since he tried to call the election when he wrote "Waiting for the Etonians", he might just be a little pissed off if the Etonian party doesn't win.