For those who don’t know, David Cameron is the latest leader of the U.K. Conservative Party. He’s the Leader of the Opposition. Somehow I don’t see him progressing to Prime Minister. Here’s a good reason why. What a prat.
Can someone translate this into non-whining-blogger bullshit for me? I got about three paragraphs in and the promised reason for the opposition leader’s non-appearance has not yet been revealed.
I don’t have patience for writing this poor. Don’t they still teach the “inverted pyramid” method?
Cameron strikes me as being a step change in the leadership of the Tories. He’s very posh granted, but he and his cohort largely seem to live in the twenty-first century rather than the nineteenth that the rancid moralizers who infest that party still do. Bravo, Sir!
I hasten to add: I don’t think that they are experienced enough in the rough and tumble of Parliamentary life yet. They will likely be in opposition for a few years, possibly for a full term of Brown, but the Tories have to bite the bullet and stick with someone who is electable in modern Britain. I think that Cameron is that person, and god knows we need an effective opposition.
-
It’s a blog. Not journalism.
-
It’s first link is to another blog.
Forget you ever read the thing. It’s content-free.
He’s Blair lite. No substance, no policy, no hope. He’s better than Major, Hague, and Duncan-Smith, but not by much. He needs to be more.
What the blog is complaining about…
Last week, the Queen made her annual speech to Parliament. This is a speech she makes every year, usually in November, when the new session of Parliament opens. It’s written by the Government, and its lays out the Government’s goals for the coming year, and legislation and policy the Prime Minister would like to see passed. After the speech, the party leaders debate the speech. This all happened, as it does every year.
This Monday, David Cameron, the Conservative Party chairman, flew to Darfur, to inspect the crisis there and urge the Sudanese government to stop the genocide. Apparently the blog, and, one would assume, Quartz, believes he should be back in the House, instead, discussing further elements of last week’s speech.
What policies do you think he should pursue? The country is largely centrist, and not keen on radicalism. What strategy does he have other than distancing himself from the rapidly dying-off Tebbitt-tendency?
I’d like him to have some pollicies to pursue. So far, all we know is that we’ll have a Bill of Rights.
The link is to a blog and a badly written blog at that. There are reasons not to think highly of Cameron but don’t take you’re information from here. Also, the website is straight up anti-EU rhetoric so the author is not going to be kind to a Tory leader that refuses to stick to the previous line on Europe.
On his policies, you can see why he won’t publish them at the moment – if he did and they were any good the Labour party would nick them! If there are no detailed policies in the run up to the next General Election (3-4 years away) then he’s in trouble.
Since this thread isn’t asking for opinions, I am moving it to MPSIMS.
The man is a shoo-in for the next PM. He’s distanced himself from the lunatic right and is managing to uotflank Labour on the Left. He’s running against a party who the country is now sullenly waiting to vote out of power in the same manner it was with Major in the 90’s. And he’s running against a party who’s only two policies seem to be:
- We still think it was right to invade Iraq so stop bugging us about it.
- The scary Muslims will kill all of you unless you hand over all your civil liberites NOW.
Factor in the predictable incompetence in preparing for the Olympics, being led by a Scotsman with a face like a smacked arse and all the gruff charm of a drunk panhandler and the election is Cameron’s to lose. They don’t need policies.
And i’m saying this as a New Labour supporter. I can’t bring myself to vote again for this lying bunch of incompetent, illiberal, c*nts.
Stop it! You’re frightening me.