Since securing the GOP nomination for the upcoming Delaware senate race, Christine O’Donnell has begun to attract media scrutiny – and not all of it favourable.
Friday evening, the subject of O’Donnell and the Tea Party movement was discussed on the Tonight Show, when Jay Leno’s guests included the evergreen Arianna Huffington. Although Arianna was on promoting her book Third World America, she found time to conclude that anger among the electorate – the driver of the Tea Party movement - was because “The Democrats and the Republicans have for 30 years now screwed the middle class”.
And, although Arianna told that O’Donnell’s success was not all bad – “Anyone in my book who gets Karl Rove that upset must be doing something right” – she did not consider that masturbation was the huge problem O’Donnell believed it to be, concluding “Self love is deficit-neutral”.
Had that been the most severe analysis on her candidacy, O’Donnell might not have been too concerned. But Bill Maher, on whose previous show Politically Incorrect O’Donnell had guested 22 times, has decided that he’ll release a clip of her on that show every week until she agrees to appear on his current prog Real Time. “It’s like a hostage crisis” he explained.
So what? Well, the first clip Maher has run shows O’Donnell admitting that she dabbled in witchcraft, and had a picnic on a satanic altar. Possibly not unconnected with this latest revelation is the news that O’Donnell has pulled out not only from CBS’ Face The Nation tomorrow, but also from a softball session on Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse).
Whatever their politics, these Tea Partiers make elections so much more entertaining.
Saturday, 18 September 2010
Father Of The Bride
Thursday evening last, former Prez Bill Clinton guested on the Daily Show (video available of 4OD HERE, it’s towards the end of the prog). He was among friends: the warm applause when he appeared confirmed that.
But the line that brought the house down was when he recalled the recent wedding of daughter Chelsea. That, he recalled, was “my contribution to the economic stimulus”.
But the line that brought the house down was when he recalled the recent wedding of daughter Chelsea. That, he recalled, was “my contribution to the economic stimulus”.
Friday, 17 September 2010
Whinger Is Watching
Today, a show of public spiritedness has come from the Rothermere press: the Daily Mail, under the less than benign editorship of the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre, has begun a series called “Whinge Watch”. Sad to say, this is supremely unfortunate titling, and might more usefully be called “Whinger is Watching”, because the column is one long whinge from start to finish.
Author of this waste of space is one Tim Montgomerie, stalwart of ConservativeHome, and his target is the BBC. They’re biased – well, in the world of Monty and Dacre, they are. But Monty sells the pass before he’s finished with the title. Here, he tells that “The BBC – the flagship of the public sector – is obsessed with stories warning of the dire impact of cuts but rarely speaks up for the private sector that funds it”.
As I’ve told recently, the idea that the Beeb is part of the public sector is bogus. It is an independent and autonomous organisation. And, as to who funds it, that would be folks who own a television. So are they the private sector? What if they work at Leighton Hospital, or at MMU, or for Cheshire East council? Monty really ought to get his facts right before he starts on the carping.
Otherwise, there are the usual rhetorical questions beloved of other less than impartial media outlets, like Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse). Here, we get “Is Huw Edwards too liberal?”, and “Does Andrew Marr have an innate liberal bias?”, just as Fox sees Neil Cavuto asking “Is President Obama’s policy tanking the economy?”. They are, of course, not really questions.
Elsewhere, Monty keeps making the mistake of calling Beeb staffers “people who have only ever worked for the state”, which they are not. He whinges that Beeb has the effrontery to advertise jobs in the Guardian, which in his world is really the “Leftwing Guardian”. And – horror of horrors – Beeb staff are eleven times more likely to describe themselves as “liberal” than “conservative”.
Well, Monty, have I got news for you. Young Dave – the Prime Minister, and leader of your party – describes himself as “liberal”. Why not start your clearout of these wishy washy liberals on your own patch first?
And, while you’re at it, quit the whingeing.
Author of this waste of space is one Tim Montgomerie, stalwart of ConservativeHome, and his target is the BBC. They’re biased – well, in the world of Monty and Dacre, they are. But Monty sells the pass before he’s finished with the title. Here, he tells that “The BBC – the flagship of the public sector – is obsessed with stories warning of the dire impact of cuts but rarely speaks up for the private sector that funds it”.
As I’ve told recently, the idea that the Beeb is part of the public sector is bogus. It is an independent and autonomous organisation. And, as to who funds it, that would be folks who own a television. So are they the private sector? What if they work at Leighton Hospital, or at MMU, or for Cheshire East council? Monty really ought to get his facts right before he starts on the carping.
Otherwise, there are the usual rhetorical questions beloved of other less than impartial media outlets, like Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse). Here, we get “Is Huw Edwards too liberal?”, and “Does Andrew Marr have an innate liberal bias?”, just as Fox sees Neil Cavuto asking “Is President Obama’s policy tanking the economy?”. They are, of course, not really questions.
Elsewhere, Monty keeps making the mistake of calling Beeb staffers “people who have only ever worked for the state”, which they are not. He whinges that Beeb has the effrontery to advertise jobs in the Guardian, which in his world is really the “Leftwing Guardian”. And – horror of horrors – Beeb staff are eleven times more likely to describe themselves as “liberal” than “conservative”.
Well, Monty, have I got news for you. Young Dave – the Prime Minister, and leader of your party – describes himself as “liberal”. Why not start your clearout of these wishy washy liberals on your own patch first?
And, while you’re at it, quit the whingeing.
Rush To Believe Anything
A judge on the Federal District Court in Pensacola, Florida, has recently allowed a challenge on the new health care law to go to a full hearing. This apparent challenge to the centrepiece legislation of the Obama Administration soon attracted the attention of his opponents in the media, notably the deeply unpleasant Rush Limbaugh.
So when Rushie and his team found the Wikipedia bio of Judge Roger Vinson, they were very happy people. Here, apparently, was a keen hunter who had killed three brown bears, then mounted their heads above his courtroom door in order to “install the fear of God into the accused”.
