« Kennedy is a "dead man walking" | Main | This blog would like to distance itself from today's FT »

Comments

Heffer on Saturday - third item down.

It's here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/07/do0701.xml

Under "Reasons To Be Cheerful".

A rather irritating and irrelevant comment.

To be honest, I thought that it was a neat encapsulation of Heffer's irrelevence, bile, and 19th Century worldview.

Thanks for the link. The Heffersaurus appears determined to continue to strive to be a menace to modernity.

Simon Heffer - less "irascible, irrepressible, irreverent", more "irrational, irredeemable, irrelevant".

"In fact, he tried to rubbish Cameron purely for owning an iPod."

No he didn't. I think you'll find it's Cameron's attempt to show off how modern and "with it" he is, that's actually being mocked.

No he didn't. I think you'll find it's Cameron's attempt to show off how modern and "with it" he is, that's actually being mocked.
Isn't it remotely possible that he just LIKES that kind of music?
Why can't someone talk about what they like without being mocked for it?

Heffer doesn't come across as humourous which I'm sure was his intention.

What on earth is he trying to say with this statement "hideous pop music of the sort favoured by acne-flecked youths half his age" ?

The mind boggles.
Why is the music hideous? Why are the youth acne-flecked?

The negative undertones of Heffer's writing are the reasons why it is difficult to read what he has to say with an open-mind.

How insulting to anyone in their 20s or who just happens to like pop music.

"Isn't it remotely possible that he just LIKES that kind of music?"

Remotely possible, yes. But it's always ungainly when politicians try and appeal to the youth vote by appealing to fashion. I'm afraid boasting about your i-pod is jus a bit meh!

"Why is the music hideous?

Because it sounds horrible.

"Why are the youth acne-flecked?"

Because lots of youths have acne.

Musical tastes being publicised is always a silly move to do. As for Camerons list, I dont like that list at all. The list has deliberately been picked to tell the public that hes not completely stupid when it comes to music. Anyone really think that an Eton educated person would really like the Ramones? Im not a fan of Radiohead at all. The only bands named that I half like were Pulp and Blur but I wouldnt go out and buy their albums though. They are bands that most people in their late teens to thirties like. The people who read the Sun for example. Name checking just means they are aware. Id like to see some reviews. As for his favourite album being the Killers....well, its his list...

Pulp and Blur, whoever or whatever they may be, would make excellent titles for Mr Cameron's brand of politics.

I wonder if Cameron ever listens to real music? I daresay he may have a copy of 'Classic FM's Best Compilation Album Ever' lurking somewhere, probably still in its cellophane wraps.

Even that clunking thug Neil Kinnock had what appeared to be a genuine love of classical music. He ran his car off the road while listening to a Brahms symphony.

Simon Heffer recently pointed out that modern Tory politicians rarely have any genuine hobbies or interests outside politics. This certainly seems to be one of Cameron's problems.

Anybody who listened, some months ago, to Kenneth Clarke's passionately presented Radio 4 series on the History of Jazz, will realise why one Clarke - for all his Europhilia and other failings - is worth a hundred Camerons

The Killers are absolutely quality, no doubt about it, I find myself agreeing with Cameron over music, not much else though. I wonder if he likes the Editors?

Cameron's musical choices are fairly typical for someone in their late thirties - eighties indie, britpop, and timeless Bob Dylan. He would still have been in his twenties when albums like Parklife were released, and the Smiths were at their most prolific about the time he would have been at University.

As for iPods, my (fifty-something) uncle has one. People who like music - of whatever sort - buy mp3 players. You can even get a PodCast of your favourite Telegraph columnist if you want! It was a stupid article by Heffer and barely defensible.

"It was a stupid article by Heffer and barely defensible."

Actually I think the borderline hysterical reaction of some people to the article is what's barely defensible.

*raises hand* Yep, I'm in that figure. New paid up member. Although reading blogs like this gives me flashbacks about why I've never taken an active role in politics till now.

