Tuesday, June 30, 2009

A Strange Definition of Loyalty

I rather liked this piece from Nic Cecil's story in the Standard tonight...

"... But some ministers remain dismayed at Mr Brown's leadership. "I knew Gordon's weaknesses but I thought they would be lessened by becoming Prime Minister, and that his strengths would increase," said one Cabinet loyalist. "I was wrong...."

If he's a loyalist, I'd like to see Nic Cecil's definition of a rebel!!! Maybe Gordon is in more trouble than we thought.

17 comments:

Swiss Bob said...

Slow as ever but here's Gove responding to balls in Parliamnet today (YouTubed). Gove Gives Balls a Dose.

wv plaising, which it certainly was if you like seeing Balls being made a fool of.

Simon The Bluesman said...

No s**t Sherlock. Peter Oborne has written a good article in today's Mail on Gordon Brown. Fraser Nelson has also been very busy discussing Ed Balls too. This Government is beneath contempt.

VotR said...

Johnson's ID card announcement this afternoon was nothing short of a future leadership challenge.

Gordon's enemies are starting to come out of the closet... what a surprise.

wapping boy said...

That "Cabinet loyalist" simply illustrates the pathetic calibre of Labour's front bench. How many opportunities have they had now to get rid of Brown? But no, it's easier and simpler just to let someone they know is not up to the job, who Blair's own man called "psychologically flawed", who is clearly borderline insane and incapable of working with others, to carry on "leading" Britain down the path to oblivion.

These "Cabinet loyalists" deserve to be strung up from lamposts for so abjectly failing their country (and indeed their supporters).

Anonymous said...

The pygmies revolt was a few weeks ago now and Brown is still PM.
He replaced most of the rebels with Lords but Lords still "only" make up about half the cabinet.

So plenty of room left for further lordly appointments to fill in the gaps after the next round of resignations/sackings.

Curious to think that in 2009 we are looking at a cabinet - and a Labour one at that-increasingly composed of peers!

Anonymous said...

What kind of logic is that? Brown's failures would lessen if he got a more important job? What cobblers. Weaknesses increase as the job get's tougher!

Bloody 'eck, they barely have a brain cell to rub between them, do they?

John said...

From Mr Bean to

Victor Meldrew/Gordon Brown , "I don't believe it!"

MikeyP said...

Strengths? What strengths are those then?

mistermagoogle said...

Stubbornness is considered a strength... by some

Nigel said...

I guess it's loyalty so long as you briefing against the PM remains anonymous.

Seems pretty congruent with Newlab ethical rules to me.

Hawkeye said...

Votr said: "Johnson's ID card announcement this afternoon was nothing short of a future leadership challenge"

What a load of "Mr Coopers".

Johnson was shambolic, mouthing the most puerile drivel I've yet heard from a government minister. The platitudes were beyond banal and the logical absurdities were laughable.

If that "performance" was the launch of a leadership bid then God help Labour because Johnson would be even worse than Brown - something I did not think possible. Statements like "ID cards will not be compulsory unless a future government changes the law". Really? Is that a fact? Well I never.....

moorlandhunter said...

The U turn on ID cards was on the cards (ha) all the time it was just a matter of time for Labour to finally admit they were up a Gum tree over their plans to us ID cards to fight terrorism.
Another lie issued by Labour us that Inheritance Tax will only help a few multi millionaires, something trotted out by Labour on any occasion, which is totally untrue. My Mother-in-law died leaving a modest inheritance, a house and small amount of savings built up over years by her husband and herself. They wished to leave it to my wife and her sister, but because the house they had rose in value from £75,000 to £300,000 over a period of years and their savings, a large amount of the savings went onto the hands of greedy Brown.
By raing the threshold of IHT the Tories will be helping many hundreds of thousands of ordinary working people who wish to leave something to their children, not the few millionaires lied about by Brown.

Anonymous said...

Johnson sounded very embarrassed on Radio 4 at 5 p.m. about the U turn on ID cards. Rightly so. Another fine mess!

Thats News said...

Brown faces revolt. Not looking too good for Brown, this Wednesday…

Mark Senior said...

Moorlandhunter - Why is it that you Tories are happy to throw out accusations of lying at Labour ministers left right and centre and yet you post lies yourself .
Let us examine your claim that your Mother In Law died and a large amount of her savings went into the hands of Gordon Brown because the value of her house had gone up to £ 300,000 .
IHT threshold has been over £300K since 2007 , so your M In Law presumably died before then . Let us assume a pretty much worse case scenario and say she died in 2002 when the threshold was £250K . IHT of £20K would have been payable - hardly a large part of her savings and IMHO a reasonable tax to pay for your wife and sister who were receiving a large sum of money each for no effort .
You then compound your lie by saying that the Conservative proposals will help "many hundreds of thousands of ordinary working people" - that is absolute utter utter bilge not even dared to be trotted out by the Conservative shadow cabinet who know that the number of people benefitting is a few thousand a year but conveniently is likely to include most of them Cameron/Osborne et al - hardly ordinary working people . The whole IHT Conservative proposal is merely a ploy to feather their own nests being sold to the voters as something that may benefit them but omitting to say only if they are lucky enough to have won the lottery .

Jim Baxter said...

What is it, Godwin's Law? OK here it comes anyway.


They thought they could control Hitler, that he would grow with office, Von Papen, Strasser... nobody who could have stopped him did. They all thought only of 'The Party' and/or themselves.

They thought they could control Stalin - Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin.

Extreme cases but it's an iron rule. The politicians never protect us, however dreadful the prospective leader is as long as that leader has momentum. We're on our own.

if there were no other reason to annihilate Labour at the GE what they, cowards, morons, and self-servers, have let through as PM would be reason enough.

The Armchair Sceptic (Wilted Rose) said...

As an Ulster Protestant, I can assure you that loyalists know when to be loyal and when to kick someone in the knees.