The only time the BBC gets behind Cameron is when Nanny State comes out to play and in this case seeks to remove tobacco products from visual display. When the Coalition continues the socialist engineering agenda of banning and price hiking then it is guaranteed a good press from the State Broadcaster.
STUBBING OUT LIBERTY
Bookmark the permalink.
Cameron is Blue Blair and should be treated with the distain and contempt that he deserves.
People have got to realise that this is not a health issue. It’s about revenue gathering , if the uk has plain packaging and Europe uses the branding , it is easy to distinguish between legit and illegally re- imported cigs , even if supplied under the counter. It’s a money spinner!
What a shit society! One where you have to hide the nasty goods under the counter, but everyone knows they’re there. Yet another example of government treating the average person as an imbecile in need of tight control and restriction. This sort of behaviour has sparked wars in the past, yet the stoic (or stupid, gullible, soft) British public just roll over and lap it up, inviting more of the same. When will they realise what’s happening to them, sit up and take notice, and kick against it all.
All they do is whinge, and carry on as normal.
Wait until they have electricity available on certain days only, and they can’t afford to drive their HP’d Beamers, and the buses don’t come any more, and they need a second mortgage and 6-week pre-booking for a train ticket for a train that goes nowhere near where they want to be, and they have to take their holidays in Blackpool, or some other God-forsaken British resort that they can’t afford anyway, and there are no REAL police to be seen, the NHS is in tatters, their children uneducated, and housing unaffordable, and taxes through the roof. THEN they’ll wake up – won’t they? Or vote labour, and the whole thing will start all over again.
Here comes the black market. And how is this silly idea going to stop parents passing the habit on to their children? This is a cultural thing, not a simple marketing game.
over in the USA, a senior exec of NPR has been caught describing the US population as “uneducated”. To people who said they were members of the Muslim Brotherhood and had $5m to invest.
Its strange that more stings like this haven’t been done to the behind the scenes BBC “agenda setters”.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0308/NPR-executive-calls-tea-party-seriously-racist-most-Americans-uneducated
Funny how the key info about how Schiller thought they were talking to the MB has been censored from the BBC report. It’s only the whole reason for the outrage. Yet, they make sure to point out the Muslim reason for Juan Williams getting fired, and connect it to criticism from conservatives.
But the BBC always has its Fags displayed prominently.
I’ll have ten Rent Boys please, and a box of matches (got a brown paper bag?).
Would you like your Rent Boys “tipped” or “untipped”?
I’ll have ’em ready-rubbed, please…
And remind me how hiding such things under the counter is supposed to make them LESS attractive to children and teenagers?
Cameron also won BBC favour by ruling out an in/out EU referendum.
True that the only time the Beeb give the Coalition a good press is when they do only what Blairs lot would have done-it`s “progressive” you see and keeps the charity campaigners, the quacks and house trained researchers and experts in a sinecure.
This was a coalition acid test and they have failed it badly. That the BBC can let the likes of Philip Davies be seen as reactionary old fogies out of step with those nice progressive values of all right-thinking people shows that Camerons lot are now officially BluLabor!
Loved the follow up stuff on “whether the BBC are impartial” or not-little Justin really wanted Sir Michael Lyons that they were-it was a given surely and rune-reading from Patten(parachuted into Beebland to mass public acclaim!).
Think the Radio Times should now be sold in a brown paper bag and under the counter to csonsenting adults only…it does fare more damage to the mental health of the nation than a few puffs from a fag or two! Ooh-er missus!
Does Cameron really think he will ever get elected again? I doubt it. Why vote for a government who still use Blairs nanny state policies AND “cut” all local services (according to the media, even if not in practice).
Why not stick to the socialists – you may still have the nanny state but at least millions of jobs overseeing that nanny state will be created.
Cameron is a fool.
I loathed Brown but at least you knew where you were with him. Cameron is far far worse. He is a pretend conservative and will end up destroying the party if not our democratic system.
I’m totally baffled by Cameron, I really don’t know who he’s trying to appeal to. His continuation of the Nu Lab brand of social Marxism is driving away all traditional conservatives, and his conservative economic policies (and the way they do nothing about the BBC reporting of such) will ensure that any Nu Lab voters won’t drift towards his Party.
He couldn’t do a better job of wrecking the Conservative Party if he tried.
I bet Peter Hitchens is feeling very smug for predicting so much of this before the election.
Who else can seriously vote for who would get elected? I’m more a traditional conservative(well actually I’m a raging reactionary.) than a classical liberal or what Americans call ‘libertarian’ but I don’t mind UKIP.
It’s a shame there are none of the large sections of working class, socially conservative Methodists or Catholics left in the Labour party thanks to chairman Jenkins and his permanent cultural revolution. I still wouldn’t much care for labour but at least they might be a little better for Britain.
“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”
Ronald Reagan
“We should not expect the state to appear in the guise of an extravagant good fairy at christening, a loquacious companion at every stage of life’s journey and the unknown mourner at every funeral.”
Margaret Thatcher
“The Tory leader vowed to smash Labour’s stifling nanny state and return power to the people.”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2675093/David-Cameron-stakes-claim-for-No10-with-conference-speech.html
“Prime Minister Gordon Brown promised yesterday to fight the “nanny state” culture.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508705/Gordon-Browns-fight-nanny-state-Set-risk-aversion-quango.html#ixzz1G8pHsvZl
Reagan and Thatcher practiced what they preached. The modern PR politician are clones of each other.
I forget who said this but it decribes the coalition perfectly.
Moralists by nature. Bureaucrats by inclination and tyrants by inevitability.
Come to think of it it fits all politicians and most of the liberal media.
“The left always destroys itself. Every time it takes power, it unleashes the seeds of its own destruction. And the same greater thinkers who can write entire treatises on the perfect society, and have hair-pulling eye-gouging fights over the precise definition of working class, can no more run a country, than they can run a farmhouse. They are moralists by nature, bureaucrats by inclination and tyrants by inevitability.”
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2010/12/left-drinks-itself-to-death-again.html
I’m not sure Reagan’s quote completely covers all conservative perspectives on the state. Certainly the traditional conservative would not quite put it so simply.
Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites…society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of inteperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.
Edmund Burke.
Now I’m not sure Reagan is technically opposed to a more traditional conservative position, though I personally do not absolutely rule out gov’t protecting people from themselves, though the impression of a quote like that without more context or complexity gives a very simplified and reduced impression of the issue in my opinion.
Not to sahy that men don’t need a lot of freedom to learn how to act morally, realise the consequences of their actions and develop themselves without someone else doing this for them.
Not of course that most of the nanny state stuff, like this silly move, has much to do with this. These have little to do with an real moral development. I just though Reagan’s quote was a little simplistic, at least without any additional context.
They are moralists by nature, bureaucrats by inclination and tyrants by inevitability.”
Can I ask what is wrong with being a moralist? At least as long as one realises that inner virtues are more important than outer actions. As the Lord said:
“But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”
Matthew 5:28.
Dr.Johnson was a moralist, as was Burke, as was Shakespeare. The problem with the left is more they aren’t moralists and when they are they are too narrow in the foundation and too expansive in the outcomes of their morality.