This would, for sure, be bad news for all those pro-healthcare reform liberals. Or it would if it were true: someone had edited Judge Vinson’s Wiki entry to portray him as a sort of Davy Crockett figure, which he is not. Limbaugh then recycled the hoax as fact, more than likely because it fitted his agenda.
There was a clue in the Wiki edit: the article in The Pensacola News Journal used as a cite for the story was dated June 31, 2003. How many days in June, Rushie?
Judge Vinson has taken it all in his stride, but his wife was not happy, saying “I don’t think you should be able to broadcast something nationally if you can’t verify it”.
Since when has the inconvenience of verification stood in the way of Rush Limbaugh?
So when Rushie and his team found the Wikipedia bio of Judge Roger Vinson, they were very happy people. Here, apparently, was a keen hunter who had killed three brown bears, then mounted their heads above his courtroom door in order to “install the fear of God into the accused”.
This would, for sure, be bad news for all those pro-healthcare reform liberals. Or it would if it were true: someone had edited Judge Vinson’s Wiki entry to portray him as a sort of Davy Crockett figure, which he is not. Limbaugh then recycled the hoax as fact, more than likely because it fitted his agenda.
There was a clue in the Wiki edit: the article in The Pensacola News Journal used as a cite for the story was dated June 31, 2003. How many days in June, Rushie?
Judge Vinson has taken it all in his stride, but his wife was not happy, saying “I don’t think you should be able to broadcast something nationally if you can’t verify it”.
Since when has the inconvenience of verification stood in the way of Rush Limbaugh?
Thursday, 16 September 2010
The Tone Of The Journey – 4
The Blair tour around New York City has been followed by some parts of the Fourth Estate for reasons other than what he says, and which shows he guests on. Typical of this is an article on the website of the Daily Mail, written by one of the footsoldiers supporting the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre.
Tone’s book is mentioned only in passing: the hack is more interested in his clothes. The outfit which he wore when appearing on the Daily Show and The View, we are told, included “a close fitting blue suit paired with 60s-style crisp white shirt and a skinny tie”. This outfit, we are told, is like something out of the drama series Mad Men.
But, so what? Is there a point to this piece? Well, yes there is, and the clue is in the last paragraph. Here, we are told by the obligatory fashionista that “The reason why it looks like Mad Men is that the cut of classic Savile Row and bespoke suits has changed very little in the past hundred years”.
“Savile Row and bespoke suits” means that Tone’s suit was expensive. He’s got more money than you. You’re supposed to be envious. That is part of the Dacre way. The Mail’s editor has always detested Blair, so no stone is left unturned to point out – subtlety is not a prerequisite here – that Tone is well minted and is now getting loads more wonga just for swanning round the TV studios.
Meanwhile, a Zelo Street regular has asked the kind of question that the assembled hackery has thus far missed. After seeing Tone on the Daily Show, an email arrived, asserting “he’s wearing a hairpiece, isn’t he?”
I couldn’t possibly comment.
Tone’s book is mentioned only in passing: the hack is more interested in his clothes. The outfit which he wore when appearing on the Daily Show and The View, we are told, included “a close fitting blue suit paired with 60s-style crisp white shirt and a skinny tie”. This outfit, we are told, is like something out of the drama series Mad Men.
But, so what? Is there a point to this piece? Well, yes there is, and the clue is in the last paragraph. Here, we are told by the obligatory fashionista that “The reason why it looks like Mad Men is that the cut of classic Savile Row and bespoke suits has changed very little in the past hundred years”.
“Savile Row and bespoke suits” means that Tone’s suit was expensive. He’s got more money than you. You’re supposed to be envious. That is part of the Dacre way. The Mail’s editor has always detested Blair, so no stone is left unturned to point out – subtlety is not a prerequisite here – that Tone is well minted and is now getting loads more wonga just for swanning round the TV studios.
Meanwhile, a Zelo Street regular has asked the kind of question that the assembled hackery has thus far missed. After seeing Tone on the Daily Show, an email arrived, asserting “he’s wearing a hairpiece, isn’t he?”
I couldn’t possibly comment.
Two Mils In Search Of A Leadership
A long, long time ago – well, just after the General Election and its immediate aftermath – the starting gun was fired for the Labour leadership contest. The race is still being run, but the end is in sight. That is no bad thing: what will be needed in the next year or two will be an opposition that keeps the present Government honest.
The most certainty about the result is about who will not win: Andy Burnham and Diane Abbott are not likely to get anywhere near this particular prize. It is increasingly clear that Pa Broon’s former confidant “Auguste” Balls will be joining them, but his ability to rough up whoever he shadows will mean he remains in the spotlight.
Which leaves the two brothers, so will it be Mil the Elder (previously thought to be favourite) or Mil the Younger, now believed to be doing well on second preferences? My take is that the Elder will shave it, though last weekend’s Screws decided that Ed Miliband was in the lead. This enabled them to deploy their staggeringly unoriginal nickname of “Red Ed” (geddit?!?!?).
Fortunately, this particular convocation of Rupe’s downmarket troops will vanish behind a paywall next month, so we will be spared the routinely inarticulate “edges ahead of bruv” headline style. And, given their increasingly distant relationship with Labour, it would be best to get a second opinion before believing the Screws’ story.
All the candidates are on Question Time tonight, and then it’s less than a fortnight to the finish line.
The most certainty about the result is about who will not win: Andy Burnham and Diane Abbott are not likely to get anywhere near this particular prize. It is increasingly clear that Pa Broon’s former confidant “Auguste” Balls will be joining them, but his ability to rough up whoever he shadows will mean he remains in the spotlight.
