"Special" relationship

All tuckered.

There are things you don't admit to, such as this Telegraph headline:

Barack Obama 'tucked David Cameron up in bed' on Air Force One

No doubt gave him his teddy and read him a story as well.  I hope the ghost of Palmerston appears at the foot of Mr Cameron's bed with rattling chains and shrieks at him.

The article also mentions Roosevelt walking in on Churchill in the bath only for the great man to say,

The British Prime Minister has nothing to hide from the President of the United States.

One thing we can definitely say is that Roosevelt never tucked him.  That's because the President was passed out at the time.  It turns out that on Churchill's first visit, he and Roosevelt sat up late drinking Scotch until Roosevelt slid to the carpet.  The next morning, Eleanor left her room and saw Churchill walking towards the President's bedroom with a bottle in each hand to start the party up again.

On his next visit, Churchill discovered that Elanor in retaliation had Blair House across the street turned into the official residence of visiting dignitaries, so no tucking in opportunities there.

The heirs of Churchill and Roosevelt

The "leaders" of the free world show off their gravitas

The traitor and leader of the illegal junta that occupies Britain, Mr David Cameron hits a new low as he takes in a basketball game with Mr Barack Hussein Obama as if the last three years of pointed insults, slights and undermining of Britain's place in the world never happened.

It's a staggering sight: Her Majesty's Prime Minister (or he would be, if his government was legitimate) acting as The One's re-election campaign  prop.  It's bad enough for a minister of the Crown getting involved in foreign politics.  It's even worse when a Tory (Red Tory, anyway), shills for a Socialist who is the antithesis of everything the Conservatives once stood for.  And it is a travesty how these two have turned the Special Relationship from an alliance of giants into a "Screw the world, let's take in a basketball game" affair.   But for Cameron to abase himself to the point of endorsing Mr Soetoro's cynical plan to tap the US Strategic Oil Reserve to push down petrol prices and effectively bribe American voters with their country's national security and that of the West shows that Mr Cameron is either a phenomenal lightweight in the brains department or an amoral political hack.

I could weep.

Caligula in pinstripes

Mr Cameron's role model

Mr David Cameron, traitor and leader of the junta that illegally occupies Britain, has succumbed to a brand of brand of monomania that combines delusions of grandeur with being fundamentally a wet slap.  Britain faces her worst economic crisis since the 1930s; across the Channel, democracy is suffocating under a technocratic oligarchy who have usurped all power to itself and what does the Prime Minister do?   He threatens to cut foreign aid to countries that don't subscribe to a radical homosexual rights agenda.  Not those who massacre their citizens or keep them in bondage or reduce their economies to kleptocratic hell holes, mind you, but those who think redefining marriage is a bad idea.

Needless to say, what he doesn't mean is cutting off aid to Jihadist countries that execute homosexuals as a matter of routine.  That would be crazy.

At the very least, this shows a man who has absolutely no idea of where his priorities lie.  If he had any integrity or even sanity, he would spend every waking hour reversing the "reforms" inflicted on Britain by his predecessors going back to John Major as well as repealing every bit of  legislation passed since 1997.  Instead, he indulges in fits of madness such as demanding more female executives in private firms where it's none of his damn business, crushing a non-binding bill calling for a referendum on the European Empire and then claiming that he will "claw back" power from Brussels when he has no ability whatsoever to do so and wouldn't if he did, and saying that criminals on benefits should face stiffer fines.

The last one left me, for want of a better word, gobstruck.  Stiffer fines?  Here's an idea; how about removing the criminal from the public teat and never allowing him back on?  Sorry, I'm wandering back into the realm of sanity again.  He'll be declaring war on the sea next.

I can't wait for the Christmas honours list when Mr Cameron elevates a horse to the peerage.

Pathetic

Didums!

Mr David Cameron on the royal wedding: "For Gawd's sake, please celebrate!  Okay, I don't give a gnat's fart about Britain's institutions, but you're making my rat-arse coalition look bad!"

Cameron condemns Britain and himself

Mr David Cameron on his visit to Pakistan (emphasis added):

I don’t want to try to insert Britain in some leading role where, as with so many of the world’s problems, we are responsible for the issue in the first place. 

The Anti-Churchill

Sweet spirits of nitre!   I bloody well hope that Mr Cameron has misspoken and apologises immediately; because if he didn't, I want him to resign like a gentleman for having insulted his country abroad.  Who does this pipsqueak think he is?  More to the point, who does he think we are?  Does he truly have such a low opinion of Britain?  If so, why the blazes did he seek office–any office–in the first place?  If this is what he believes, then I can only conclude that he never entered politics to serve either the people or his queen, but merely to fulfill his own selfish ambitions.

The frightening thing, and I mean truly frightening, is that among the political class we have no other choice except the traitorous and the deranged.

Abdication

His bicycle is probably all that's left after the defence cuts.

