Wednesday, June 25, 2008

(Satire)

Thom C drops us an email to alert us to Guido Fawkes' blog suddenly embedding music videos (don't worry, we're not going to retaliate by suddenly throwing adverts for Total Sport Film Politics all over the place.

Guido is championing Billy Ruffian, who have written a song in support of David Davis and his 42 day stunt. Sort-of.

Let's not quibble that they seem to have confused John Stuart Mill with Hayley Mills, and instead ponder why the song - sung from Davis' point of view:

Canada can detain for just one day,
And it's two days for Germany and the USA,
Russia has five, Italy has four,
So why do we require 38 more?"

"There's no argument for it, mine's the argument against,
I want the voters to come down off the fence,
I've gambled my job and my political future,
Mr. Brown debate with me on any day that suits you."

Trouble is, of course, that Davis has happily supported - and, indeed, continues to support - 28 days, which is equally random and - a quick tap of the calculator suggests - 24 more than Italy.

The other question, of course, is the awkward question of what effect this has on the people of Haltemprice and Howden. With Davis only campaigning on one issue, either they're going to have to vote for a man with no manifesto commitment to indicate how he might represent their wishes in Parliament on other questions of the day, or else will have to withdraw from anything other than votes on 42 Days. Either way, the constituency is being denied proper representation - is effectively disenfranchising a large swathe of the North-East really the act of a defender of individual liberty?

The comment on Guido's blog includes an entry from Billy Ruffian:
Just to clarify, I wouldn't exactly say we're Davis supporters - we're made up of two wussy liberals and an anarchist.

They steal a Tony Hancock gag:
What about Magna Carta? Did she die in vain?

That's from the Half Hour, Twelve Angry Men, where Hancock exploits the legal system in order to boost his own personal finances by extending the jury deliberations. We'd like to think using the appeal from a man who was interested in justice, but only up until it started to cost him, was intentional. But we're guessing not.


No comments:

Post a Comment

As a general rule, posts will only be deleted if they reek of spam.

Post a Comment