Which leaves the two brothers, so will it be Mil the Elder (previously thought to be favourite) or Mil the Younger, now believed to be doing well on second preferences? My take is that the Elder will shave it, though last weekend’s Screws decided that Ed Miliband was in the lead. This enabled them to deploy their staggeringly unoriginal nickname of “Red Ed” (geddit?!?!?).
Fortunately, this particular convocation of Rupe’s downmarket troops will vanish behind a paywall next month, so we will be spared the routinely inarticulate “edges ahead of bruv” headline style. And, given their increasingly distant relationship with Labour, it would be best to get a second opinion before believing the Screws’ story.
All the candidates are on Question Time tonight, and then it’s less than a fortnight to the finish line.
Merv Meets The Unions
Yesterday, the Governor of the Bank of England addressed the TUC. That might not seem too unusual, except that this was only the second time in over 140 years that it has happened. He even got a round of applause afterwards, and there was a Q&A session.
Not everyone was happy at his presence: Bob “Scare” Crow and his fellow RMT delegates walked out, rather than listen to Merv the Swerve. Crow doesn’t like the idea of his members being on the wrong end of pay curbs and job cuts when, as he tells, the state of the economy is all the banks’ and bankers’ fault.
Crow is entitled to his view, and everyone tuned in to last Sunday’s Andy Marr Show heard it loud and clear. But Mervyn King’s speech was pitched sensitively and thoughtfully – and many other delegates were at least appreciative that he had delivered it.
It was a pity that no member of the Government made a similar gesture – whatever the reason.
Not everyone was happy at his presence: Bob “Scare” Crow and his fellow RMT delegates walked out, rather than listen to Merv the Swerve. Crow doesn’t like the idea of his members being on the wrong end of pay curbs and job cuts when, as he tells, the state of the economy is all the banks’ and bankers’ fault.
Crow is entitled to his view, and everyone tuned in to last Sunday’s Andy Marr Show heard it loud and clear. But Mervyn King’s speech was pitched sensitively and thoughtfully – and many other delegates were at least appreciative that he had delivered it.
It was a pity that no member of the Government made a similar gesture – whatever the reason.
The Tone Of The Journey – 3
And so the Blair book promotion found its way to an appearance on the Daily Show last Tuesday. You can see part of the interview on 4OD HERE, but be warned: it’s towards the end of the programme.
The predictable part was that, as ever, Tone showed the audience that part of his persona that he wanted to show them, and no more. Also, he was right, and continued to stress the terrorist threat. More disturbingly, he has got into the rut of obsession over Iran.
The more interesting part of the interview was Jon Stewart trying to manoeuvre Blair into giving some kind of convincing answer to the ideology that attempts to justify military intervention in a succession of countries on the basis that the local branch of the Al-Qaeda franchise might be in town. Stewart set out his concerns thus:
“I live in New York. We have cockroaches ... I will never, as long as I live in New York City, be totally rid of cockroaches. Now, I could seal my apartment; I could use bug bombs so that it was nearly unlivable and reduce the amount of cockroaches. But what kind of life is that for me? Do you see what I'm saying? Do you see where I'm going here? Our strategy seems idealistic and naïve to some extent.”
He later went on:
“This is what I mean by naive: Omigod, we have cockroaches. We have to get rats to eat them. Omigod, now we have rats! Oh no, we better getter cats! Oh no, we're overrun by cats; let's get dogs! Omigod, we need to get polar bears!
Do you understand what I'm saying? We are chasing our tails around...
Our resources are not limitless. We cannot continue to go into countries, topple whatever regime we find distasteful, occupy that country to the extent that we can rebuild its infrastructure, re-win the hearts and minds because here's my point: Ultimately within that, there could still be a pocket of extremism in that country... So all that effort still would not gain us the advantage and the safety that we need, as evidenced by the attacks in England by homegrown extremists. So don't we need to rethink and be much smarter about the way we're handling this?"
Blair could be excused for not addressing that last question convincingly: none of the other supporters of that policy – “Dick” Cheney, “Wiggy” Bolton and the rest - have done so either.
But of course this wasn’t the point of his appearance: that was the promotion of the Blair book, and the Blair brand. Good for Tone, but not much use to the average Iraqi.
The predictable part was that, as ever, Tone showed the audience that part of his persona that he wanted to show them, and no more. Also, he was right, and continued to stress the terrorist threat. More disturbingly, he has got into the rut of obsession over Iran.
The more interesting part of the interview was Jon Stewart trying to manoeuvre Blair into giving some kind of convincing answer to the ideology that attempts to justify military intervention in a succession of countries on the basis that the local branch of the Al-Qaeda franchise might be in town. Stewart set out his concerns thus:
“I live in New York. We have cockroaches ... I will never, as long as I live in New York City, be totally rid of cockroaches. Now, I could seal my apartment; I could use bug bombs so that it was nearly unlivable and reduce the amount of cockroaches. But what kind of life is that for me? Do you see what I'm saying? Do you see where I'm going here? Our strategy seems idealistic and naïve to some extent.”
He later went on:
“This is what I mean by naive: Omigod, we have cockroaches. We have to get rats to eat them. Omigod, now we have rats! Oh no, we better getter cats! Oh no, we're overrun by cats; let's get dogs! Omigod, we need to get polar bears!
Do you understand what I'm saying? We are chasing our tails around...
Our resources are not limitless. We cannot continue to go into countries, topple whatever regime we find distasteful, occupy that country to the extent that we can rebuild its infrastructure, re-win the hearts and minds because here's my point: Ultimately within that, there could still be a pocket of extremism in that country... So all that effort still would not gain us the advantage and the safety that we need, as evidenced by the attacks in England by homegrown extremists. So don't we need to rethink and be much smarter about the way we're handling this?"
Blair could be excused for not addressing that last question convincingly: none of the other supporters of that policy – “Dick” Cheney, “Wiggy” Bolton and the rest - have done so either.
But of course this wasn’t the point of his appearance: that was the promotion of the Blair book, and the Blair brand. Good for Tone, but not much use to the average Iraqi.