Anyway, to whoever said something like, "how long till they desert when they realise the party no longer represents their views?" - I'd just like to point out, that it's pretty much Cameron's version of conservatism which is attracting people. If the old right-wingers can accept the fact that the party lost three elections on their beliefs, and is suddenly booming, then maybe the party will finally be credible again.

Just a view from one of the fresh blood Tories quoted in that figure. Take it or leave it. I'm just telling you all, people are back backing the Tories again because of HIS policies, not because of the staunch right-wing old rubbish. So I'd suggest taking a hint and towing the party line for once.

*sigh - I wish I could afford an ipod*

Actually I think the borderline hysterical reaction of some people to the article is what's barely defensible

The interesting thing is that it proves they can't stop reading Heffer.

Indeed, this hysterical talk about Heffer's 'irrelevance' contrasts strangely with reality.

The Cameron camp were actually beside themselves in their efforts to sweet-talk Heffer into praising (or at any rate not deriding) their candidate.

They not only got nowhere; he publicly dismissed their efforts with withering contempt.

Heffer is not only a brilliant writer, as anybody who has read his biographies of Carlyle, Powell and Vaughan Williams will attest. He is also a very shrewd judge of the political scene.

He will long be remembered for his early predictions of the lethal divisions that the Tory party will suffer as Cameron's plans continue to unfold.


Actually I think the borderline hysterical reaction of some people to the article is what's barely defensible

The interesting thing is that it proves they can't stop reading Heffer.

Indeed, this hysterical talk about Heffer's 'irrelevance' contrasts strangely with reality.

The Cameron camp were actually beside themselves in their efforts to sweet-talk Heffer into praising (or at any rate not deriding) their candidate.

They not only got nowhere; he publicly dismissed their efforts with withering contempt.

Heffer is not only a brilliant writer, as anybody who has read his biographies of Carlyle, Powell and Vaughan Williams will attest. He is also a very shrewd judge of the political scene.

He will long be remembered for his early predictions of the lethal divisions that the Tory party will suffer as Cameron's plans continue to unfold.


"Actually I think the borderline hysterical reaction of some people to the article is what's barely defensible."

Absolutely, and there is a hysterical reaction towards almost anything Heffer writes (no matter how slight or innocuous). Often, this involves mendaciously twisting his meaning.

I think this fixation with bashing Heffer displayed by more than a few Tories here tells you more about them than it does about Heffer.

If the old right-wingers can accept the fact that the party lost three elections on their beliefs...

Except it didn't. It lost in '97 off the back of Black Wednesday, sleaze, and the general ambience of the Major government. It lost in '01 because Hague's leadership was dire and fought the wrong battles. It lost in '05 on a moderate manifesto expressed stridently.

" I'm just telling you all, people are back backing the Tories again because of HIS policies"

Or more accurately because he's presentable, nicely spoken and doesn't seem as weird as Michael Howard.

"If the old right-wingers can accept the fact that the party lost three elections on their beliefs..."

Hey James, I think the people constantly repeating this mantra (in spite of the refutations) are following the advice of Vladimir Lenin:

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

To be honest, you'd be more accurate if you'd said that there is a hysterical reaction from Heffer (and some writers on here) towards almost anything Cameron does (no matter how slight or innocuous). Often, this involves mendaciously twisting his meaning.

Does it matter what music Cameron likes? I listen to Green Day, Less Than Jake, Brand New and Taking Back Sunday, and yes, I listen on my iPod. Does that make me a bad person?

"To be honest, you'd be more accurate if you'd said that there is a hysterical reaction from Heffer (and some writers on here) towards almost anything Cameron does (no matter how slight or innocuous). Often, this involves mendaciously twisting his meaning."

Except that would be dishonest. I don't think anyone "twists" David Cameron's meanings (they're clear enough), especially as his critics seem to be the ones... taking him at his word and assuming he means the things he says.

