Hello? Polly?
There's not much to comment on in this piece really, not because it's closely-argued and well backed-up with apposite and accurate facts - come on - but because reading an article by Polly Toynbee on John Redwood is really rather pointless. You know what she is going to say, and it's not worth wasting my time eviscerating it - other than briefly to point out that John Redwood is about as much a 'neo-conservative' as Ronald Reagan or Margaret Thatcher. The current trend for putting "neo-" as a prefix to words as a scary "boo-word" is puerile in the extreme, but there we are. There is one enlightening bit though.
"I believe in freedom for everyone. I'm a freedom lover," Redwood said. Whose freedom, I asked. But his steamroller style of speaking is like interviewing a talking hologram: he brooks few interruptions.
Hello? Polly? Everyone's freedom! He said it, right there! Just before you interrupted him! Weren't you listening? And what is he? A steamroller or a hologram? Or perhaps a hologrammatic steamroller? You really get paid for this?
Labels: Toynbee
3 Comments:
Wow, the truth still cuts deep, ay?
Why don't you just give up your delusional stance and accept the way of rationality and sanity? Why slate Polly for telling the truth? Are you really that bitter just because she called your favourite wet dream a nasty name?
Ahhhhhh, poor little lizard.
"Why slate Polly for telling the truth? "
In order to slate Polly for telling the truth, first of all she would have to do so.
If you read the article in question, you'll find that nowhere in it is any evidence for the suggestion that John Redwood is a 'neo-conservative'. It's a ridiculous thing to say and suggests that Toynbee doesn't understand what the term means and is using it instead as a 'boo word' to mean 'nasty person.
If I'm looking for the path of reason and sanity then I'll look for guidance from the rational and sane. Polly Toynbee isn't the best place to start.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home