In the Telegraph today, Cochrane confuses and, typically for a Tory, resorts to the talk of the physical violence they are all so fond of, talking about, from Johnson and throughout the Party.
Ill come back to that but first, read this:
Despite Nicola Sturgeon’s woeful record in office, affluent people north of the border have allowed themselves to be bribed. By any standards, the year just ending was pretty dreadful for Nicola Sturgeon, so much so that lesser mortals might well concede that they deserved a good political kicking for all the mistakes they had made.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/12/30/scotlands-complicit-middle-class-have-lot-answer/
Wait, I though the ‘affluent’ were being over-taxed by Sturgeon and planning flight? Make up your mind?
Back to the Tory ‘kickings’, then. I write as one who knew numerous routes home from school so as to evade a ‘good’ kicking of the kind statistically more common in the 60s, and, looking at Cochrane, I see a face I might well have encountered using the same diversions. If Cochrane ever gave a kicking, it must have been to a puny junior lad or, a girl?
In July 2020, I wrote:
For someone who often sought sympathy for her experience of depression after being bullied and who complained of the toxic environment for women politicians, the former Tory leader in Scotland seems to have an unhealthy attraction to the language and the images of street violence.
Today in the Herald we read:
RUTH Davidson has said she regrets “not putting the boot in” to the losing side in the 2014 independence referendum. The former Scottish Conservative leader said it was a “huge strategic error” by the Unionist side not to press home its advantage and keep undermining the Nationalist cause.
What sort of language is that? Davidson conjures for us the merciless kicking to death of a helpless victim by thugs. Why can she not find words to describe winning a democratic contest without imagining a bloody-broken face and the heartless brutality of a victor? Does she derive some erotic pleasure from this kind of imagery?
Just over a week ago, she was in the same mood. Less violent but still with a mindset that loves domination by a leader, expressed in words bellowed in a victim’s face, Davidson imagines an implausible relationship between two educated professional women. Do any of us, for one moment, think the FM would even raise her voice after disagreement with an adviser?
There’s a trail. In December 2019, Davidson delights in claiming that Scottish voters refer to the FM as that effing woman. She has no evidence but clearly wishes it were that way. She likes the feel of that word.
A few days earlier, on December 3rd, after an interview with Andrew Neil, the First Minister’s experience was described by Davidson as:
Well that was an absolute doing from @afneil. A doing on the growth report, a doing on the hypocrisy of her Brexit vs Indy position and a doing over her domestic record in health.
Neil was bit over-bearing and shouty but a ‘doing?’ Once again she seems drawn to the words and the imagery of extreme violence.
I dislike Ruth Davidson intensely but I would not wish to see her shouted at in her face, described as an effing anything and I certainly could not watch her get a doing or a kicking. I like to think I might step in to help her.
So, back to Cochrane: Stop the tough talk you big bottom.