Once Leader of the Free World

An interesting point from Daniel Foster at the Corner on Mr David Cameron taking the lead in enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya, starting with this quote from the Times:

British forces could soon be directly involved in the battle against Colonel Gaddafi after David Cameron announced that the UK would help enforce a no-fly zone designed to prevent the Libyan leader using jet fighters against his own people. The Prime Minister became the first Western leader to publicly commit to the no-fly zone in a statement to Parliament which marked a potentially significant escalation in the crisis after the imposition of sanctions and an arms embargo by the UN Security Council.

The signifigace of this, Foster points out,  is that Mr Cameron is doing the leading while Mr Barack Hussein Obama sits on the sidelines and dithers.

A couple of interesting points about this.  First, it's good to see Mr Cameron finally standing on his hind legs and acting like a prime minister.  I suspect that the shade of Lord Palmerston appeared at the foot of his bed last night screaming and clanking his chains.  Of course, now that Mr Cameron has effectively emasculated Britain's forces, I hardly think sending a pair of hang gliders and a duck punt is going to do much good.

The second point is more dismaying.  Mr Obama holding back and letting Mr Cameron take the lead is a frightening echo of how Mr Clinton let Mr Blair carry the can in the Balkans.  In that dismal little episode, Mr Clinton thought he was being very clever by making it look like he was making NATO tend to its own back yard while letting Mr Blair take all the heat.  Unfortunately, it just made the United States look weak, indecisive, and an easy target.  Soon American embassy's were being bombed in Africa, the USS Cole was attacked, and the Twin Towers fell.

Stand by for the other shoe to drop.

Hitting soft

Mr David Cameron gives a speech condemning state multiculturalism.  To be far, it is a good speech and lays out the Prime Minister's position as well as one might expect–if that Prime Minister was Mr Tony Blair.  For a "Conservative" politician to take a mild shot at the "soft-left" before tearing into "right-wing" extremists and then defining British values in that squishy New Labour way that basically says that being British is about wanting nice things is the sort of waffling we expect from his predecessor but one who went around gate-crashing state funerals.

It's all very well for Mr Cameron to declare an end to multiculturalism and he should be applauded for this, but I can't help but notice that he never says anything about what he's going to do about it.  Is he going to repeal the Human Rights Act?  The Equality Act?  The European Community Act?  Stop "consulting" with Muslim community "leaders" every time the police mount a raid on a Jihadist cell? Is he going to abolish all of these programmes that turn so many ethnic, religious, sex, and sexual groups into victim aristocracies?  Will Christmas and other Christian holidays once again be celebrated without apology?  Will Satanism no longer be catered to in the Royal Navy?  Will Sharia law be expunged root and branch from Britain?  Will immigration finally come under control?  Will the war be conducted as a war?  Frankly, I'm not holding my breath. 

I can understand that Mr Cameron wishes to be cautious and not offend Muslims, but by trying to avoid offence for the sake of avoiding it rather than to gain a tactical advantage, he's indulging in the very multiculturalism that he condemns.  At the very least, he is, to paraphrase Churchill, hitting soft.

Would that Mr Cameron's speech had been more along these lines:

Gentlemen, Lords and Ladies,

First, I would like to say that the government sees the error of its ways and withdraws the unjustified defence cuts that we tried to impose on the British people.  We and preceding governments going back to before the War have played fast and loose with keeping Britain safe from enemies foreign and domestic while using the money rightly needed for defence to feed and expand a parasitic welfare state.  That stops now.  I have instructed the cabinet to work on a comprehensive programme that will reduce MOD bureaucracy and make weapons procurement based soley on increasing Britain's military capability.  It is our goal within ten years to triple the defence budget and to pay for this by reducing the welfare state to the level of a true safety net for the truly needy rather than a soul-destroying dependency machine that wastes labour, human lives and money that would be better off in private hands where it would create wealth rather than squander it.  Britain is wealthier than at any time in her history and our technology is as advanced as any in the world.  There is no reason why our military forces cannot rival, allowing for our relative size and peculiar needs, that of the United States.

Second, multiculturalism is nothing but a vicious lie that requires the superior to grovel at the feet of the inferior, of the enlightened at the feet of the ignorant, the free at the feet of the enslaved, and of the good at the feet of the wicked.  It requires pretending against all evidence that there is no such thing as progress, that right and wrong are mere illusions, and that the only acceptable act of a civilised man is to bare his throat to the butcher's knife. 

Her Majesty's government will no longer do so, nor will we coerce our citizens to either.  Britain has nothing to apologise for. We have our faults, as do all of common humanity, but in our history we have been a force of unparalleled good in this world that mightily outweighs our follies.  Our contributions to art, literature, government, philosophy, science, technology, warfare, religion, human freedom, and basic decency is unparalleled in human history.  I will not recount them here because I've no desire to rattle off such a gigantic list–one that most of you, if you are not willfully blind, know already. It is a legacy to be proud of and we are proud of it.  We regard it as not only our common heritage, but our gift to mankind.  For nearly two generations we were taught that we must be ashamed of our achievements and our history.  That was a lie and we were fools to listen to it.  For the sake of that lie we cast aside all that we are.  Those days are over.  We now reclaim that birthright, embrace it, add to it, and will defend it to the last redoubt against anyone who seeks to destroy it or to shame us once again into renouncing it.

