http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3225947.stm I defy anyone to find a picture of Micheal Howard in which he doesn't look like he's just had a blow job. Or shot an immigrant. One of the two. Ah well ... all good news for the Lib Dems.
God, I wish I could find a transcript of that interview. I remember seeing it at the time and it was amazing entertainment.
An interview between Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard back in (I think) 1998 on the BBC's 'Newsnight' programme about some bloke who had done something and Michael Howard was in a position to overrule him. The question Paxman asked was "Did you threaten to overrule him?" and Howard refused to answer it. So Paxman asked again - "Did you threaten to overrule him?". Howard evaded the question again, using all his skills as a QC to answer without answering and Paxman scented blood. He asked again. And again. And again - every time, Howard would answer without answering. This went on for minutes on end, over and over. In the end Paxman had asked him the same one-sentence question 14 times. Everything Howard said was met by "Did you threaten to overrule him?" and he just would not answer. He became ever more hot under the collar, squirmed in his seat, sickly smile on is face as he refused the question again and again. He knew he looked like ever caricature of a smarmy, shifty politician ever conceived but he also knew he could not answer the question truthfully without political fallout. It was pure theatre. Oddly enough, though, I can't actually remember what the base issue was. I just remember their exchange, which ended with the fourteenth reiteration of the question. As Howard began to speak and again showed he was not going to answer, Paxman slapped his hand on his desk, said "Right! Micheal Howard, thank you very much!" and just cut him off and went to the next item.
Nice! Jeremy Paxman is easily my favorite tv journalist/broadcaster (at least this side of The Daily Show, but that doesn't count), and for that matter he's probably a safe bet to be the best in the English-speaking world; we simply don't have anyone who's capable of being as rude and sharp of a bastard as he is, much less combining that with an intellect.
I think it was the sacking of a prison governor. Just when the Tories were making something of a renaissance in Scotland, they are looking to coronate the man who helped to introduce the poll tax. Oh dear. It's amusing that things could actually get worse for them after punting IDS.
As someone who is an outsider to politics in the UK, I have a question. Might there be the possibility in the future (perhaps far future) that the Lib Dems would ever supplant the Tories as the primary opposition party in the Commons? I know they're a long way off at the moment, but could it be a possibility? I know that in Canada, the "traditional" Canadian Tories (the Progressive Conservatives) have been rendered politically impotent in the last 10 years by a newer, more conservative political movement, the Canadian Alliance party. EDIT: Apparently, the PC's in Canada have recently begun the process of unifying with the Canadian Alliance to form the "Conservative Party of Canada."
He's a liar too. Interviewed only last friday he categorically stated that he was 100% behind IDS and there was absolutely no way at all he would ever consider running to be party leader. I do remember that interview though. a stunning example of a politician answering a question with an irrelevant answer. There was also a brief interview after Arnie's election in california with someone from a rival party who'd have to work with him, who seemed genuinely suprised an amused to find that his statement that he had a "cordial working relationship" with Arnie, over here would be interpreted as saying he hated his guts. The best political interview I heard was on Five live a few years ago, travelling down to a (postponed) match at bournemouth, they were covering the Israeli elections with an interview with someone from the Israeli equivalent of the young conservatives. It started dull, as you expect, then went... Radio 5: will you be watching the election results on TV tonight? Interviewee: I'll be watching the blue channel until 10pm, then I'll be tuning in. Radio 5: and what is the blue channel? Interviewee: It is a new adult movie channel in Tel aviv that I am enjoying very much. After that the interview picked up immensely.
What - shooting immigrants or giving Micheal Howard a blow job? Yes. And no. Depends on whether you vote Lib Dem or not. The Lib Dems don't have the personality issues that the Tories (or indeed Noo Labah!) have. In both the good way (people like their main leaders) and the bad way (no one can name a Lib Dem outside of their main leaders). So they have that curious combination of high credibility, low visibility that third-place parties tend to have. At the moment, they also have the luxury of being honest about their policies and about the way they go about their business. And they can champion causes neither of the bigger parties wants to be categorically committed or opposed to. Like the legalisation of cannabis, a hike in income tax to pay for education changes, the re-incorporation of NHS trusts, licensing reform (the big one Tory Blair promised and never delivered on), European integration, tax-breaks for corporate community involvement, increase in front-line defence spending, child support reform, liberalisation of trade restrictions with NAFTA, strong regional government, etc. Once true political power is at stake, it will be interesting to see how determinedly they stick to those principles though. As is the case with any politician. Can they surplant the Tories? Well, not in the short or medium term, no. Micheal Howard is a lying, evasive, smarmy, hard-right 'typical Tory' but he is also a devastating Parliamentary performer. Tory Blair hasn't had an adversary worthy of the name on the opposite side of the dispatch box in his entre tenure as PM. Now he has. He will be made to tighten up his act a fair bit by Howard and I think Britain's inate conservative tendencies will boost Tory fortunes once a few televised ding-dongs between Howard and Blair have done the rounds. The Lib Dems will be peripheral to that central bit of theatre. Their main problem is that they are a party that you either do vote for, or you don't. They don't tend to benefit from swing votes in the way that the Tories and Noo Labah! do. If you're a left-of-centre type and you want to register your protest with the party you traditionally support, you vote right-of centre. And vice versa. The Libs Dems are centre centre, so they tend to miss out in a national sense.
FWIW this guy is the son of immigrants, what bearing that would have on his desire to shoot them, I don't know.
I think this shows that the Torries don't really have anyone on the back benches that can offer a new vision for the party. Howard is a retread of Thatcherism and is being sacrifised for the inevitble Labor victory in 2006 (or whenever Blair decides to call the election). As for the LDP, they basically are a party born out of the merging of the Liberal party and the moderates who broke away from Labour in the '80s in reaction to the "loony left" that were in control of the party in the early '80s. They have good policies but, because of the "first past the post" election system, there is a good chance that they will always be the 3rd party for quite a while. As for me, I would be a member of the Monster Raving Loony Party. http://www.omrlp.com/ Bill Q.
The Canadian Alliance was never meant to be nothing more than a western rump party. The party it orginally created, the Reform party, was made up of westerners who felt that their voices need to be heard. These included some of the PC's. They haven't been able to make a breaktrhough on their own.