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Virgin On The Resurrected – 2
So the realisation had come upon the Department for Transport (aka DaFT) that their cunning plan, for getting some mileage out of the new additions to the fleet of Pendolino trains, was in fact not particularly cunning at all. Allied to all the other good reasons not to try and run one of the trainsets between London and Edinburgh, as I noted previously, was the possibility that the Pendolino might not be good for the traction supply (which has had to be beefed up on lines where it runs at present).
Virgin Trains (VT), ever optimistic that their demise may be avoided, now launched a cunning plan of their own. Figuring out that the new Government may have priorities more pressing than launching a bidding war for the right to run InterCity trains on the West Coast Main Line (WCML), they dangled a pleasantly tempting carrot before DaFT.
Were DaFT to be minded to award VT a two year extension to their franchise, a further 42 coaches could be ordered and put into service, at no extra cost to the taxpayer. Why another 42? Well, the new coaches already ordered, in true penny pinching style, would only be enough to make 31 trains up to eleven coaches from the current nine. That would leave 21 trains still with nine coaches, and keeping one type away from the other’s diagrams would, in practice, be impossible.
What happens now? One clue is in the timescale: the franchise comes up in 2012, and the bidding process could take well over a year, but nothing has been announced on that front. So the two year extension, especially if it brings a uniform fleet of trains, might be too tempting for the Government to pass up.
Seasoned surveyor of the railway and founder of Rail Business Intelligence Roger Ford reckons that the Government will be unable to resist this particular temptation, and will sign off a two year extension for VT, before the civil servants at DaFT breathe a collective sigh of relief. I would go further.
Two years would take the franchise renewal to 2014. That would still be in the Government’s first term, and they may then be in the middle of a period of severe unpopularity over their spending cuts. Better to kick the ball into the long grass properly: five years, taking it to 2017, would mean getting back to the process in a second and hopefully calmer term, or, if they get booted out, it’s someone else’s problem.
I am not a betting man. But if I were, a few quid might be going on VT getting another five years.
Virgin Trains (VT), ever optimistic that their demise may be avoided, now launched a cunning plan of their own. Figuring out that the new Government may have priorities more pressing than launching a bidding war for the right to run InterCity trains on the West Coast Main Line (WCML), they dangled a pleasantly tempting carrot before DaFT.
Were DaFT to be minded to award VT a two year extension to their franchise, a further 42 coaches could be ordered and put into service, at no extra cost to the taxpayer. Why another 42? Well, the new coaches already ordered, in true penny pinching style, would only be enough to make 31 trains up to eleven coaches from the current nine. That would leave 21 trains still with nine coaches, and keeping one type away from the other’s diagrams would, in practice, be impossible.
What happens now? One clue is in the timescale: the franchise comes up in 2012, and the bidding process could take well over a year, but nothing has been announced on that front. So the two year extension, especially if it brings a uniform fleet of trains, might be too tempting for the Government to pass up.
Seasoned surveyor of the railway and founder of Rail Business Intelligence Roger Ford reckons that the Government will be unable to resist this particular temptation, and will sign off a two year extension for VT, before the civil servants at DaFT breathe a collective sigh of relief. I would go further.
Two years would take the franchise renewal to 2014. That would still be in the Government’s first term, and they may then be in the middle of a period of severe unpopularity over their spending cuts. Better to kick the ball into the long grass properly: five years, taking it to 2017, would mean getting back to the process in a second and hopefully calmer term, or, if they get booted out, it’s someone else’s problem.
I am not a betting man. But if I were, a few quid might be going on VT getting another five years.
The Right Fights The Right
It’s happened in the UK before, but not often: candidates splinter off from mainstream parties and end up fighting their former colleagues. Also, on occasion, a party’s workers won’t turn out to help their own candidates. Now it’s happening in the US state of Delaware, following the result of yesterday’s primary for the GOP Senate nomination.
This is the state represented in the Senate by Joe Biden before he became Vice President, but Republicans reckoned they had, in Mike Castle, a candidate capable of taking the seat. But Castle was challenged for the nomination by “Tea Party” Conservative Christine O’Donnell, who turned out the winner. Democrat Chris Coons now looks the more likely victor come November.
Why so? Well, mainstream GOP supporters, and more importantly party workers, don’t support the O’Donnell candidacy, and won’t work for her election. She claims to be able to win the race without them, but that may be a big ask: even Karl Rove is sceptical. The Republican state chairman says O’Donnell “could not be elected dogcatcher”. Ouch.
And that is utterly perverse: the “Tea Party”, a movement which might be thought of as bolstering the GOP, turns out to have the potential to split its vote and let in a Democrat – just at the time when politicians of all stripes agree that the Dems are vulnerable. Were they to lose control of Congress, the remainder of Barack Obama’s term could be a lot rockier than his first two years.
But if the Democrats hold on to the House, the infighting might really kick off within the GOP. As Ronnie might have said after last night’s result in Delaware, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
[UPDATE: This post has also featured on Liberal Conspiracy. My thanks as ever to Sunny Hundal]
This is the state represented in the Senate by Joe Biden before he became Vice President, but Republicans reckoned they had, in Mike Castle, a candidate capable of taking the seat. But Castle was challenged for the nomination by “Tea Party” Conservative Christine O’Donnell, who turned out the winner. Democrat Chris Coons now looks the more likely victor come November.
Why so? Well, mainstream GOP supporters, and more importantly party workers, don’t support the O’Donnell candidacy, and won’t work for her election. She claims to be able to win the race without them, but that may be a big ask: even Karl Rove is sceptical. The Republican state chairman says O’Donnell “could not be elected dogcatcher”. Ouch.
And that is utterly perverse: the “Tea Party”, a movement which might be thought of as bolstering the GOP, turns out to have the potential to split its vote and let in a Democrat – just at the time when politicians of all stripes agree that the Dems are vulnerable. Were they to lose control of Congress, the remainder of Barack Obama’s term could be a lot rockier than his first two years.