Today, Britain is home to more people of exotic lands than at any time since the Saxon Invasions.  Immigration is a good thing, but only when it occurs with the consent of the native population and is carried out with their good in mind.  It is also a good that the previous government perverted to use as a weapon against their own countrymen.  We will no longer be a party to that.  As of now, all immigration will be on a strictly legal basis, in numbers that we can easily assimilate, and with applicants selected solely to suit the needs and ideals of Britain.  From now on, we extend our invitation to those who wish to join us, but in accepting that invitation it must be understood that immigrants, past as well as present, must accept our laws, our customs, our institutions, and openly swear fealty to the Crown.  If they wish to preserve their former culture, they may do so, but how is up to them, they may not violate the law, and they can expect no support from the state.  Furthermore, they need not share our religion, but they must acknowledge both the established church and the right of their fellow subjects to worship and publicly exercise their faith as their conscience moves them. This emphatically includes the principle that a man may change his religion without fear.  We stress to our immigrant brothers that our friends become their friends and our enemies become theirs.  Anyone who makes common cause with the Jihadists, whether through violent means or otherwise, will be regarded as  a traitor and dealt with accordingly. 

If you find this unacceptable; if you wish to feed off the public purse; if you wish to bring your old hatred, feuds, oppressions, superstitions, and barbarisms with you; if you come as conquerors rather than brothers; if you come to carve out colonies in our cities, then you are not welcome and you are not required to stay a moment longer. Go find somewhere more suited to your tastes.

And to my fellow members of the Political Class, I ask you this question:  If you have such contempt for your own country that you encourage your fellow Britons to loathe themselves and make them ashamed of their flag, if you regard your countrymen as mere fodder to build your Utopia, then why do you lust for power over a land that you clearly despise?

Random thoughts on a rotten burough

Mr David Cameron announces the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition.

We now have the Cameron/Clegg coalition and for the past 24 hours I've been wracking my brains trying to come up with something to say about it other than "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!" and hoping that I'll wake up. Unfortunately, I did this morning and they were still there.

What has happened over the past week is a perfect encapsulment of all that has gone rotten in British politics. For 13 years, Britain was governed by a party that acted like an occupying power hellbent on dismantling a hated enemy. It was a disaster so all-encompassing that a re-subtitled Downfall clip would have been far too appropriate to be funny. New Labour was such an amazing, transcendent screw up that the Conservatives should have conducted the election in their street clothes and come away with a majority so large that both Labour and the Liberal Democrats should have been replaced as the loyal opposition by the UKIP. Instead, Boy Cameron, who feels that the problem with Conservatives was all that conservatism, managed to run against a hated PM leading an imploding party and couldn't even reach the finish line.

Now, to add insult to injury, the Conservatives have formed a coalition with a party so insane that they haven't held power since the First World War. This isn't a coalition government; it's a stitch up between a hollow log and a joy buzzer. In order to make nice with each other they've had to jettison so much of their manifestos that neither can do anything except infuriate their own supporters and leave the entire country in a position like an alien abduction victim waiting for the anal probe.

A sane outcome of the election would have been a Prime Minister of some standing announcing a five-year programme of dismantling everything New Labour has ever done while giving Johnny Jihad a kick up the backside he'd never forget with an afternoon off to repeal the European Communities Act of 1972. Instead, we have two members of the parasitic new political class that replaced the Establishment who regard actually doing something about defence, immigration, the economy, and the general collapse of British society as too much of a distraction from playing with their train set and altering the electoral system so that another proper government will never be possible ever again.

Mr Cameron says that he will ask Parliament to rig the system so that there won't be another election until May 2015. Fat Chance–especially with the BBC acting as if the Liberal Democrats have broken their lefty little hearts.

Frankly, I give this Frankenstein's Monster of a coalition six months before it gets tossed back to the nation to go through the whole sorry mess again.

RESULT!

Her Majesty has invited Mr David Cameron to become Prime Minister.

More on this development later. As for Mr Gordon Brown's resignation (However are they going to get the claw marks out of the door jamb?) and New Labour's finally getting the boot, let's put it this way.

Laying a poor foundation

Trying to attack the Conservative leader for allegedly wearing make up in an advert has to be the silliest idea in the history of politics.

Politicians have been wearing make up in front of cameras ever since Richard Nixon refused it when he debated John Kennedy on television and came across as unshaven and sweaty–an image that lost him the election. If nothing else, it's a ploy so open to counterattack that it's a bit like building a bunker out of spun sugar.