Nov 08

What comes first the decision or the reasoning?

You hear something think it through logically and then answer? Not really most of us go to say yes or no straight away and our conscious brain tries to explain our often irrational decision.  It’s why Politics is about catchy phrases and not policy depth as the front men understand that say something catchy and people will look favourably whatever the argument. That’s why it’s hard to argue Liberty with its deeply nuanced arguments and difficult to explain points why we should allow freedoms to people when in the short term such things may seem risky.

If you’re Harriet Harman you go with whatever your leader says as she cheerfully admitted to David Miliband the immoral former Foreign Secretary after disowning him, Blair and Brown along with the Iraq war. Now we learn she’ll take what a couple of judges say and run with that.

This weekend Harman basically threw Phil Woolas out of front line politics. Apparently regardless of his appeal. Now Harman was in full possession of the facts months ago. Yet it is only after 2 unelected judges passed judgment that she did. A judgment that could be overturned as well  – they want the by election before voting  public start to realise the cuts are not that deep and the economy is steaming ahead I guess.

Woolas’ vile viewpoint of the world was published in his own election diaries where it was clear that it was not just the pig Brown who viewed the working people of Rochdale and Oldham as dreck but one of their own MPs. A person with at best a small ‘p’ prejudice who viewed people as classes and skin colours.

You might say well Harman did not want to prejudice the inquiry.  Yet she allowed him to remain in the Shadow cabinet – a resignation to clear his name is the usual course of action. Harman now says that his election campaign regardless of whether it breaches the law was wrong!

Once again a senior Labour figure is claiming to be ignorant of anything until an inquiry passes judgment. That until last week she saw no problem with what the toad Woolas did. The incompetence defence.

David Miliband comes out even worse. He used Woolas talents as a muckspreader and shit shoveler on his own campaign. He allowed a man whose actions and own diary had been widely reported to be his ‘fixer’ in the words of one paper. This leaves on wondering if David Miliband is thick? Probably not with his massive IQ and degrees to die for. Immoral? Almost certainly, does anyone have to spend 2 hours checking if they can be proved to have sanctioned torture? Most of us would know as it would have been a moral dilemma and we would have said no.

It’s all a bit rich for me the way Woolas is being disowned by Labour now because of a couple of judges. It shows that his crime is literally being convicted not just caught or obviously a vicious scum bag but to be proven legally. That he would be one of the founding fathers of the low life rhetoric obsessed media manipulating New Labour project shows they have no sense of loyalty bar to what will get them elected.

Labour for their high moral tone clearly have no morality.

They should stop claiming it.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , ,


Leave a Reply

i3Theme sponsored by Top 10 Web Hosting, Hosting in Colombia and Web Hosting Reviews