"Does it matter what music Cameron likes? "

Not until he goes out of his way to present a selection of songs and artists that are meant to prove something about his character. This is really the equivalent of Bill Clinton playing his saxophone on the Arsenio Hall show to prove how hip and with-it he is to the kids.

"I listen on my iPod. Does that make me a bad person?"

No, just one who mendaciously misses the point.

"Hey James, I think the people constantly repeating this mantra (in spite of the refutations) are following the advice of Vladimir Lenin:

A lie told often enough becomes the truth."

I suspect some have heard the lie repeated so often that they actually believe it's the truth (much like the "nasty party" meme).


Fair enough, I don't care what music David Cameron listens to or whether or not he owns an IPOD.

He should be praised or criticised on the basis of the views he is expressing.

Not until he goes out of his way to present a selection of songs and artists that are meant to prove something about his character.
You have no proof of this.

How did he go out of his way? He was asked a question about the ipod his wife gave him.

The selection of songs and artists he gave was very wide-ranging and says NOTHING about his character except that he likes different types of music.

Simon Heffer may think he is trying to relate to the young, but the Guardian thinks he is Who are we to believe?

What really happened is that Cameron gave a wide-ranging list, and Heffer tried to use some bits to prove that he is an opportunist.

I was undecided about Simon Heffer, not being an initial Cameron supporter myself, but this constant negativity makes it difficult to accept anything he says objectively.

Sorry I meant to say, this makes it difficult to accept anything he says as an objective comment.

While I have no interest in pop music whatsoever, I know that there are men and women of taste who do claim to like this or that rock star in addition to their choice of serious music.

However, if a person indicates no interest whatsoever in serious music (or the other arts) his taste and judgment may seriously be called into question.

Indeed, we sense that we are contemplating a one-dimensional individual with no inclination towards the finer things of life.

That is why, as I have already said, Ken Clarke's fine reputation as a Jazz enthusiast and expert marks him apart from many of his fellow Tory MPs.

At Covent Garden, and at London concerts, I frequently see Tory MPs and indeed personally encounter prominent Tories I have known for years.

A pity, therefore, that the party's not altogether deserved reputation for philistinism should be so shoddily and thoughtlessly confirmed in the eyes of art-lovers.

"How did he go out of his way?"

So appearing on a show about to be quizzed about your personal life isn't going out of your way to tell people about it?

"He was asked a question about the ipod his wife gave him."

And how did they know he had an i-pod?

"The selection of songs and artists he gave was very wide-ranging and says NOTHING about his character except that he likes different types of music"

Or is calculated to include things that appeal to different segments of the programme's audience.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth."

I think that's very true John. That tactic seems to have worked particularly well for the Labour party.

"Perhaps some of the more vociferous posters on this forum would care to tell us why they believe the social life of the Conservative Party has changed for the better since they appeared on the scene?" - Mike Smith

I was recently told by someone that way back in the 1970's (before my time) there was no real social scene. Therefore lots of young men and women joined Conservative associations and went to their events to meet others. Since that time, other social scenes have opened up, causing a decrease in the Conservative "social scene."

I would argue though that since Mike Smith left the party, the social scene in his area has probably dramatically improved.

Iain and Biodun,

Even if you believe that Cameron was just innocently giving an indication of his "wide-ranging" taste in music, and that he had no political agenda at all in revealing it, you can surely at least understand why others might be more cynical.

Tories have been taking swipes at Tony Blair for years for his blatant cringe-producing populism. All of a sudden, the same criticisms are made about Cameron, and and now Tories pretend that they just can't understand why they're being made.

Strikes me as a tad myopic.

Exactly John. For years we've heard Tony Blair making these lifestyle statements (for example, he's famously told different audiences that what his favourite meals are - Islington types were told it was sun dried tomatoes, while constituents were told it was fish and chips), so it's not surprising that people are naturally suspicious of lifestyle pronouncements for our oh-so-PR-conscious leader.

