The top and bottom of the special relationship
If you read a more depressing paragraph than this today please let me know:
“Barack Obama’s election makes you realise we may have been operating with one hand tied behind our back for the past few years . Everything is now energised.” That somewhat bittersweet verdict by one Downing Street staffer yesterday underlies the unbridled relief in Labour circles that Obama has indeed made history. In the words of one former Foreign Office minister, British Labour foreign policy can breathe once again.
That’s a crawling, skulking admission on so many levels. Look at the imagery of extreme sexuality. Bondage. Subservience. Asphyxiation.
Who tied that one hand behind our back? I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t done against our will. I think you’ll find that Blair and Brown were/are the willing submissive participants in a fully consensual sado-masochistic relationship. Tony thought the Iraq war would spice up his ’special’ relationship with George. When Tony got bored Gordon joined in.
Clearly, we are now to believe that the safeword is ‘Obama’. Can we take the ball-gag out and the gimp mask off now, please?
Posted on November 6th, 2008 at 10:55 am
| See also • Obama: facing certain realities • Flatus Quo • Idiots, useful and otherwise |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
• Filed under New Labour, US Politics |
• |
The quote suggests that we MUST ALWAYS support the US line - even under Obama - the only difference being that Obama may listen to our views and modify his actions.
BUT the bottom line is we will support them regardless.
AND they think this is worth a sigh of relief.
It’s like being raped. Bush just buggared us while Obama may ask for our views on anal sex and then decide whether to go ahead or not. We, of course, support their right to rape us.
Good take on this, Justin.
Spot on! The end of Bush may mean the end of the “Bush doctrine” of completely ignoring international law, which may mean that the UK Government no longer has to face tricky questions about how it squares “being joined at the hip with the US” with international law. Or it may not. But no question of not being joined at the hip.
Oooooh, luv that special relationship. Y’know, the one where the POTUS tells us what to do and we do it?
How about we go for something approaching parity this time round? I mean, how many US bases are there in the UK - 8? 10? What say we send an MOD team off to the States to scout out some real estate suitable for a British military base on US territory, mebbe even a few, just to even things up. I`m sure the Pentagon would be okay with that, seeing as how the Relationship is a partnership, an all!
An excellent idea. Can we extraordinarily render George Lamb and water board him there?
And here was me thinking that one of my previous comments describing the UK as the USA’s gimp might have been a touch hyperbolic…