But if the Democrats hold on to the House, the infighting might really kick off within the GOP. As Ronnie might have said after last night’s result in Delaware, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
[UPDATE: This post has also featured on Liberal Conspiracy. My thanks as ever to Sunny Hundal]
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
Defining The Beeb
The prospect of a strike by workers at the BBC next month – potentially coinciding with the Tory conference – has started the usual suspects off. Out of the traps with customary speed has been the well-coordinated why-oh-why machine that is the Daily Mail, under the command of the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre.
The Mail leaves no stone unturned in putting the boot into the Beeb: part of the Dacre modus operandi is to paint the corporation as biased and unreliable, while trumpeting his own slanted agenda as the One True Way. Europhobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, demonisation of Government, obsession with slebs – it’s all in the Daily Mail.
And one way in which the Beeb gets its ritual kicking from Dacre’s finest is the idea that it is a public sector body. But is it? It’s certainly a public service broadcaster, but it is also autonomous – it’s not a branch of Government. This realisation was grasped recently by culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, who likened the BBC to Government departments which were having to draw up cuts.
Hunt was then asked if he defined the BBC as a Government department, and he used the phrases “arm’s length body” and “public body”. But not a public sector body. There is a difference, and that is why the Beeb has to sort its pension problem alone, as would a private sector business.
As for the Daily Mail assertion that those staff pensions – the cause of the potential industrial action – are “gold plated”, that is rather rich coming from a paper whose editor routinely trousers a remuneration package now well north of a million and a half notes a year. Whenever he retires, Paul Dacre won’t be without a few bob.
[UPDATE: My thanks to Chris Dillow for linking to this post from Stumbling and Mumbling. Much appreciated]
The Mail leaves no stone unturned in putting the boot into the Beeb: part of the Dacre modus operandi is to paint the corporation as biased and unreliable, while trumpeting his own slanted agenda as the One True Way. Europhobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, demonisation of Government, obsession with slebs – it’s all in the Daily Mail.
And one way in which the Beeb gets its ritual kicking from Dacre’s finest is the idea that it is a public sector body. But is it? It’s certainly a public service broadcaster, but it is also autonomous – it’s not a branch of Government. This realisation was grasped recently by culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, who likened the BBC to Government departments which were having to draw up cuts.
Hunt was then asked if he defined the BBC as a Government department, and he used the phrases “arm’s length body” and “public body”. But not a public sector body. There is a difference, and that is why the Beeb has to sort its pension problem alone, as would a private sector business.
As for the Daily Mail assertion that those staff pensions – the cause of the potential industrial action – are “gold plated”, that is rather rich coming from a paper whose editor routinely trousers a remuneration package now well north of a million and a half notes a year. Whenever he retires, Paul Dacre won’t be without a few bob.
[UPDATE: My thanks to Chris Dillow for linking to this post from Stumbling and Mumbling. Much appreciated]
Murdoch Is Served (21)
One story that will not go away – despite some parts of the political spectrum trying vainly to shout it down – is Phonehackgate. Former assistant Met Commissioner Brian Paddick and Labour’s Chris Bryant have started legal action alleging a police cover-up.
Also now confirmed to be taking action against Rupe’s troops at the Screws are Steve Coogan and Chris Tarrant, along with Nicola Phillips, formerly assistant to Max Clifford. Clifford was effectively bought off by Murdoch’s representative on this part of the earth, Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), the sum changing hands said to be north of a million notes.
For a supposed “non story”, there seems to be rather a lot of story in this one.
[UPDATE: Sienna Miller has now joined the fray]
Also now confirmed to be taking action against Rupe’s troops at the Screws are Steve Coogan and Chris Tarrant, along with Nicola Phillips, formerly assistant to Max Clifford. Clifford was effectively bought off by Murdoch’s representative on this part of the earth, Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), the sum changing hands said to be north of a million notes.
For a supposed “non story”, there seems to be rather a lot of story in this one.
[UPDATE: Sienna Miller has now joined the fray]
Where Are They Now? – 1
Go back to the mid 90s, and that interview with Diana, Princess of Wales. It was unmissable TV: the audience was massive, the repeats of parts or all of the programme numerous. The interviewer was Martin Bashir. You won’t have seen him on the Beeb, or any other UK broadcaster, for a while.
That’s because Bashir has moved across the North Atlantic: in 2005, he began a stint for ABC. That has just finished, and he will soon be appearing on cable broadcaster MSNBC, hosting a one hour afternoon slot. Looks like an interesting opportunity for the former BBC man.
That’s because Bashir has moved across the North Atlantic: in 2005, he began a stint for ABC. That has just finished, and he will soon be appearing on cable broadcaster MSNBC, hosting a one hour afternoon slot. Looks like an interesting opportunity for the former BBC man.
Monday, 13 September 2010
Seriously Funny
Putting together a top comedy show really is a serious business. Seriously. And, as anyone who drops in on Zelo Street will know, one top comedy offering that I put in the must-watch category is the Daily Show.
Just how much effort Jon Stewart and his team put into a typical show can be seen from a read through this excellent article in New York magazine. The week’s first show can be seen on More4 tomorrow at 2030 hours.
Just how much effort Jon Stewart and his team put into a typical show can be seen from a read through this excellent article in New York magazine. The week’s first show can be seen on More4 tomorrow at 2030 hours.
Newt Suffers Heatstroke
No, this isn’t about former London mayor Ken Livingstone and his supposedly favourite pets, but the wayward musings of an ostensibly mainstream politician in the USA. Newt Gingrich, who is thought to be ready to make a pitch for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination, has been talking to the National Review Online. And he’s not making sense.
