22-10-2009, 09:27 PM
Some random thoughts on the issue:
1) Britain's stewards seem intent on recreating the Chirac v Le Pen contest of some years back.
2) The ostensible primary object is, of course, a Tory restoration after a decade+ of neo-con rule.
3) The greater purpose is to end any prospect of left-wing government for good, just as in France.
4) The intervention of the Tory Generals in an attempt to distance the British Army from the ersatz fascist British National Pary - the so-called battle of the uniformed war crims and Mosley's heirs - appears an integral component in the above.
5) The embrace of the French strategy is an admission of Cameron's failure to relicate the Blair "big tent." Unable to win that kind of broad support - or merely lazy acquiescence - by the usual means, the stewards have had to go for a much grander scheme: Cameron v Griffin.
6) There would appear to be a major portent here for America's next election: Obama himself will need significant assistance from the US stewards to win a second term after the abysmal farce of his first. What form will the US variant of the Chirac/Le Pen (Cameron/Griffin) ceremonial will the US stewards plump for? Obama v the Military is looking favourite.
7) The timing of Frau Clinton's intervention on the question of the Tory attitude to Europe leaves little doubt that the US stewards are in broad agreement with their Brit equivalents; and that efforts to restore establishment "sanity" to the Tory approach will be unbending between now and the next election. Stand by for some swift volte faces from the compliant Cameron.
1) Britain's stewards seem intent on recreating the Chirac v Le Pen contest of some years back.
2) The ostensible primary object is, of course, a Tory restoration after a decade+ of neo-con rule.
3) The greater purpose is to end any prospect of left-wing government for good, just as in France.
4) The intervention of the Tory Generals in an attempt to distance the British Army from the ersatz fascist British National Pary - the so-called battle of the uniformed war crims and Mosley's heirs - appears an integral component in the above.
5) The embrace of the French strategy is an admission of Cameron's failure to relicate the Blair "big tent." Unable to win that kind of broad support - or merely lazy acquiescence - by the usual means, the stewards have had to go for a much grander scheme: Cameron v Griffin.
6) There would appear to be a major portent here for America's next election: Obama himself will need significant assistance from the US stewards to win a second term after the abysmal farce of his first. What form will the US variant of the Chirac/Le Pen (Cameron/Griffin) ceremonial will the US stewards plump for? Obama v the Military is looking favourite.
7) The timing of Frau Clinton's intervention on the question of the Tory attitude to Europe leaves little doubt that the US stewards are in broad agreement with their Brit equivalents; and that efforts to restore establishment "sanity" to the Tory approach will be unbending between now and the next election. Stand by for some swift volte faces from the compliant Cameron.