Explain to me my Cameron & Clegg are good or bad for the UK

Charles Kennedy voted against the deal. Who to trust? Nick Clegg or Charles Kennedy?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/16/charles-kennedy-coalition-views
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8685050.stm

Charles Kennedy has shown sound judgment over the years (Iraq for one), not to mention an uncommon empathy with real people, rare among the public school boys now back in charge.

I foresee a future for him, once it all goes tits up. Perhaps he is maneuvering to lead a anti-Tory faction with an eye to a future leadership bid. He’s still only 51 and now has the added life experience of beating alcohol.

[quote=“Chuanzao El Ale Destroyer”]http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2010/0512/Cameron-and-Clegg-a-show-of-unity-in-Britain

There’s quite a lot of talk about this on Facebook, all my Brit friends seem upset with this result.

Do I just have one-sided friends or are these two really that bad? Someone must have liked them and voted them in.[/quote]
I am happy with it :thumbsup:

Just occasionally there is a good Tory. I am reminded of a certain Benjamin Disraeli who extended the franchise in 1867. He did however say:

“A Conservative government is an organised hypocrisy.”

Michael Foot said of Disraeli:

“Disraeli was my favourite Tory. He was an adventurer pure and simple, or impure and complex. I’m glad to say that Gladstone got the better of him.”

Some are now comparing Cameron to Disraeli. i.e. a social reformer with loose party affiliations.

A good idea of why lefties are left feeling confused is this article from the Grauniad subtitled “Why can’t these 21st-century Tories just be massively unreasonable from the outset?”

Bear in mind that the British are never happier than when they’re complaining to themselves.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/17/charlie-brooker-coalition-government

Some highlights

[quote]The worst part is working out who to hate, and why…

I was eight when Thatcher got in, and didn’t really understand what was happening. Nonetheless, before long the Tories had replaced the Cybermen as my number one bogeymen…

The Tories weren’t just nasty – they seemed to actively enjoy being nasty. And there was no getting rid of them, even when Thatcher got the boot. Consequently, an entire generation grew up regarding the Tory government as something like rain, or wasps, or stomach flu: an unavoidable, undying source of dismay…

Until 1997, when they were eradicated overnight. It was as if scientists had suddenly discovered a cure for the common cold. A permanent millstone – gone! The initial glow of jubilation never completely faded. For years afterwards, simply knowing the Conservatives weren’t in power left me mildly delighted on a daily basis. Even when Blair and co turned out to be so disappointing, I could console myself with the thought that the Conservatives would have been even worse…

As this year’s election crept closer, and a Conservative government appeared ever more likely, the Tories became meaningful bogeymen once again. The fact that Cameron generally looks and sounds even less sincere than Blair ever managed to, meant that the more he professed to be caring, the more sinister he became… after six weeks in power, the mask would slip and he’d legalise the hunting of single mums…

But instead we’ve got this . . . coalition thing. This disorientating mash-up. Cameron and Clegg engaging in public foreplay. A sour Tory cookie with chunks of Lib Dem chocolate. Even the prospect of George Osborne as chancellor seems less chilling in the knowledge that Vince Cable can pop his head round the door from time to time, if only to pull disapproving faces.

Cameron appears to be making a sincere attempt to permanently drag his party toward more moderate ground, which is a crushing blow for those of us who were expecting outright malevolence from day one.

As long-dreaded bogeymen, these 21st-century Tories are proving a damp squib, like the brightly coloured Daleks. No doubt they’ll do something horrific fairly soon, but so far they haven’t quite obliged, thereby depriving us all of a good cathartic hate-in. I always knew the Tories were selfish at heart, but this really takes the biscuit. Why can’t they just be massively and obviously unreasonable from the outset, like they’re supposed to?

In the meantime, we’ll just have to wait for them to do something unequivocally shitty before we can say “I told you so”. But by all means remind me of my nonchalance on this subject in four years’ time, when we’re being issued uniforms and ushered down the bunkers. Unless it’s illegal for citizens to converse by then, in which case simply arch your eyebrows and shrug a bit, and I’ll know what you mean.[/quote]

I think it might be ok, actually:

economist.com/opinion/displa … d=16109312