"Absolutely, and there is a hysterical reaction towards almost anything Heffer writes (no matter how slight or innocuous). Often, this involves mendaciously twisting his meaning."

I actually thought two things he said in his column today were rather agreeable:

a) "how nice it would be if certain other obsessions that linger from those years were quietly parcelled up and stuck in the museum of obsolete ideas";

b) "utterly hamstrung by its own prejudices, and utterly boring about them".

I thought they were rather agreeable, but it transpires that he wasn't referring to:

a) his own fixation with unreconstructed Thatcherism;

b) himself.

Even if you believe that Cameron was just innocently giving an indication of his "wide-ranging" taste in music, and that he had no political agenda at all in revealing it, you can surely at least understand why others might be more cynical.

Thankyou John. That's a good argument - one I disagree with, but a fair point nonetheless.

As I've pointed out, the overwhelming majority of his selections are entirely typical of someone of his generation, and scouring those artists for some hidden meaning is both irrelevent and stupid. Criticising him for appearing on Radio 1 is fair, although I'd strongly disagree.

Like it or not, one of Blair's strongest plus points was his ability to be likeable - to be the sort of person you'd want round for dinner. People trusted him, and they trusted him even when it became obvious he was tailoring his message to different audiences.

I see no problem with Cameron appearing on Radio 1, or Richard and Judy, or whatever, providing he keeps being himself. I see no reason to believe that those music choices were not being himself.

"As I've pointed out, the overwhelming majority of his selections are entirely typical of someone of his generation, and scouring those artists for some hidden meaning is both irrelevent and stupid."

Yes, we forgot you knew exactly what a typical person of that generation would like. How remiss of us.

Yes, we forgot you knew exactly what a typical person of that generation would like. How remiss of us.

Well, each to their own James. I have as good an idea of what a typical 39-year-old listens to, as you have an idea of what a typical 39-year-old doesn't listen to.

Cameron (born in 1966) would have been pretty much the right age to be a Smiths (active '82-'87) fan. He would have been in his late twenties (about your age, James) when bands like Blur and Pulp became household names. He'd have been in his mid-teens in the Ramones' heydey. Bob Dylan spans generations. The Killers have a reasonably mature audience. What makes you think he is making it up as he goes along?

I see no reason to believe that those music choices were not being himself.
Neither do I.
The man is being unnecessarily villified. Blair has set some kind of precedent in terms of how to present yourself to the public. I think it would be foolish to ignore it.

What is also interesting is an above comment on "people with taste" listening to serious music.
I find the example of Ken Clarke's Jazz expertise and appreciation quite amusing.

Last century, Jazz was for vulgar people. It was said to be immoral devil music, sounded awful and had the bad reputation currently held by rap and hip-hop today. Even the word Jazz originated from sex.

I'm sure the people (of taste of course)of the 1920s would be shocked to hear it spoken of so well today.
In another 100 years, perhaps all this hideous pop music will be listened to by "people of taste" as well and they'll wonder what all the fuss was about as something new and even more hideous takes over.

"Well, each to their own James. I have as good an idea of what a typical 39-year-old listens to, as you have an idea of what a typical 39-year-old doesn't listen to."

What you mean is you're making it up. A band being popular when you're alive doesn't mean you were the target audience/age for that band at that time. So enough of your false assumptions.

And I don't think David Cameron is making it up as he goes along. He's clearly media savvy enough to thought through these things - like Tony Blair did. That doesn't mean that it's the sort of politics we should want to see though.

"Last century, Jazz was for vulgar people."

Yes for all 100 years. Hyperbole, much?

You appear to be implying that he doesn't actually like those bands. You have no evidence for that at all. I rather think he's telling the truth.

