Phil Woolas doesn’t do political populism
Just look at this awful, awful bastard talking about the Gurkhas. Someone should tell him that it’s hard to claim the high ground when you’re up to your waist in shit…
Immigration minister Phil Woolas told MPs decisions on who was allowed to settle in the UK must be guided by the law, not merely “political populism”.
Because New Labour never, ever used political populism over the issue of immigration did it? Never suggested a ‘white list‘. Never talked about asylum seekers ‘swamping‘ Britain. John Reid, when he replaced Charles Clarke as Home Secretary, never appeared on the front of the Daily Mirror with his sleeves rolled up and his fists clenched vowing ‘I’ll f****** well work 18 hours a day to sort this out’ before promptly ‘f******’ off on holiday. Woolas never let himself be photographed looking like a nightclub bouncer while barking ‘you can’t come in‘, did he? Woolas has never made political populist points linking immigration to unemployment. Woolas has never appended the word ‘industry’ to the word ‘immigration’ in an attempt to smear those with the brass neck to wish New Labour would carry out its immigration policies with a modicum of humanity. Woolas never called previous Conservative governments ’soft’ on immigration for admitting the Ugandan Asians when they were expelled by Idi Amin.
No, New Labour would never sink to such revolting ‘political populism’ on an issue as sensitive and complex as immigration.
Update 6/5: Let’s hope he gets his smile right at the photo op:
Gordon Brown is to meet Joanna Lumley later to discuss her on-going campaign for Gurkhas’ settlement rights.
That wouldn’t be a little ‘political populism’, would it?
Posted on May 5th, 2009 at 6:06pm under New Labour
| Related posts... • The ’situation’ with Eastern Africa • Phil Woolas: satirical singularity • Doing the BNP’s job |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 16 Comments |
I think that I do not like this man.
I think that I agree.
Wow, that’s quite remarkable – I thought I already had boundless for loathing for Woolas and now I discover he’s even worse than I imagined.
Phil is an idiot, he seems to be a Frankenstein of all the worst New Labour immigration bogey men put together into one revolting whole.
Sadly immigrants remain a foorball to be kicked around by the biggest bastard, and little Phil is trying to out bastard the BNP with this nonsense.
Labour have some hereditary fears; tax, crime and immigration. I wish they would grow a backbone.
My partner has to quickly change the channel whenever Woolas comes on, because I lose all self control and find myself just shouting garbled obscenities.
If anything demonstrates the moral bankruptcy at the heart of Labour after 12 years in power it is this vile little man.
(I edited all of the swearing out of this comment, as I am at work…)
I don’t imagine that it’s coincidence that New Labour is throwing up vile shits like Woolas as it rapidly approaches it’s tawdry demise. He makes the likes of David Blunkett and Charles Clarke look like pantomime dames.
Surely some journalists have looked into the political background of Woolas? Surely someone has done some digging about how he came to propose someone as campaign manager to Peter Hain who ended Hain’s political career? Just saying!
Just watched the 10.00 News on BBC in the light of this development:
The government’s policy towards the Gurkhas descended into a potentially hugely expensive shambles yesterday after the actor Joanna Lumley extracted fresh concessions in an extraordinary live television confrontation with the home office minister Phil Woolas.
The TV footage is priceless for the scolded-little-boy demeanour of Woolas as Lumley makes sure he’ll do the right thing for the Gurkhas in future.
Phil is one of the most hard working, charming politicians I have met. When the Gurkhas decided to fight for us uk citizenship was not a carrot offered to them. People should see the bigger picture that this country does not have a bottomless pit of money to look after people. Lumley came across as a big bully with a plum in her gob.
Phil is one of the most hard working, charming politicians I have met.
If that’s the case he hides those attributes from the public exceedingly well.
Some people dont know what they are talking about. How can anybody judge anyone when they have not met them. I have met Phil many times and he is a very understanding, hard working family man.
How can anybody judge anyone when they have not met them. … he is a very understanding, hard working family man
By their actions, perhaps? It would make a little more sense than judging them by how they present themselves, how much they do (as opposed to how well they do) or whether their reproductive system is in good order.
Isn’t “political populism” AKA “listening to the electorate”? Don’t they have a duty to do whatever the fuck we tell them we want them to do?
Dear Andy and Cathy, this wouldn’t be a concerted attempt at a little Woolas-boosting, would it? Strange that you both share the same reasonably unusual surname (I can see your email addresses) and same Internet service provider (I can see your IP addresses). Any interest to declare?
“hard working family man”… sounds like a phrase you’d hear in those news interviews with the neighbours of serial killers, doesn’t it?
“I just can’t believe it! He seemed like such a charming, hard working family man”, claimed a neighbour of the suspect, “though I guess it does explain his collection of little shoes…”
[...] to further their agenda. The chilling thought is that Purnell’s flounce moves the terrifying Phil Woolas closer to a big [...]