- Note to The Guardian: There is a difference between things one writes in a News of the World column and what one does when shadow foreign secretary. One involves populist attempts to appeal to that kind of lowest common denominator that isn't interested or knowledgable about politics; the other involves convincing the general, swing-voter public that, from a position of knowledge, you share their attitude to international relations.
Oh... Shit... That should read "I HOPE there's a difference..." What ARE the Tories up to?
3 Comments:
I never thought I'd say this, but Hague's right. Chirac is only free to walk the streets because he's the president, and even by France's standards he's particularly corrupt and would have been tried by now.
Frankly I don't know why Blair didn't bring this up when Chirac started playing hard ball. The French hate him and he'll be gone in a few years, so there's not much to be gained from kissing his arse.
I, um, agree with Tom? Which means I agree with Hague. Wait a minute, that's ok.
Chirac's a French Conservative type thing. He won by default as the left managed to tear itself to bits and it was him or the bloke we really didn't want.
Has France even got a liberal-ish party, of any description or nature? From what I can tell, they're all a bunch of statists.
There's only one problem with this analysis: William Hague isn't trying to get elected in France. He's not campaigning against Jacques Chirac.
D'you think the President knows who he is?
Post a Comment