One name I expected on that list which people would have liked was Kasabian. I would have fit in with the list fine and is popular. Of course I dont think this was a purely populist exercise but I cant help but feel cynical about lists about musical tastes, especially with major politicians naming theirs.

"You appear to be implying that he doesn't actually like those bands."

No more than Tony Blair liking neither sun dried tomatoes of Fish 'n Chips. I'm sure he likes them both - just for the same audiences.

"Last century, Jazz was for vulgar people."

Yes for all 100 years. Hyperbole, much?
Well you're really nit-picking my argument to find fault now aren't you? I'll be flattered.

If I said Yesterday, I was in a bar, you wouldn't assume I'd been in there for 24 hours.

I also think that my reference to the 1920s put that comment in context.

Give it a rest, James.
Music is music.

"Well you're really nit-picking my argument to find fault now aren't you? I'll be flattered."

Don't be, I was dimissing your post out of hand because you were essentially ignoring the major point of objection people had, in order to contend that the Smiths would be seen in a par with Louis Armstrong in the future.

"You appear to be implying that he doesn't actually like those bands. You have no evidence for that at all. I rather think he's telling the truth."

Okay, you be gullible and I'll be cynical.

We'll see alot more of these kinds of statements, I'm sure. I wonder how "genuine" people will think him after several years of it.

"Okay, you be gullible and I'll be cynical."

I like that slogan!

I'll be cynical too.

This thread seems to be arguing about the minutiae of David Cameron's taste, whereas it should not matter, other than to show he has other interests than politics.

It is good that he is getting publicity, and hopefully attracting support from younger voters.

"This thread seems to be arguing about the minutiae of David Cameron's taste"

Or rather that he's cynically portraying his tastes in order to gain support from the target audience du jour.

"It is good that he is getting publicity, and hopefully attracting support from younger voters."

Personally I always find it cringeworthy when politicians try to show themselves to be 'hip' or 'trendy' to try and connect with younger voters, through such stunts as Cameron's Radio 1 appearance, Galloway's Big Brother appearance, Blair's X Factor appearance, Hague's baseball cap on the log flume at Thorpe Park etc. I also think it insults the intelligence of us younger voters through the unspoken implication that we're more interested in superficial matters than real issues. However, those are just my personal opinions and if Cameron thinks he can attract extra support through such stunts, then good luck to him.

"Because I'm 39, there's The Smiths, Radiohead, Pulp, Blur - all that quite gloomy music... I'm a big Bob Dylan fan - there's a lot of Bob Dylan - but I'm not a Tom Waits fan."

I'm the same age as Cameron and just asked my husband "who is Bob Dylan?" and he said "he's one of those liberal/lefty musicians that students used to listen to at Uni whilst smoking pot". As I didn't go to Uni that's probably why I didn't know who he is.

Now I like Madonna - Ray of Light, Kate Bush - Red Shoes, Queen - It's a kind of Magic. Music to me is about albums or songs that mean something to you at a particular point in your life rather than mindlessly following a band or cult. My latest buy was The Black Eyed Peas - brilliant.

But you're clearly only saying you like the Black Eyed Peas to appear cool and trendy... *rolls eyes*

Blair born in 1953 experienced (for a while) a world without TV, with few cars, corporal punishment at most schools, when politics in Britain meant trade union issues, or decline of our empire. Much as he tries to act as if he's just arrived recently, he is of an older world.

Cameron born in 1966? saw a completely different world where popular culture was starting to be less about rebellion and cutting off the baggage of the past, and more expression of personal style - however grotesque much of that was in the 1970's!

He cleverly throws in Bob Dylan to let the oldies know he can connect with the Blair generation. But people born pre-1955 saw a completely different world which reached back generations into the past. Those born post-1960 are the first TV mass media generation, where image replaced traditons.

Cameron has image in his soul, and plays the game like a master. Blair has to use bullies like Alistair Campbell to force the media to comply with his message/lies. Cameron uses charm - far more deadly.

