figurewizard
103p812 comments posted · 91 followers · following 0
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Matthew Elliott: The E... · 3 replies · +8 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Benedict Rogers: A Fox... · 0 replies · +3 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Ted Yarbrough: Lucky Y... · 3 replies · +16 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Graham Godwin-Pearson:... · 2 replies · -23 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Graham Godwin-Pearson:... · 3 replies · -60 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - In It Together: Andrew... · 3 replies · +14 points
This is the phrase that stands out for me. It also happens to describe the motivation of Blair and his acolytes which was focused on creating "New-Labour" that was to be perceived as being a very different animal from the party led by Wilson, Foot and Callaghan that proved to be such a disaster when in power. As we now know to our cost the only difference it went on to represent was an even bigger disaster. In the case of the Conservative party however the comparison has to be with the party led by Margaret Thatcher; representing another very different but this time hugely positive difference. What these comparisons seem to add up to here is that since 1997 this country has been led by people who by no stretch of the imagination can be described as conviction politicians but rather by groups whose principal motivation has been to prove to themselves how clever they are. This would explain why people such as David Davies and John Redwood are not in the cabinet.
PS: What on earth is "high politics" supposed to mean?
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - What the battle over l... · 2 replies · +5 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Cameron warned against... · 0 replies · +27 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Dr Spencer Pitfield: W... · 0 replies · +15 points
11 years ago @ Conservative Home - Your one-glance guide ... · 0 replies · +3 points