This week Gail’s doing local politics, and getting stuck into Ian Parsley with surprising vim. I say surprising, because Gail’s Tory shtick and her oft-expressed disdain for the Alliance Party might have misled some readers into expecting that she might have been pleased about young Parsley’s defection. Not so. She starts off with
Perhaps more than most places we in Northen Ireland don’t like turncoats.
In some ways, it is a deplorable trait, displaying the most stubborn, blinkered and vengeful aspects of our character.
and goes downhill from there. Note Gail’s ability to accuse others of being “stubborn, blinkered and vengeful” without blushing. We have fulminations about how Parsley had betrayed his electors, betrayed the party that made him a rising star and turned his back on his pro-European credentials. (One would have thought Gail would appreciate the latter, but she doesn’t let logic or consistency get in her way when on a roll.) And, bathetically, we have the strident demand that Parsley should force a by-election at a cost of £30,000 to the North Down ratepayers.
We do not hear a similar demand that George Ennis and Terry Williams, who were elected by the people of Ards as loyal Paisleyites but have now joined Jim Allister’s Provisional DUP, should follow suit. Perhaps Gail hasn’t noticed. Nor do I recall her making such demands on turncoats Jeffrey Donaldson and Arlene Foster. Maybe that was a totally different situation. Or perhaps she just doesn’t like the cut of Parsley’s jib. She’s rarely happier than when in aren’tchasickofhim mode.
But this is all by the by. What’s caught my eye is that Gail is sounding off about Elton John wanting to adopt this wee Ukrainian boy. Gail has previous on this issue, having vocally defended the right of her hero Madonna to adopt as many Malawian children as she wants. So, what does our intrepid columnist make of the Elton situation? Apart, that is, from mentioning Madonna no less than four times in a small sidebar supposedly devoted to Elton John?
No doubt we’ll get some lectures in the press about exploitation and sorrowful thought pieces about the children left behind.
From whom? Gail does not inform us. I fear she is again doing battle with the nasty liberalses in her head.
But, as with Madonna, Sir Elton will find a way through the guff, if to adopt this little boy is what he genuinely wants to do.
Guff, you see. Those nasty liberalses who annoy Gail, they don’t actually have points of view that might be worth considering, if only to disagree with them. It’s all just guff.
It’ll be interesting to see though, if his Britishness is a protection against the more savage invective levelled against Madge by some well-known chidren’s charities, for instance.
The liberalses, they just want to slag off Americans, you see. Nobody could possibly have any other objection to an extremely wealthy white woman blowing around Africa, picking up attractive toddlers as she goes, and using her money and influence to circumvent local law. No, even to suggest that would be anti-American.
Even more, if his being gay will deter some of his potential critics in a way that Madonna’s adoptions didn’t.
It’s an added complication for the salad-munchers. They’ll probably not bother, pretending it’s not happening.
I am not familiar with this term “salad-muncher”. It sounds vaguely like a homophobic slur, but is probably just a Gail coinage to describe people she disagrees with.
Meanwhile, let’s hope that little Lev – now he’s been outed in the papers, and photographed with the real Queen of England – gets to spend his formative years with someone destined to be a great dad.
“Outed”? “Queen”? You know, I never realised Elton John was gay… No, I get it now. Ooh, my aching sides.
God knows, Gail has never taken this blog’s advice in the past, but if you’re going to do gay jokes in your columns, it might help if you’re not an outspoken defender of Iris Robinson. I’m just saying.