Thursday, July 06, 2006

Casino Royale

As a matter of interest, how many readers are comfortable with the idea of John Prescott being left in charge of the country when Tony Blair goes on his annual holiday in a couple of weeks?

Given his statements of the last 24-hours, Prescott may have been thinking of the words of Winston Churchill: “Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed.”


Anonymous said...

I wouldn't trust Prescott as far as I could throw the chubby, surly, oaf. If he had any decency he would have resigned weeks ago.

Anonymous said...

Could he do worse than Blair, well yes he probably could.
I think the sentence he is thinking about is from a Carryon film - or was it Frankie Howerd?
Infamy, Infamy, they've all got it in for me.
Whatever he gets he deserves imho.
And his Toniness does too.

Simon - I am sorry if this post reinforces some people's view of this site as a Tory propaganda machine, but actually I am a Labour voter.

Dane Valley Ted said...

Just a couple of my favourite qoutes.
On Prescott taking over,

Just buy a box of popcorn and a Coca-Cola and sit back and watch.
James Carville

His love life,

Politics have no relation to morals.

Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527)

And of course his job,

The man with the best job in the country is the Vice President. All he has to do is get up every morning and say, "How's the President?"
Will Rogers (1879-1935)


What is politics, after all, but the compulsion to preside over property and make other peoples' decisions for them?
Tom Robbins

James Maskell said...

While it'd be all too easy to make a cheap jibe at Prescott, I shall refrain. That said, Im suprized hes still in Government. Charles Clarke was forced out for nothing less than presiding over a shambles that he had inherited from his predecesor. Why should Prescott stay in office for much worse? I guess the real question is...what's John Prescott in Government for?

Mr Friday said...

My guess James is that he is one of Blair's few remaining links to "old Labour" and throwing him out would further dent his "popularity" with the party and wider electorate.

The sad thing is that Prescott has become a figure of fun nationally and no-one will take him seriously any more for anything he does/says.

Anonymous said...

I agree that John Prescott has generated more than enough doubt about his integrity and judgement and should resign as Deputy Prime Minister.

That said, it does bother me that the media are becoming too powerful in picking and choosing which national leaders to support and then to mount relentless campaigns against those they don't. They feed continuously negative stories that serve to undermine and weaken. It is quite distinct from investigative journalism.

And it's relevant to remember that another national "leader", Prince Charles, also had an affair outside his marriage, and yet rather than be forced out of "office", he is destined to be head of the anglican church!

Anonymous said...

Anonynmous 10.37 - The first head of the Anglican church was Henry 8th.
He effectively murdered his first few wives by trumping up charges against them and then realized if he was head of his own church he could just divorce them without the Pope agreeing.
It was all done to ensure a male heir to the throne but was that really a good enough reason?

So Charles had a precedent to follow, although he is of course not a blood relative of Henry Tudor.

And we don't believe he had Di topped - do we?

Anonymous said...

Probably a bit dangerous to stray into that particular area (Di's death), Anon 641. But sticking with modern times, how right was it for John Major to be awarded the Order of the Garter - a chivalry award - last year when he had cheated on his wife? Not very chivalrous behaviour.