who owns David Cameron?

I’m wondering if the Tories aren’t on the verge of making a fairly comprehensive mistake in choosing the smooth young chap with the twinkly eyes, or rather, in agreeing to have him chosen for them by the media. His credentials appear to consist of a people meter exercise on Newsnight and a lot of gush from columnists. That and the fact that he managed to give a speech which consisted of the successful linking together of a number of straight declarative sentences.

But never mind that. The wider question is: who owns David Cameron? I don’t mean politically. So far as I can make out his politics are nice chap waffle, centre right division, just as Blair started out with nice chap waffle, centre left division.

Blair’s early leadership was marked by a deliberate strategy of wooing the media, yet his media relations generally are now pretty wretched, aside from his open or at least obvious partisans. Cameron’s emergence, by contrast, seems to be entirely a media phenomenon. It’s almost as though the Telegraph and the Guardian have got together and built a more advanced model of the politician of which Blair was the prototype, and then foisted it on the Tories.

And for their part, the Tories seem glad to have him. At last, someone who can’t be written off as a reactionary dolt on the basis that his age and lifestyle is similar to that of mid ranking TV execs and newspaper features editors. So the Tories seem inclined to endorse someone who is in fact the media’s candidate for their leader.

The problem here is that if they own him, they can do anything they like with him. We had a taste of that last week with the drug story. Right now, that was just a tease, but there was an element there of the build em up, knock em down approach the media take to other celebrity properties they own.

“Tories choose fully formed human being as leader” may be this week’s political feelgood story. But time passes, and we’ll get bored with that. How about: “Tories choose effete old Etonian lucky boy”? How about: “Proper Charlie: coke sniffing conservative leader in drug legalisation storm.” ?

Oh, yes. There’s lots of fun to be had with David Cameron. And if I were a Tory I'd be wondering if there was such a thing as being too media friendly.

Comments

[Andrew]

Indeed, but you try telling that to the ones who've seen the light. They're like nutjob fundamentalists, and all because Cameron has a team who know the right people in the media. It'll never last.

[jamie]

"...but you try telling that to the ones who've seen the light."

People who feel unloved are notoriously lousy pickers in relationships. maybe that applies politically as well.

[Alex]

Fuck "tea boy", his new name is Chazbaps...

[jamie]

No shit?! So who do the baps belong to? (e-mail at right on blogroll, etc)

[Alex]

Well, the original CB was well-known singing sensation Billie Piper, I believe. It just struck me, standing in Terminal 4 at London's fabulous Heathrow Airport at the weekend, that it was the perfect nickname for him.

[jamie]

Ah, I thought you'd got something tying David Cameron himself to a breast related cocaine snorting incident.

Which is quite interesting since if you keep repeating the phrases "David Cameron" and "breast related cocaine snorting incident" then Google might do some wonderful things.

[Alex]

4th Generation Warfare, James, it's a blackly beautiful thing.

[Vendetta]

Program on the emergence of civilization.

"14 species of large animals capable of domesitcation in the history of mankind.
13 from Europe, Asia and northern Africa.
None from the sub-Saharan African continent. "
Favor.
And disfavor.

They point out Africans’ failed attempts to domesticate the elephant and zebra, the latter being an animal they illustrate that had utmost importance for it's applicability in transformation from a hunting/gathering to agrarian-based civilization.

The roots of racism are not of this earth.

Austrailia, aboriginals:::No domesticable animals.

The North American continent had none. Now 99% of that population is gone.

AIDS in Africa.

Organizational Heirarchy
Heirarchical order, from top to bottom:

1. MUCK - perhaps have experienced multiple universal contractions (have seen multiple big bangs), creator of the artificial intelligence humans ignorantly refer to as "god"
2. Perhaps some mid-level alien management
3. Mafia (evil) aliens - runs day-to-day operations here and perhaps elsewhere (On planets where they approved evil.)

Terrestrial management:

4. Chinese/egyptians - this may be separated into the eastern and western worlds
5. Romans - they answer to the egyptians
6. Mafia - the real-world interface that constantly turns over generationally so as to reinforce the widely-held notion of mortality
7. Jews, corporation, women, politician - Evidence exisits to suggest mafia management over all these groups.

Movies foreshadowing catastrophy
1985 James Bond View to a Kill 1989 San Francisco Loma Prieta earthquake.

Many Muslims are being used like the Germans and Japanese of wwii::being used to hurt others and envoke condemnation upon their people.

I wish I could find a source to educate many Muslim fundamentalists. Muhammad is alive. He is a man chosen like Jesus Christ and, due to his historical status, will live forever.

They can affect the weather and Hurricane Katrina was accomplished for many reasons and involves many interests, as anything this historical is::
1. Take heat off Sheenhan/Iraq, protecting profitable war machine/private war contracts
2. Gentrification. New Orleans median home price of $84k is among the lowest in major American cities, certainly among desirable cities.

Our society gives clues to the system in place. We all have heard the saying "He has more money than god." There is also an episode of the Simpsons where god meets Homer and says "I'm too old and rich for this."

This is the system on earth because this is the system everywhere.
god is evil because of money.

I don't want to suggest the upper eschelons are evil and good is the fringe.

But they have made it abundantly clear that doing business with evil won't help people. They say only good would have the ear, since evil is struggling for survival, and therefore only they could help me.

The clues are there which companies are good and which are evil, but they conceal it very hard because it is so crucial.

I offer an example of historical proportions:::

People point to Walmart and cry "anti-union".

Unions enable disfavored people to live satisfactorly without addressing their disfavor. This way their family's problems are never resolved. Without the union they would have to accept the heirarchy, their own inferiority.

Unions serve to empower.

Yes, there are many implications here, from the 60s to civil rights (which got ugly thereafter), music, movements, etc.

Walmart is anti-union because they are good. They try to help people address and resolve their problems.

Media ridicule, lawsuits, creations to reinforce people's belief that Walmart is evil.

Why is that important? Because there's a cutoff date.
And that date may have been 2000.

Amercia is a country of castoffs, rejects. "Italy sent its criminals." "Malcontents."
Between the thrones, the klans and kindred, they "decided" who they didn't want and acted, creating discontent and/or starvation.
The u.s. is full of disfavored rejects. As far as the Rockafellers, Waltons and Fords go, I suspect these aren't their real names. I suspect they were chosen to go and head this new empire.

Jesus Christ is a religious figure of evil. These seperatist churches formed so they could still capture the rest of the white people, keeping them worshipping the wrong god.
And now they do it to people of color, latinos and Asians, after centuries of preying upon them. "Only disfavored Asians."

Jews maim the body formed in the image of "god", and inflicted circumsision upon all other white people. I believe Islam is the one true religion, and those misled christians who attack "god's" most favored people will pay for it dearly one day.

[Alex]

Now that's a crank comment with class.