Gingrich, an ultimately polarising politician, has taken to nay-saying the Obama presidency whenever and wherever he gets the opportunity. The NRO piece therefore contains plenty of routine abuse – he asserts that the Prez is out of touch, dishonest, and an opportunist – but goes further, when he suggests that Obama has a “Kenyan, anti-colonial worldview”.
Anti-colonial? Just what was it that brought the USA into being? So is he praising Obama? Well, no he isn’t, not if he’s pitching the term “Kenyan”. There’s only one reason to go down that particular road, and that is to enter the wacky world of birtherism. Obama’s father was Kenyan, and the birther movement holds that the Prez was born there, not in the USA.
Unfortunately for the birthers, no credible story has been put together to show how the Obamas managed to get their son into the USA and secure a birth certificate for him, nor why they would want to do so, given that the only job that Kenyan birth would disqualify him for would be the Presidency. Perhaps there is a time machine in there somewhere.
Apart from appealing to that part of the GOP which believes the birther argument, there is little reason for Gingrich to move onto this ground. Perhaps he is trying to position himself even further to the right than Sarah Palin. Perhaps he has thought this one through. But I suspect he’s fallen before the race even starts.
Gingrich, an ultimately polarising politician, has taken to nay-saying the Obama presidency whenever and wherever he gets the opportunity. The NRO piece therefore contains plenty of routine abuse – he asserts that the Prez is out of touch, dishonest, and an opportunist – but goes further, when he suggests that Obama has a “Kenyan, anti-colonial worldview”.
Anti-colonial? Just what was it that brought the USA into being? So is he praising Obama? Well, no he isn’t, not if he’s pitching the term “Kenyan”. There’s only one reason to go down that particular road, and that is to enter the wacky world of birtherism. Obama’s father was Kenyan, and the birther movement holds that the Prez was born there, not in the USA.
Unfortunately for the birthers, no credible story has been put together to show how the Obamas managed to get their son into the USA and secure a birth certificate for him, nor why they would want to do so, given that the only job that Kenyan birth would disqualify him for would be the Presidency. Perhaps there is a time machine in there somewhere.
Apart from appealing to that part of the GOP which believes the birther argument, there is little reason for Gingrich to move onto this ground. Perhaps he is trying to position himself even further to the right than Sarah Palin. Perhaps he has thought this one through. But I suspect he’s fallen before the race even starts.
Virgin On The Resurrected – 1
Like mainstream party politics, the rail industry’s comings and goings can be a funny old game at times. And in the past two years or so, nothing has illustrated this better than the fall and rise in the stock of Virgin Trains (VT), the operator that runs services out of London’s Euston terminus to Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Preston and Glasgow (as well as Crewe).
The expectation until very recently was that, come 2012, VT would lose their franchise and last presence on the UK’s rail map. They had already lost the Cross Country operation, although Arriva, who won that battle, have not exactly covered themselves in glory since.
Such was the dislike within Government for VT that, when agreement came to lengthen many of the fleet of Pendolino trains – as well as adding a few more complete ones – it was stressed that this additional capacity would be available only after the franchise renewal date. VT would, by inference, no longer be around.
And then came the contract to ready the additional Pendolino coaches and complete trains. After the obligatory bidding, it was awarded to ... a part of the Virgin Rail Group. But all the new equipment was not to be used in service by VT. By now it was starting to get silly.
It got sillier. The realisation dawned on the Department For Transport – known by many in the industry, with good reason, as DaFT – that any new trains readied for service before franchise change day in 2012 would be sitting around doing nothing, as VT would not be allowed to operate them. So a cunning plan was hatched, so cunning that some who should have known better took it at face value and failed to subject it to a reality check.
The franchise to operate InterCity trains out of London’s Kings Cross terminus to Newcastle and Edinburgh – the East Coast Main Line (ECML) – had been handed back by its previous operators, and is now a Proper Public Operation. This line, like the West Coast Main Line (WCML) where VT operate, was electrified. So one of the new trains could provide extra capacity on the ECML. Simples.
Except it wasn’t. The Pendolino trains are totally different to any of the train types in use on the ECML. There would have to be driver training just for one daily round trip, or drivers would have to be taken from VT, and then learn the road or be piloted. Reservation systems and catering facilities were different. And the ECML’s rescue locomotives can’t couple to a Pendolino, so if the new train “sat down” on the job, there would be even more chaos than usual.
Realisation grew that this was indeed a DaFT idea. But VT also had a cunning plan.
The expectation until very recently was that, come 2012, VT would lose their franchise and last presence on the UK’s rail map. They had already lost the Cross Country operation, although Arriva, who won that battle, have not exactly covered themselves in glory since.
Such was the dislike within Government for VT that, when agreement came to lengthen many of the fleet of Pendolino trains – as well as adding a few more complete ones – it was stressed that this additional capacity would be available only after the franchise renewal date. VT would, by inference, no longer be around.
And then came the contract to ready the additional Pendolino coaches and complete trains. After the obligatory bidding, it was awarded to ... a part of the Virgin Rail Group. But all the new equipment was not to be used in service by VT. By now it was starting to get silly.
It got sillier. The realisation dawned on the Department For Transport – known by many in the industry, with good reason, as DaFT – that any new trains readied for service before franchise change day in 2012 would be sitting around doing nothing, as VT would not be allowed to operate them. So a cunning plan was hatched, so cunning that some who should have known better took it at face value and failed to subject it to a reality check.
The franchise to operate InterCity trains out of London’s Kings Cross terminus to Newcastle and Edinburgh – the East Coast Main Line (ECML) – had been handed back by its previous operators, and is now a Proper Public Operation. This line, like the West Coast Main Line (WCML) where VT operate, was electrified. So one of the new trains could provide extra capacity on the ECML. Simples.
Except it wasn’t. The Pendolino trains are totally different to any of the train types in use on the ECML. There would have to be driver training just for one daily round trip, or drivers would have to be taken from VT, and then learn the road or be piloted. Reservation systems and catering facilities were different. And the ECML’s rescue locomotives can’t couple to a Pendolino, so if the new train “sat down” on the job, there would be even more chaos than usual.
