Skip to main content

Age before Beauty

I must admit to have been taken aback by the ageism of so many people who have attacked Ming Campbell. Sometimes they overtly say "He is too old", sometimes they are more coded: "it is an image thing". Personally I can only think that it is a symptom of the irrational obsession with youth that everyone seems to deride in others and ignore in themselves. In the US, Ronald Reagan was 70 when he became President for the first time. John McCain- a leading candidate for the 2008 election would be 72 on taking office for the first time. In the UK, Winston Churchill took office for the first time aged 66 and only finally stepped down in 1955 aged 81.

Menzies Campbell is 64. He has been an Olympic Sprinter and Captain of the British Athletics team, He has two university degrees: MA and LLB. He has twice been decorated by HM The Queen- a CBE in 1987 and a Knighthood in 2003. He has been a QC- the most senior level of Legal Advocate since 1982. He has served in the House of Commons with distinction for nearly 20 years. This is a man with the intelligence and knowledge to make a great Prime Minister.

The only "achievement" of David Cameron- apart from his unlikely elevation- has been to be rated the 92th sexiest man by the readers of New Woman . Image obsessed crazies might argue that this is more important in today's politics- my only advice to such shallow immaturities is to grow up and get a real life.

Comments

Laban said…
Without being indelicate, I think the issue may be whether, at his age, he can match the rst of the Front banch in the drinking and libido stakes.

(and well done to Mark Oaten for turning up to vote against the Religious Hatred Bill)
9:31 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...
Post a Comment
Read more

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...
20 comments
Read more

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...
14 comments
Read more