On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 12:28:10 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Julian Fowler wrote:

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 22:49:21 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

snip/

In eithercase he shouldresign. He won;t tho. Not untol he gets
stilletooed in the back by the party faithful who realise he is now a
libality, not an asset.


My concern is that Mr Blair is increasingly becoming a liability (sp)
to the *country*, in the sense that his mistakes over Iraq open up the
appalling possibility of a Conservative government with Michael Howard
at the helm.


He has ALWAYS been a liability to the country.

I'm certainly not going to indulge in IMM style Tony-is-always-right
dogma; however, when you look at the alternatives ... Major? Dull and
inept. Haig? Witty but indept. IDS? Just ... indept. Howard?
He'd probably have invaded Poland by now ...

Like him or or not, Blair is the most *successful* PM for generations.
There are many, many things that I dislike about the current
government ... but none of them would make me even consider for a
moment the possibility of having a different party in power.

What is increasing is teh public realization of that.

Do you really think that the public at large have the faintest
comprehension of the issues involved here? Even if they do, do you
think that they actually *care* about dossiers, Kelly, Hutton, WMDs,
etc.? The key to the success of any government is (in Bill Clinton's
words): "its the economy, stupid".

The 'demon eyes' poster is now looking almost precognitive in its
accuracy...

RAOTFL ....

--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk