Tuesday 6 November 2007

Grow A Pair

As they say in America.

We stand for something distinctive, which we know is able to bring together the best in each of Britain's three political traditions. You - the Euston Manifesto Group, the Henry Jackson Society, and so forth - also stand for something distinctive, of which you believe that the same can be said. Indeed, you believe that it cannot be said of our position, as we believe that it cannot be said of yours.

But we are prepared to put ourselves to the test honestly at the ballot box, i.e., in the form of a party.

Are you? If so, then where is your party (especially now that Oliver Kamm says he wants to stand for Parliament again, at Wantage against Neil Clark)? And if not, why not?

Frit? I think so. So go on, then: prove me wrong. Grow a pair. Set up a party. All else from you is wind, to be blown back at you. And it will be.

18 comments:

  1. No sign of it as yet. They're still accusing you of "accidentally posting under your own name while pretending to be Martin Miller Blah Blah". Even though Martin has dealt with it all. More fool him for trying I suppose. They must think that you are stupid as they are. A mistake like that! And they must think that everyone else is, too.

    But Kamm has repeated his desire to stand at Wantage. Well what's stopping him then? Where is their party?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh, I'm not surprised. Blow their wind back at them. The only thing of interest from them will be the news that they have set up a party honestly committed to their principles and policies, and will be contesting every seat accordingly. Where is it?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  3. They are completely obsessed with you and the BPA. How many times can they say that you are irrelevant? And at just how much length each time?

    Yet all without undertaking to put up against you, never mind do so and talk about politics rather than "sockpuppets" and "IP addresses" and blah blah blah.

    Of course they know that no one would vote for a party openly signed up to their views, rather than one still pretending to be Labour, the Tories or (before long) the Lib Dems.

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey David, I thought you said this matter was closed. For a site that you pay no attention to, you're paying a remarkable amount of attention to it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. They are too worried that this matter MIGHT come up, and that someone will be on hand to explain that everything alleged could perfectly easily have been faked by anyone with the IT knowledge, which they undoubtedly have.

    Someone else could then weigh in about how they believe that they, as the elite, are under a moral obligation to lie to the common herd. And then all sorts of things would start to come out. Beginning with Straight Left. But certainly not ending there.

    Funny how Neil Clark still gets published and Oliver Kamm doesn't, isn't it?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm not, Anonymous 3:33 PM. Other people are.

    The matter of the neocons' failure to set up a party honestly committed to their position is very definitely not closed. That of their blather in order to avoid answering that question definitely is.

    I have rejected comments about the latter. I welcome them on, and will myself continue to press the question of, the former. Where is their party?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. David, I think you're missing the fact that you think (genuinely) that a new party is necessary, and they think (genuinely) that it isn't.

    It simply doesn't make sense for them to respond to your challenge by setting up a new party, because they don't see a need for one. It's not that they think they'd lose (although they probably would) but that they just don't want the existing parties replaced.

    They're not just laughing at you because of your specific views (although they are doing that, because your specific views are funny) but laughing at your attempt to set up a new party - something which they think is intrinsically absurd, irrespective of the platform.

    As I say, they may be wrong in all that. But there's nothing hypocritical, or "frit" in refusing to start their own party.

    I'm trying to be nice to you here. Goodness knows why.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well, why DOESN'T their position deserve a party? Why DOESN'T the electorate deserve the option of voting for it specifically?

    Why should voters run the risk of an Old Labourite versus a High Tory versus a Lib Dem, as can perfectly easily happen? Shouldn't they have the guarantee of a Eustonite-Jacksonite candidate to vote for?

    Or have I missed something?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Any member of the electorate who wants to vote for that position specifically can, of course, set up their own party. This does not create any obligation on anyone else to set one up for them. How could it?

    Most people, of course, don't want to vote for such a party. Just as, on all available evidence, they don't want to vote for yours.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There isn't any available evidence: it has yet to contest an election. We will see what happens when it does, though, by definition, not before.

    If the neocons don't want people to vote for us (and why would they?), then what alternative are they offering? Two, soon to be three, parties that they have stolen, but none of which, even then, really suits them? Or a party of their own? If the latter, then where is it?

    They tend to try and sell themselves (absurdly and dishonestly, but there we are) as the voice of public opinion against the elite. Well, doesn't that public opinion deserve an unambiguous voice at the ballot box? Where is it?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Are you starting to show up on opinion polls yet?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hmmm. Anonymous, Bob and David Lindsay all put "Frit" at the end of their comments, in a separate paragraph. It's almost as if they're the same person.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Mercifully not. Seriously, though, our views do, or would if they were polled.

    But then, have you ever been polled? No, nor have I, and nor has anyone else whom I have ever asked that question. Furthermore, most polling is now conducted by telephone, so the pollsters know exactly to whom they are speaking.

    Are the neocons showing up in the polls? Nor would they even days before the next Election, which is the real difference. If they doubt or deny this, then where is their party to prove me wrong?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  14. David makes an excellent point. The British People's Alliance has never shown up in opinion polls, because pollsters only ever question people who have never heard of the British People's Alliance.

    The question we have to ask is: Why do they do this? Why?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well, I can't speak for the others, but I'd say that it was almost as if we could all read, and pick up a pattern.

    Can you pick up a pattern, Anonymous 4:29 PM? Indeed, beyond four words at the end of each comment, can you read?

    ReplyDelete
  16. John Beaumont, this thread isn't eally about opinion polls, but the question of whom they ask is nevertheless an important one.

    Remember those polls for a while until a few days ago, saying how popular Cameron was? Whom had they asked? No doubt mostly people in the South East, where the Tories already hold most of the seats anyway. Where they actually have to iwn seats, the situation was, and is, is very different. Examples like this could be multiplied almost without end.

    And the key point about opinion polls is that the determined non-voters are now never lower than 34%, and sometimes as high as 38%, but are factored out for headline purposes.

    We are trying to reach that huge potential electorate. Are the diehard neocons of the same persuasion as Oliver "Vote Tory To Unseat An Anti-War Labour MP" Kamm (who'll never be a Labour MP or a Labour peer after that) and Douglas "Vote Labour Because The Tories' Vice-Chairman Wasn't As Unyieldingly Pro-War As I Was On Question Time" Murray (who'll never be a Tory MP after that)? If so, then where is their party?

    Frit.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think David Lindsay is brilliant!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think David Lindsay is one of our lizard masters!

    ReplyDelete