The title says it all, really; that’s more or less the best thing that can be said about Jared O’Mara, Labour MP for Sheffield Hallam. Not a great accolade, is it? It’s a bit like when Crazy Frog kept Coldplay from the No.1 spot in 2005 – ‘Yeah, it’s the biggest load of crap ever. But at least it’s not Coldplay.’ Mr O’Mara, who resembles Ed Sheeran in the guise of an apprentice butcher, has been forced to quit the Women and Equalities Committee over comments that emerged via the site of veteran Alt Right agent-provocateur Guido Fawkes. These comments were made thirteen years ago, when O’Mara was 23.
According to the dramatic revelations, the contentious comments were made on a music website called Drowned in Sound way back in 2004. The young O’Mara apparently said Jamie Cullum should be ‘sodomised with his own piano’ and forgotten ‘Pop Idol’ winner Michelle McManus only won ‘because she was fat’. Pretty puerile stuff that anyone familiar with certain online discourse will recognise, though the comment about the pseudo-Jazz dullard wouldn’t have been that out-of-place in a Charlie Brooker column from the same era, to be honest; and probably not a million miles from the kind of things I would’ve said about a few early 90s pop stars when I was the same age myself. Even his desire for an orgy with Girls Aloud can, I suppose, be compared to similarly licentious thoughts the likes of Kylie, Betty Boo and Cathy Dennis provoked in me at 23.
There’s a big difference between me in 1991 and Jared O’Mara in 2004, however, and that’s the fact my 23-year-old spleen-venting was done in private, bereft of a platform that lives forever out there in cyberspace. Also, I’m not seeking a career in public office, something that surely would necessitate a comprehensive spring-clean of past online comments that contradict contemporary mores. One would imagine that would have been a top priority of O’Mara’s campaign team, though there’s the strong possibility he’d completely forgotten even saying what he said thirteen years ago. After all, how many times have we each been presented with photographic evidence of our participation in a dim ‘n’ distant event and have struggled to recall even being there? But, again, none of us are running for public office, a post in which the past has a habit of coming back to haunt you.
Perhaps it’s especially damaging for a figure such as Jared O’Mara in that he, like many of his party colleagues, is surfing on a social justice wave that embraces ‘diversity’; as if to emphasise this, he was elected in June courtesy of a large student vote that ousted the aforementioned Mr Clegg, a man viewed as a traitor by adolescent academics for failing to keep promises made in their favour. Therefore, when his juvenile grumblings about entertainers with no relevance to 2017 were suddenly leaked to the media, it looked worse for him than it would for an opponent on the blue benches; people expect unpleasant skeletons to be excavated from the Tory closet, but Labour politicians have a habit of selling themselves as a spotless brand of PC MP, particularly under Jezza. I guess that makes it all the funnier when one of them is exposed as less than perfect, especially when they’re a member of a Commons committee designed to eradicate the kind of opinions O’Mara expressed.
Whilst O’Mara should be cut a little slack for making gormless comments on the kind of forum that is usually abundant in them – and for making them quite a long time ago (which 23 is when you’re 36) – his cause hasn’t been helped by a further Fawkes revelation that the MP used such antiquated terms as ‘poofters’ and ‘fudge-packers’ on another site a couple of years before his Drowned in Sound outburst. None of this plays well in O’Mara’s current role; having to answer to a collective known as LGBT Labour, whose motto may well be ‘We are not amused’, means O’Mara’s neglect re erasing his previous online existence has led to the classic humbling apology.
The predictable backlash had included a ticking-off from the LGBT Labour lot (referencing O’Mara’s comments by the snappy label of ‘historical homophobia’) as well as accusations from a constituent that her MP had directed ‘abusive and sexist language’ towards her; O’Mara even has the fun-packed prospect of a meeting with Stella Creasy and her Phil Oakey-gone-wrong haircut to look forward to. The Labour leadership took a leaf out of the Tony Blackburn book of after-the-event insults by calling O’Mara’s comments ‘horrendous’ and ‘vile’, though hasn’t suspended O’Mara from the Parliamentary Party in the wake of his apology; it’s not as if he made disparaging comments about Jews, anyway; and as we know, Labour takes anti-Semitism seriously.
In the wake of the fuss, O’Mara addressed a meeting of his colleagues and bent over backwards for forgiveness, echoing his sentiments in the statement he issued on Twitter. In turn, Labour has done its best to sweep the kerfuffle under the carpet in record time, even going so far as to serve up O’Mara’s maiden speech as proof of what a changed man he is. The only real problem with doing so is that O’Mara hasn’t actually made that maiden speech yet; give him time, though.
