The most shocking thing about Gordon Brown’s little gaffe yesterday wasn’t what it revealed about him as a human being – we’ve always known what a nasty creep he really is. No, what was shocking was the realization that he actually believes that what he’s doing is morally right!
Here was I thinking that everything he did was for political gain. I assumed he had opened the floodgates to immigrants to ensure a 1000 year Labour Reich. Ditto, the massive, pointless and economically ruinous expansion of public sector employment.
Until yesterday, I had assumed that Brown was involved in the greatest act of gerrymandering this country had ever witnessed, fueled, inevitably, by our taxes, and, given the eye-watering levels of borrowing even prior to the banking crisis, by the taxes to be extracted from our children for decades to come.
There was an audacious brutality and brazenness about the whole scheme that one couldn’t help but admire. The Big Lie, I’d always presumed, was that this was being done for the good of the country and its people, when in fact it was purely in order for Britain to be transformed into a one-party state. (Given the almost total absence of policy differences between the main parties, he seemed to have pretty much succeeded.) Like so many politicians before him, he was doing things he knew to be wrong, in order to hold on to power.
But then came Rochdale, and the use of the word “bigot”.
After I’d wiped away the tears of laughter (burying his head in his hand on the Jeremy Vine Show was pure Ceausescu, and quite the most heartening shot of the campaign so far) it dawned on me that I might have been wrong all these years.
Could it be that this crumpled wreck of a deeply inadequate human being actually believes that letting in hundreds and hundreds of thousands of immigrants is the moral thing to do and that anyone questioning such a deranged policy might as well don a white hood and start burning crosses on non-British neighbours’ lawns?
And that led to another thought: could it be that this tortured, friendless, incompetent wretch actually – sincerely – believes that draining vast sums of money from the productive sector of the economy and pouring it into the non-productive sector is the moral course of action?
When Gordy No-mates purloined the Prime Ministership of this country, his habit of answering questions about the wisdom of various policies by citing the number of extra public sector employees we were paying for as proof of his genius – without any reference to the results achieved by this unprecedented largesse with our taxes – did make him sound a trifle detached from reality.
He managed to give the impression that fears concerning the rise of superbug deaths in our hospitals could be allayed by citing employment statistics or rising pay levels amongst nursing staff: “Under Labour seven million more brain-dead NHS administrators have been appointed and nurses’ pay has increased tenfold,” he would thunder.
Dumbing down in schools? How could that be when either class sizes were being reduced, or the number of teaching assistants was increasing, or teacher’s pay was soaring? Rising crime levels were refuted by reference to increasing police numbers. When the numbers were dodgy, he’d cite the creation of yet another massively expensive quango to demonstrate that a problem had magically been solved.
I had always assumed that this was all a ploy to cover up the fact that, in practice, Labour’s policies have invariably proved disastrous. But the mad triumph in his voice whenever he started reeling off statistics that should have been a matter of shame and alarm should have revealed the truth to me: Gordon Brown actually believes that spending more public money on a problem is in itself the right thing to do. The effect of that spending doesn’t really matter: it is the act of spending it that counts.
He is a complete and utter solipsist.
“There is a problem. I have spent other people’s money to address that problem. Spending money in the public sector is in itself a good thing. It makes me feel morally good about myself. Problem solved.”
And now, his insulting description of a Rochdale OAP reveals that allowing a seemingly limitless number of immigrants into this country is a moral good in its own right.
To be honest, if he’d said “That old bag really caught me out on immigration – how the hell am I supposed to explain away such a monumental cock-up” I’d have been far less appalled than by his use of the word “bigot”. He’s even madder than one had suspected.
To think, we let a man this barking run our country.
No comments:
Post a Comment