Naturally his [Alan Duncan's] criticisms, as reported at least, don't actually contain any actual arguments about what the likely effects of prison policy will be, but are primarily about ingratiating himself with the people who despise the voters who actually vote for him. This also applies to his numerous appearances on panel shows.
In what previous era have politicians had so many opportunities to ingratiate themselves with the public and is this really a good idea? Well, in Alan Duncan's case, it certainly wasn't, be cause he crowed arrogantly about his expenses on Have I Got News For You and then got severely toasted on the next show.
But really, overall, is it such a good thing for us that politicians have the ability to present a matey, witty, pleasant persona to us? For every Alan Duncan who stuffs both his beautifully-polished brogues into his arrogant face, there are five other cunts who manage to persuade us that they might actually be alright.
And just think about that: where would we be if we didn't at all times bear in mind that our politicians are all mendacious, thieving, arrogant cunts?
1 comment:
We need a better system, one that excludes tossers like Duncan and mental patients like brown.
maybe the selection process should include a psychiatric evaluation, a financial audit and a 9mm bullet through the brain.we need people who dont want authority over others and want rid of the burden asap.
Draconian punishments should also exist for law makers who cant even obey their own laws.
Post a Comment