It’s less than a week since another Labour MP, Clive Lewis, had to apologise for a video featuring his ‘offensive and unacceptable’ language at a fringe event during the Labour Party Conference; his ‘Get down on your knees, bitch’ moment was again brought to us by Mr Fawkes (is there a pattern emerging here?) and received greater condemnation from his peers than Jared O’Mara has so far managed – even a Tweet from the Grande Dame of PC Labour, Harriet Harperson. None of these dumb and dumber comments would really inspire much more than a shoulder-shrugging ‘what a dickhead’ observation from most of us; but preserving the illusion of Labour MPs as residents of a moral plateau that Tories are barred from is essential to the image the party believes will win them power next time round. Perish the thought there might be a few Holier-than-Thou hypocrites in the ranks.
© The Editor
7 thoughts on “AT LEAST HE’S NOT NICK CLEGG”
As was evident at the point of his election, Jared O’Mara is not the sharpest knife in the drawer of Sheffield cutlery, certainly not the intellectual equal of the right honourable member he displaced, despite Mr Clegg’s other manifold faults, sins and wickednesses. But none of that mattered on that day in that place, he became a very fortunate beneficiary of matters outside his sphere.
We have all taken our own growing-up journeys, during which we probably all did and said things which we now regret and would wish forgotten: O’Mara’s misfortune is that some of his historic (and histrionic) outpourings were recorded and retrievable, hence his current time on the party’s naughty step. His alleged more recent choice of phrase describing as lady suggests that his own growing-up journey into his new and exalted position is still far from complete.
He’s a brain-dead thug basically, but is also a passenger on ‘The Corbyn Line’ so he will serve his time in temporary purgatory, then return to the obedient fold to earn his corn by nodding through whatever is expected of him. High office does not beckon and never will, but his sinecure is safe for now, he won’t be on the dole queue and Universal Credit for a while yet.
There is a comfort when some Labour MPs occasionally prove that they are indeed human, shades of Prescott’s punch, just as there is when Tory MPs speak as they see it without first referring to the party manual, as Rory Stewart did the other day when recommending extra-judicial killing for ex-pat ISIS fighters. In an ideal world, all MPs would say it as they see it, then we would know the true character of those we are electing. On that scale, O’Mara has done his electors a favour, although not his party’s polished perception profile.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a pattern which emerges here, and it is something which I will call (a) sophistry and (b) projection. Sophistry has a long and complicated history, but in the modern context it is to mislead by half truth, to mislead by omission, to manipulate. I recently watched a brilliant debate/analysis of The Lord of the Rings on Youtube in which it is pointed out, in my view rightly, that not simply characters like Grima Wormtongue arw Sophists, but so is the ring itself. The ring influences language and thought by seductive deception over time; this is why you can use it for good at first but over time it corrupts utterly.
Jeremy Corbyn is the embodiment of sophistry; he adopts the persona of a kindly old grandpa, concerned about Jill from Coventry. But where does this lead? it leads to Russia or Venezuela, with elephants starving in the zoo and people eating their pets.
The second aspect of projection is also fascinating. This can be summed up as follows: The Left projects what it represents. To give a practical example, we have the so called ANTIFA movement, in which black clad thugs physically attack “Nazis”. Their definition of Nazi is interesting; it has nothing to do with National Socialism, or German National Socialism (there is a clue in the title by the way), but anyone who disagrees with them. It is a curious irony that this group identifies as an anti establishment, anti Wall Street group, but is paid for by George Soros, the hedge fund manager from hell. In short, who is the fascist? Who is the tool of capitalism?
My point is that what they rail against they embody. Harvey Weinstein joined a march against the alleged (nonsense) “rape” culture on campus in the weeks before he was revealed as a serial sexual predator. The Left always does this; it behaves in vicious, violent, sexist ways, and denounces violence and sexism; in doing so in some weird way it transfers its violence onto its victims.
Correction: “The Left always does this; it behaves in vicious, violent, sexist ways, and denounces violence and sexism; in doing so in some weird way it transfers its violence onto its victims.” should read “Some people who call themselves leftwing politcally, like those who would describe themselves as of the right, do this, they behave…”
The loonies supporting Trump are a good example.