Realisation grew that this was indeed a DaFT idea. But VT also had a cunning plan.
Hate Springs Eternal
Right now is not a good time to be a follower of Islam across the USA: the almost hysterical reaction to the proposed Cordoba Centre in Lower Manhattan has spilled over into citizens opposing mosques and Islamic centres anywhere and everywhere within the Republic. It might be thought that a call for calm and reflection would be the order of the day.
Unfortunately, in one part of the broadcast media at least, the opposite appears to be happening: no prizes for guessing that the anti-Muslim rhetoric is being stoked by our old friends at Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse). And, as a number of their hosts are weighing in with the same kind of message, the thought enters that this approach has been organised in advance.
During the summer, Imam Rauf, the softly spoken man behind the Cordoba Centre (or Park 51, if you prefer) has been characterised as a “radical” by Fox hosts including professional loudmouth Sean Hannity, despite Rauf’s moderate and conciliatory background. When Rauf voiced his concerns that being forced to move the proposed Islamic centre could provoke anti-American feeling among Muslims across the world, he was accused on the following morning’s Fox and Friends of issuing threats.
As that edition of Fox and Friends was on September 10, the timing was significant. But the disconnect was becoming noticeable: Rauf’s concern was also for the wellbeing of US forces in countries such as Afghanistan, a point also made recently by Gen. David Petraeus. Fox News Channel, like Rupe’s UK troops at the Sun and Screws, claims to be an unwavering supporter of the military.
And on that point, there has been silence. So do Roger Ailes and his coterie of obedient hosts want to put US service personnel rather more in harm’s way? It’s a strange paradox that those who shout their support for the military the loudest are also the ones who want them to be thrown into every conceivable theatre of war.
Yet stranger is the idea that the use of hate speech will do anything other than tarnish the image of the USA around the world – whatever the faith of those watching.
Unfortunately, in one part of the broadcast media at least, the opposite appears to be happening: no prizes for guessing that the anti-Muslim rhetoric is being stoked by our old friends at Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse). And, as a number of their hosts are weighing in with the same kind of message, the thought enters that this approach has been organised in advance.
During the summer, Imam Rauf, the softly spoken man behind the Cordoba Centre (or Park 51, if you prefer) has been characterised as a “radical” by Fox hosts including professional loudmouth Sean Hannity, despite Rauf’s moderate and conciliatory background. When Rauf voiced his concerns that being forced to move the proposed Islamic centre could provoke anti-American feeling among Muslims across the world, he was accused on the following morning’s Fox and Friends of issuing threats.
As that edition of Fox and Friends was on September 10, the timing was significant. But the disconnect was becoming noticeable: Rauf’s concern was also for the wellbeing of US forces in countries such as Afghanistan, a point also made recently by Gen. David Petraeus. Fox News Channel, like Rupe’s UK troops at the Sun and Screws, claims to be an unwavering supporter of the military.
And on that point, there has been silence. So do Roger Ailes and his coterie of obedient hosts want to put US service personnel rather more in harm’s way? It’s a strange paradox that those who shout their support for the military the loudest are also the ones who want them to be thrown into every conceivable theatre of war.
Yet stranger is the idea that the use of hate speech will do anything other than tarnish the image of the USA around the world – whatever the faith of those watching.
Phoney War
There does seem to be a lot of airtime being devoted to the C-word right now, whoever the broadcaster. That’s C as in cuts. We have the Coalition arguing for them, Labour arguing for less of them (or a less speedy implementation), and now the TUC are looking to mobilise opposition to them.
But, although cuts have been discussed ad infinitum – and, the impression is increasingly given, ad nauseam – there has not yet been sufficient cutting going on to give us an idea of what life will be like afterwards. So, into this vacuum, the pundits, politicians and occasionally real people pour their speculation.
Yes, we can be certain that significant cuts in the budgets of central and local Government departments will mean that they will employ less people. This in turn will knock on to suppliers, contractors, and that part of the service sector which depends on those workers spending and re-spending money. Unless jobs are created in at least equal numbers to those lost, unemployment will rise.
Moreover, given that those in work are likely to be given below inflation pay rises, or be subject to pay freezes (or even pay cuts), then there is likely to be a fall in their standard of living. All of this is likely to be reflected in a fall in support for the incumbent Government. But this sequence of events has not yet worked through.
So we are, for a few months at least, in a kind of limbo, a phoney war perhaps. Hence support for the Coalition has not been seriously eroded, and there has not been significant pressure on the alliance of Tories and Lib Dems. All is likely to change later this month: the precise nature of cuts will become known, job losses will be identified, and with that, any honeymoon period will come to a close.
If new jobs are not created, and the cuts continue, the situation will deteriorate, and then the new and improved two-headed donkey will be stress tested in earnest. It could be 1981 all over again, but this time round, there is little likelihood of a tinpot South American dictatorship riding to the rescue.
Christmas 2010, for many, could be a time for drowning sorrows, rather than celebration. And there will, more than ever, be a need for opposition to show some unity, and some leadership.
But, although cuts have been discussed ad infinitum – and, the impression is increasingly given, ad nauseam – there has not yet been sufficient cutting going on to give us an idea of what life will be like afterwards. So, into this vacuum, the pundits, politicians and occasionally real people pour their speculation.
Yes, we can be certain that significant cuts in the budgets of central and local Government departments will mean that they will employ less people. This in turn will knock on to suppliers, contractors, and that part of the service sector which depends on those workers spending and re-spending money. Unless jobs are created in at least equal numbers to those lost, unemployment will rise.
Moreover, given that those in work are likely to be given below inflation pay rises, or be subject to pay freezes (or even pay cuts), then there is likely to be a fall in their standard of living. All of this is likely to be reflected in a fall in support for the incumbent Government. But this sequence of events has not yet worked through.
