[political bloggers] failing to connect the dots

Political bloggers may be driving themselves to exhaustion but are they too narrowly channeled? Just been round to various blogs and one thing is painfully obvious – political blogs are islands and political bloggers run in well worn grooves. It’s exasperating to see bloggers persisting in pushing the same narrow focus, no matter how correct it is and flatly refusing to either research outside the style of journals they use as their primary sources or failing to take the macro-view into account. For example, one blogger keeps asking: “Why do we need a stepping stone to an English Parliament?” Well clearly because there isn’t going to be an English Parliament whilst Brown is there and Brown needs breathing space. How would I know this? Look at Part 3 of the micro-control article and the links and a possible answer is there. At least it's worth considering, which I don't see major bloggers doing. And why don't we see this sort of thing - three questions for CP? Why are the big boys not covering it? The regions are being beefed up - this is not even in dispute and CP is moving into positions of influence within local areas. The focus is on RDAs - they flew the regional assembly kite and now it’s occurring by the back door, just as the Treaty is. Now why would the DTI have altered its website and included regionalization? Why would CP be training people hell for leather in local areas such as the South West to assume command “beyond authority” as they put it? They are doing that – follow the relevant links. Look – here is a video of Diversity Training at Ian Parker’s site plus his comment: Diversity training has had to be forced on companies because there are no actual benefits to be derived from it. Were this not the case organisations would already have recognised the competitive benefits and implemented their own diversity programs, without the need for government legislation. Why are the major bloggers not picking up on these things? Where are they? Tied up in Polly Toynbee and David Milliband. Even Mr. Eugenides touches on the “what” all right and well done but does not get into the “why” or “what is going to happen as a consequence?” "Looking at the content, the result is that the institutional proposals of the constitutional treaty … are found complete in the Lisbon Treaty, only in a different order and inserted in former treaties," Mr Giscard d'Estaing said. The former chairman of the European Convention - the body of over a hundred politicians that drafted the 2004 EU constitution – suggests the new more complicated layout was only to avoid putting the treaty to a referendum. Ignoring the body of evidence out there from the more unorthodox sources, Iain Dale refers to training for something not going to happen: This sort of training course teaches them debating skills, media skills and how to campaign. It may sound dull to those not involved in the political process, but this sort of thing is vital for young people from all parties if they are to acquire the skillset to become our politicians of the future. There are going to be no “conservative leaders” because it goes straight from Britain to the EU Treaty regions. We must begin to look more broadly at the whole frame, such as Dizzy did: What's important to point out here is this is not about saying you think Gordon Brown and the Labour Government are secretly trying to enslave us all in an Orwellian nightmare with the ultimate aim of destroying democracy. No, this is about asking whether the proposal passes the Stalin Test. Would someone like Stalin have found a system like this useful? So, given that Dizzy is not talking through his hat, then what are the possible consequences of this tightening of restrictions even on people’s movement? A possible answer is via Sackerson, where Tony Allison says, about the peak oil consequences: For example, we could see a re-birth in local farming and manufacturing, as food and industrial products become exceedingly expensive to transport. Of course we’re going to – the population is being increasingly made to remain local. Still with Sackerson, Robert McHugh says of the squeeze on the bourgeoisie: The Middle Class is getting annihilated from this silent event. Incomes are not keeping up. This was done because this administration “equates stock market success with economic success and has directed their efforts to drive up equities at literally any cost,” to quote one of our subscribers. Can anyone see where this thing is going? Yep, the middle class is about to go bust and those holding gold are sitting pretty: Charles Merrill, a relation of the Merrill Lynch founder, has become a gold squirrel. And other big boys who are in the know? … up to 25% of M&A deals had some dodgy looking share deals associated with them in the past few years ... Joining the dots – that’s what is necessary here. Think tanks with data from a variety of sources coming in and bloggers combining to sift through it all and get the whole picture. By the way, was informed today that one of my irregular sources was visited by CP today for 3 hours 59 mins 46 secs and he asked: Now, do these people waste tax-payers money? :)