Also: “Jeremy Corbyn is the embodiment of sophistry; he adopts the persona of a kindly old grandpa, concerned about Jill from Coventry. But where does this lead? ” I dunno…. ask Ian Duncan Smith about Universal Credit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I politely disagree. This is what the Left does, has always done and will always do. I support Trump, and I will continue to do so. And on totally rational lines. Obama doubled or even triples the US National debt in 8 years. in 8 years he caused the US government to borrow more than all the other US Presidents to borrow in 300 years. He delivered no growth. He promoted and lived off racial division, the exact opposite of the USA’s concept. He was one of, if not the most, vicious authoritarians in US history; he locked up more journalists since anyone since Lincoln, and Lincoln was not a nice man. He reduced US foreign policy to a joke, an empty impotent disaster, and yet whilst dropping drone strikes on God knows where he goth the Nobel Peace Prize. Why did he get it? because he was black, and cool. Trump is not black, and not cool, but the US economy is starting to move again, and he is not Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton and her husband are the two most venal, corrupt, evil politicians the world has ever known. Do some research on the Clinton Foundation and ask who paid and why. I have some figure somewhere and it goes like this; of the say 600 meetings Hillary Clinton had with representatives of foreign governments as Secretary of State, 450 were governments which paid into the Clinton Foundation and its offshoots. Ask the people of Haiti what the Clintons did for them, when all the donations disappeared. Goldman Sachs paid millions into her campaign. Why? People as venal as that don’t pay for nothing. It’s called “pay for play” and it’s what the Clintons do. At one point they even had to return items they looted for from the Whitehouse.
Do some research on Uranium One, and ask who was paying and for what. The woman is a corrupt, spirit cooking, murderous bitch, and I thank God every day Trump won. Hillary Clinton would have meant the end of America.
And, by the way, Google “Seth Rich”.
Gildas: I hate Obama and the Clintons as viscerally as do you. The difference being I wouldxnot class them of “the left”…. those are just the clothes of the slightest tinge of shading they wear to differentiate themselves from “the right”.
Obama stoking racial division is kind of backward facing. He rode to power on the best will of the world to make America a better country after GWB era of ineptitude. He caved to the bankers, he caved to Wall Street and he weaponised the urban police forces of America (witness the co-ordinated break up of Occupy” events), which then turned on black people with a vengeance, both in physical violence and as a revenue stream for fictitious drugs busts and heinous asset forfeitures.
I think in many areas we might agree, but our paths to that agreement come by different routes
LikeLiked by 1 person
You guys are both right, albeit from your different directions.
Clinton and Obama are certainly not ‘Left’, the closest the Americans ever came to ‘Left’ was Bernie Sanders, but the chances are that his personal sophistry-count at least matches Corbyn’s.
I’m not a Trump supporter but I do welcome his election – the shock of having Trump as president is certainly forcing the ‘establishment’ to revisit its operating principles. Trump alone will not manage to ‘drain the swamp’ but he may be seen as the start of a process of injecting some greater honesty, or at least directness, across mainstream politics Stateside. It’s high-risk, but the overall risk of continuing in the old way was probably greater.
We shall probably not live long enough to evaluate the full outcome of the Trump Era as it will be decades in the telling, but if it has the eventual result of refreshing politics, both over there and over here, then we may not again have to suffer the Clintons, Obamas, Blairs and Camerons, all play-acting for self-interest at the expense of their electorates. And for that alone we should be truly thankful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In a sense I agree the Clintons are not The left, and in a sense I do. The Clintons are value absent sociopathic murdering thieves. They have no morals, no principles and no conscience. Bill Clinton fucked an internin the Oval Office with a cigar, and his wife defended a child rapist with which as a lawyer I can understand, but then laughed about it. She bullied and intimidated other victims of Bubba Bill’s sexual predation into silence. The pair of them are morally bankrupt scum.. She was one of the laziest and least effective Senators of all time. She actively lobbied for war with Russia, but took kick backs for the sale of 20% of America’s uranium from Putin to pay for Chelsea’s wedding. Clinton and Obama’s foreign policy with Iran, Saudi and North Korea has been little short of treason and left Trump with the difficult and highly dangerous job of re-establishing deterrence. That neocon bitch had 1.2 billion dollars spent on her campaign by Wall Street, Russian investors and Whaihibi Saudi’s and still lots. She lost because she was a fuck useless, sick, uninspiring, talent less. dangerous war mongering neo con bith and at the last moment just enough Americans realised it in a sort of Jungian moment of reflection awarenes.. If they had not, America, and the West, would have fallen. So, yes.Fuck her. Fuck Obama, a man who appears to have been actively working against the interests of the American people. Is Trump a cunt? Probably. I don’t give a fuck. As long as he keeps the Clintons out of office, I dont care. Those bastards need frying. Is that clear enough?
Comments are closed.