Cameron has image in his soul

That would be so, oh so true...

...if Cameron had a soul.

"I also think it insults the intelligence of us younger voters through the unspoken implication that we're more interested in superficial matters than real issues."

Young voters are mainly interested in superficial matters Daniel. Why do you think so many vote for the Lib Dems or support them in polls? Since the system doesn't affect them (and neither does life really, since so many these days stay on at University for years,) then the issues that younger people associate with are not the same as those people in work and with families/children.

On another forum Peter Cuthbertson (Conservative Commentary, occasional poster here and hardly a raving lefty) has commented that a friend of his was a contemporary of Cameron's at Oxford and - surprise surprise - remembers DC being a big Smiths fan.

That's besides the point. Tony Blair probably likes both fish 'n chips and sun dried tomatos, however the one he mentions will be cynically tailored to the target audience.

Mike has voted Lib Dem on previous occasions and is quite chummy with a local mp

So what if David Cameron listens to music, he is human you know, i'm 40 and still listen to some of this teeny bopper stuff, not much, but I do like the odd released track, just cause he is tory leader doesnt mean he cant have a life, go on David lad, you strutt that stuff, nothing wrong with being trendy, oh and don't forget to sell that ipod so you can pay Smith his £60 for the money he lost in books, due to your very ringing true comments on UKIP, that they are "loonies fruitcakes and closet racists"

I know this is probably nothing to do with your topic, This thread was posted on our forums, and I seen a few comments on the evil racist bigoted Mike Smith.

He is one sick and twisted individual, be careful what you say, he will have a lawsuit on you before you can say "Smith is a racist" not only is he a racist, but one who preys on innocent families for lawsuits, he provokes them into entrapment of the most evil kind, he isnt to be trusted, not anywhere, just check out our website and see some of his racist and bigoted rants, that have been taken and quoted from yahoo groups.

He should'nt be allowed to get away with moderatng such boards, yet leave or even edit posts and then accuse my someone of libel. He is just plain sad.

Thanks for posting. We're warned now. I know personally what his posts are like away from here.

On the issue of Cameron and his music...as Leader of the Opposition, what he listens to gets scrutinised so much, and rightfully so. Very often things like this are deliberately leaked to sway particular groups of people who wouldnt necessarily consider joining the Tories. It makes him seem "normal". We've become cynical in these days, but thats the way it is.

At least he is normal, I feel sad at all this debate just because he owns an ipod, hope he has a wide screen tv too, with MTV, it's only like owning a PC, now who does'nt own one of those? it's the modern day.

He might be the leader of the opposition, but that should'nt stop him listening to music, no matter what or how he listens to it.

No one is saying he shouldnt listen to music. Ive not no problem with that. Its his choice what he listens to and no one elses. However, he used his Ipods contents as a publicity stunt to show he is normal. If he was normal he wouldnt need to tell people what he has on his Ipod as its no one elses business. He chose to tell people...why? I doubt he did it as a sign of openness with the electorate because he could show that by answering the drugs question during the election campaign.

If it gets him votes then why not, people have their ways, I do see where your coming from though, from a politcians point of view.

If it gets him publicity, then kudos to him.

Meant to say "Political point of view"

One interesting thing is how that shows he truly isnt one of those he wants to help. Weve seen his limited Edition Converse trainers, his Ipod contents and his plans to put a wind turbine on his house. He talks about helping those at the bottom. The thing is, those at the bottom struggle to pay the bills and cant afford the trainers, the ipod or the wind turbine. They can barely pay their taxes and the utility bills after their enormous rises.

I don't really follow much of politics, although I have this past month, due to unfortunate circumstances, I have'nt even voted in the last 2 general elections or any local elections.

I struggled to keep my kids up with the trend, but I did it, you have to really, they had the best trainers and such things, I had heck to pay if I did'nt, but its the same no matter what government is in, to me anyway, Thats why I don't vote, I can't trust anyone in government they all promise things, and then its all down the drain.