So we are, for a few months at least, in a kind of limbo, a phoney war perhaps. Hence support for the Coalition has not been seriously eroded, and there has not been significant pressure on the alliance of Tories and Lib Dems. All is likely to change later this month: the precise nature of cuts will become known, job losses will be identified, and with that, any honeymoon period will come to a close.
If new jobs are not created, and the cuts continue, the situation will deteriorate, and then the new and improved two-headed donkey will be stress tested in earnest. It could be 1981 all over again, but this time round, there is little likelihood of a tinpot South American dictatorship riding to the rescue.
Christmas 2010, for many, could be a time for drowning sorrows, rather than celebration. And there will, more than ever, be a need for opposition to show some unity, and some leadership.
Sunday, 12 September 2010
The Crossing Of The Rails
The pressure on transport links in and around London is inexorable. It has been thus since the middle of the nineteenth Century: this was what drove the first underground railways, what is now called the “sub surface” part of the system. That pressure continued to build, and with it came “deep level” tube lines. More recently, the need for links around the centre has led to the development of what is now called the “Overground” network.
One feature of the ever rising demand has been the need to build new lines to relieve existing ones, or to serve new centres of growth. The Victoria Line of the late 60s was in large measure built to relieve the Piccadilly Line, which it shadows between Green Park and Finsbury Park. The first part of the Jubilee Line relieved the Bakerloo, taking over its Stanmore branch.
And the latter, I can confirm from grim experience, was sorely needed: even occasional visitors to the capital knew that, by the late 70s, you avoided the Bakerloo at busy times. The demand was then ramped up by new building developments: when the regeneration of London’s Docklands went almost overnight from low rise to a proliferation of skyscrapers and high apartment blocks, the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) was never going to cope.
And so it proved. The DLR went from one car to three car operation, but it has needed the extension of the Jubilee Line through Canary Wharf to provide a solution. That solution, with more development coming on stream, may soon reach capacity, and this is where Crossrail comes in.
Crossrail – an east to west tunnel across central London and Docklands – relieves a number of other lines and pressure points. Most importantly, it helps the Central Line, which experiences peak overcrowding so severe that it is impossible to board trains at stations close in to the centre. In Docklands, it will relieve the Jubilee Line at Canary Wharf, and also the interchange at Stratford.
Relieving the Central Line, which passes under the length of Oxford Street, is crucial for the continuing credibility of the West End as a shopping and leisure destination. Likewise, providing more capacity across Docklands allows that area to keep growing, and to keep attracting the kind of businesses that contribute significantly to economic growth.
Put simply, it isn’t just a building project. Nor is it something that can be delayed or cut back – not if we want our capital city to retain its power to pull in workers, shoppers and all those others who keep the economy moving. That is why Bozza is batting for Crossrail.
One feature of the ever rising demand has been the need to build new lines to relieve existing ones, or to serve new centres of growth. The Victoria Line of the late 60s was in large measure built to relieve the Piccadilly Line, which it shadows between Green Park and Finsbury Park. The first part of the Jubilee Line relieved the Bakerloo, taking over its Stanmore branch.
And the latter, I can confirm from grim experience, was sorely needed: even occasional visitors to the capital knew that, by the late 70s, you avoided the Bakerloo at busy times. The demand was then ramped up by new building developments: when the regeneration of London’s Docklands went almost overnight from low rise to a proliferation of skyscrapers and high apartment blocks, the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) was never going to cope.
And so it proved. The DLR went from one car to three car operation, but it has needed the extension of the Jubilee Line through Canary Wharf to provide a solution. That solution, with more development coming on stream, may soon reach capacity, and this is where Crossrail comes in.
Crossrail – an east to west tunnel across central London and Docklands – relieves a number of other lines and pressure points. Most importantly, it helps the Central Line, which experiences peak overcrowding so severe that it is impossible to board trains at stations close in to the centre. In Docklands, it will relieve the Jubilee Line at Canary Wharf, and also the interchange at Stratford.
Relieving the Central Line, which passes under the length of Oxford Street, is crucial for the continuing credibility of the West End as a shopping and leisure destination. Likewise, providing more capacity across Docklands allows that area to keep growing, and to keep attracting the kind of businesses that contribute significantly to economic growth.
Put simply, it isn’t just a building project. Nor is it something that can be delayed or cut back – not if we want our capital city to retain its power to pull in workers, shoppers and all those others who keep the economy moving. That is why Bozza is batting for Crossrail.
Rousing Finale
September, as always, has brought the Last Night of the Proms, and the occasion was – if predictable in its content – enjoyable music making. It was also excellent television, and for the BBC, whose own Symphony Orchestra was on view for the finale.
Added to the audience in the Albert Hall were tens of thousands at “Proms in the Park” events around the UK. It was the kind of crossover between the highbrow and the populist that the Beeb does very well, and, whisper it quietly, nowadays is virtually alone in so doing.
So those who would rather not have the BBC, at least in its present state, would not have been happy viewers last night. Events like the Proms season are best forgotten when arguing for selling off, breaking up, or otherwise hobbling what is the world’s greatest broadcasting organisation.
As for Culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, well, it just makes his job that bit more tricky. Because, coming towards him with the certainty of a ticking clock, is the licence fee settlement.
Added to the audience in the Albert Hall were tens of thousands at “Proms in the Park” events around the UK. It was the kind of crossover between the highbrow and the populist that the Beeb does very well, and, whisper it quietly, nowadays is virtually alone in so doing.
So those who would rather not have the BBC, at least in its present state, would not have been happy viewers last night. Events like the Proms season are best forgotten when arguing for selling off, breaking up, or otherwise hobbling what is the world’s greatest broadcasting organisation.
As for Culture secretary Jeremy Hunt, well, it just makes his job that bit more tricky. Because, coming towards him with the certainty of a ticking clock, is the licence fee settlement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
