Showing posts with label Labour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Labour. Show all posts

Sunday, 4 April 2010

"Fire up the Quattro Bolly"

Up till now I wouldn't have actually really questioned the Milliband Brothers intelligence, only their good sense.

Seeing them launch their latest poster attack on David Cameron by trying to compare him with Philip Glenister's no nonsense cop character Gene Hunt from the popular TV series Ashes to Ashes made me do just that though.

Now I can see where they are trying to go with it. Labour see the 80s as unmitigately bad with Maggie in power and all that. I am not sure we all hated the 80s like Labour, but Labour certainly did, so they are probably making the mistake that we will all think 80s were entirely bad.

I know the 80s wern#'t perfect by any means, but the thing is the country also kind of turned it's self round and we beagn to feel just a little bit better about ourselves for the first time in ages too.

What Labour seem to have missed is that the character of Gene Hunt is really a kind of hero. Whatever else he is A. Incorruptible B. Tough C. Direct D Kickass and C Pretty Cool, etc. none are things that I had particularly previously associated with Dave the bloke.

Quite Frankly if Gene Hunt were running for PM he might well get my vote.

Up to now I couldn't help feeling Dave's greatest asset was that he was sligtly less awful and possibly slightly less incompetent than the clunking fist Gordon Brown. Who knows.. maybe he does share some of those characteristics with Gene Hunt :-)

If I were the clunking fist I would think twice about putting the Amaising Millibandis in charge of any more posters. It seems the Tories were quick to both spot and take advantage of this spectacular own goal and have gleefully hijacked it.

“Fire up the Quattro Bolly" - If anything it’s well overdue for change.

Monday, 22 February 2010

A future - but would it really be fair for all?

It seems that Labour, or rather the ideologically dedicated ;-) Saatchi and Saatchi, have come up with an election campaign slogan.

'A future fair for all'

Apparently it is supposed to capture Labour and particularly the (possibly literally) clunking fist’s "own personal point of view”.

No wonder they want to distract us from looking at their record in power with airy waffle of the future. A future they know will involve tax hikes and spending cuts that they are even now allowing to grow larger as they try to play them down dragooning their pet economists much as when they wrongly as it turned out attacked Geoffrey Howe.

“Fairness” is one of those Labour newspeak words like “Community”.

As near as I can tell, to Labour and their fellow travellers, fairness essentially means that no one should be allowed to succeed more than anyone else. The thought seems to be that if someone does, or aspires to do so, then it is somehow unfair. They are somehow “unfairly” taking advantage of, intelligence, hard work and plain good luck, or possibly that of their parents in order to succeed.

Essentially to cut people off at the knees so to speak in order to prevent them standing head and shoulders above anyone else. Because to their minds the very act of doing so is of course “unfair”.

S&S’s director of strategy to Richard Huntington would like us to believe that the new slogan “highlights that change is a process”. Really?

Apparently it also rather worryingly “locks together a destination for Britain”

Oh and it seems outrageously contends “that the future for Labour is for the many, compared to the Conservatives”, where he would have us believe the future would “always be for the few."

So then, they are apparently (and possibly allowing their Freudian slip to show) taking a leaf out of the early Russian communists little red book.

Up to a certain point in 1903 they were part of the relatively innocuously titled “Russian Social Democratic Party”. A minority, who didn’t feel they were necessarily destined for success there, going on the way they were, spit away from the party and formed a breakaway group.

Much like our Gordon it seems they presumably cunningly and misleadingly, (rather than ironically), they referred to themselves as “members of the majority”. Possibly in order to sucker those who don’t look too closely at such claims and go with the feel of a slogan rather than it’s relationship with reality.

The Russian word for “members of the majority” is of course Bolsheviks, after 1917 they managed a much longer stint in power than Tony Blair ever did. Such an extended term in power is surely the stuff of the clunking fist’s private fantasies.

It seems to me more realistic to argue that if you want a future where you really do have a fair chance to succeed, without the ball and chain of the incompetent nannying of the repressive Labour state dragging you down then the last thing you should do is vote Labour.