I am now back, briefly, after charging about the Baltic over the past week, with only intermittant access to Blogger- why do so many public access connections seem to think Blogger is a hot porn site? Wierd huh?
The issue of the moment is, apparently not the distinct possiblity of another catastrophic disaster by George W Bush, but rather the boyish antics of Cameron of the Remove.
Of course it is no big deal if he smoked the odd spliff at Eton- or anywhere else. However, given that this biography was written from a largely friendly perspective, why do I feel that there is a lot more to this non-story?
At least 80% of us go "so Cameron smoked a spliff or few, so what?" However the issue may not be what he did at school, but what he may have done more recently.
Media and lobbying types have been known to set up a few lines of Colombian marching powder.
Did Mr. Cameron use something stronger than Cannabis, and a lot more recently?
Barack Obama admitted "a bit of blow"- is that what this is all about?
To be honest, I smoked a few spliffs when younger- and statistics show that actually many, if not most of us, have done so.
However, I have never done Charlie- I have seen too many coked up psychos on dealing floors in the City to want to go there. The effects are Not Good. Incidentally one persistent after effect is a bad temper- not an ideal characteristic for a person in charge of a nuclear arsenal: American or British.
So now we can watch the code: when the journalists ask to Cameron to "come clean about his drug use" they do not mean whether he inhaled at Eton or at Oxford: we already know that he did.
No, the question is all about the drug of choice for media lobbyists.
Someone knows for sure whether Cameron and/or his associates did this. While the old media have never its own hypocrisy get in the way of a good story, perhaps we should be more worried about whether it is true and that we don't find out soon.
Were Cameron to get into office with such a juicy skeleton then someone will use it against him. After all, when John Major was PM, his adultery was known to some people- and maybe they used it- it might, for example, explain the slow exit of many of his scandal tainted ministers. It might explain worse things.
So actually Mr. Cameron, on this issue you are not entitled to privacy: if you were on the hard stuff, that is more than a "youthful indiscretion", and we are entitled to know and to judge accordingly.