"However, if a person indicates no interest whatsoever in serious music (or the other arts) his taste and judgment may seriously be called into question."


Mike Smith, I have never heard such utter rubbish; you silly pretentious man.

"A pity, therefore, that the party's not altogether deserved reputation for philistinism should be so shoddily and thoughtlessly confirmed in the eyes of art-lovers."

I guess you would describe yourself as sophisticated! But you're just a silly, immature snob that is full of himself. What people listen to, watch and appreciate is their business. Aestheticism is NOT defined by what you like. Your views re conceited and arrogant.

"One interesting thing is how that shows he truly isnt one of those he wants to help."

I don't really think that is an issue, ipods and trainers are materialistic anyway. I think utility bills on the whole are average, we live in a capitalist society, and everyhting is about profit. There will always be those that have and those that do not. But political leaders need to maintain social structure and that means dealing confidently with national economic and social issues. Of course which ever party is in power, can't please everyone but there are plently of opportunities in the UK (if you're a criminal lol) a bit cynical there. I think the UK was much better when Thatcher held the reins, she made some major goofs, (poll tax) but overall she did a damn fine job.

>>At least he is normal, I feel sad at all this debate just because he owns an ipod, hope he has a wide screen tv too, with MTV, it's only like owning a PC, now who does'nt own one of those? it's the modern day.<<

Well MSF the kind of people who own that kind of trash are council tenants with fluffy dice in their cars.

And maybe Cameron as well. What an utter moron he is.

BTW who the f*** is Mike Smith and why are you obsessed with him?

>>BTW who the f*** is Mike Smith and why are you obsessed with him?<<

Obsessed, pffft, he's more like possessed by something pure evil and vile I am sure, and don't pretend you dont know who Mike Smith is, it's that racists big fat old decrepid moron who wears a wig, that goes around with a gun that fires writs at any poor soul he can hit.


'BTW who the f*** is Mike Smith and why are you obsessed with him?'

You can find more about Smith here:

http://www.lvl9.org/forum/index.php
or type his name into google.

BTW, Mr. Cameron is probably going to win the next election. The Conservatives are going to do well in the up and coming local elections.

The Conservative Party have at last got it right with the election of Mr. Cameron as leader. I was readng in the news today about Lib Dem Menzies comments about the Conservative party having 'Right-Wingers' in the party. Well of course they have, as does every party and if the Conservatives didn;t have a different ideological approach they would be the same as newlab and Menzie's unelectable lot.

>>http://www.lvl9.org/forum/index.php
or type his name into google.<<

LOL..nevermind.

I hope the Mr Cameron does win, that will probably give Smith a heart attack, then we can all live happily ever after.

Well people. Smith is busy advertiseing on his 'hate' sites that his racist mates come over here and spam up your boards with their usual rubbish. The sad man has dedicated to two threads to it, on on UKIP on one on is CDA boards. I don't think there will be many takers as most are his silly 'sock puppets':

BEGIN----Mikeuk
Venerable Member
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1556
Location: Fareham
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:52 am Post subject: Attack the Tories on their own Blog

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's a way you can all influence perceptions of 'The Nasty Party' via their much trumpeted 'blog' site

Go to conservativehome.com , read the drivel from pro-EU Cameroons, and attack!

No need to log on. It's open to all.

See if you can guess the real ID of the totally OTT bootlicking Cameron fan who always jumps to his aid in the most nauseating and off-putting manner!! ----END

http://www.ukipforum.co.uk/post-103814.html&highlight=#103814

This is a must read.

http://www.satiresearch.com/article.asp?id=850&type=2

>>This is a must read.

http://www.satiresearch.com/article.asp?id=850&type=2<<

I couldnt stop laughing when I seen that, that is one of the best.

People are really having fun with the Mr Mike Smith.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker