Office to rent in Lewes

Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

Norman Baker and Piccadilly Circus

On 19 Mar 2013 at 2:15am Just_Sarah wrote:

Yes. Me again.
Can we get some perspective here perhaps?
This is a perfectly well executed Kinks pastiche. It's sweet, cheap, silly, the musicians are good and it's something we would all like to do as a bit of fun and a hobby.
It is not a direct rip-off of "Well Respected Man" or anything that specific.
Norman's voice has that nervous, forced, reedy tremolo of self consciousness and to be honest he is the worst thing about this song.
But why do the Telegraph and others on this forum feel that this has anything to do with potholes and his job as a minister?
Norman Baker worked for Our Price records for years. he has every right to enjoy music privately and in public as he wishes.
Would you rather he spent his free-time fox-hunting, going on reality TV shows or lining up cushty commissions for post 2015?
He's an average singer having a bit of fun and good luck to him.
The taxpayer didn't pay for it, so why see it any differently to what he chooses to do at the weekend.
If we, the public, demand politicians that are sanitised and completely dehumanised then....
Oh. Silly me. I forgot. They already are.
No wonder they all feel they have to lie in public, if when they do something natural for once in a while everybody sneers.
Lewes of all towns should not criticise someone for sticking two proverbial fingers up to the nation and laughing at themselves.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 7:31am Deelite wrote:

Spot on comment. Can't begrudge a politician a hobby.

Good to see you are so weak willed Sarah.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 11:13am Raydavies wrote:

Nice to see that despite putting self -interest before election promises to thousands of people not wanting a Tory Government, Tory/Lib-Dem coalition junior minister Mr Baker still has a few fans.
Art mirrors life and this disappointing cringeworthy vanity project certainly does that.
(but i do agree with you about Telegraph readers and potholes)

On 19 Mar 2013 at 12:35pm Blip wrote:

Sarah: Duh!! Potholes are relevant to his job as a minister and in fact he has very recently been speaking about dealing with them, on the radio. I didn't rubbish him; I simply said I hoped he would pay some attention to this problem which is in his own area.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 1:19pm Pat Hole wrote:

yes, it would be nice if we could all be talking about how good he was at sorting out the problem of the increasing failure to maintain roads and manage potholes properly. But we aren't , because he hasn't.
Which is why it is a bit tactless expecting us to be interested or delighted in his private hobby instead.
There are times when it is better to keep a low private profile, and it says a lot abut his judgement that he does not realise that this is one of them.
If this is about showing a human side, then i suggest he would do better at that by being a bit more vocal about the human cost of some of the policies he is currently endorsing.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 6:08pm Just_Sarah wrote:

I didn't say he was good at his job, nor that potholes aren't his department.
And I am certainally no fan of the man personally.
But I know loads of colleagues who are frankly awful at their jobs, but at the weekend still do Zumba, play football or do sugarcraft.
Do I have a right to tell them they can't? Why are politicians any different?
Our three party leaders have been in politics ever since they left University as researchers, then policy wonks and PR. They then got fast tracked into safe seats.
At least Norman had a real job in the real world once ( Our Price records for five years and then apparently though it seems unlikely, Malling service station for two years )and clearly loves music, but isn't very talented.
I don't have to like or agree with him and his policies to defend his right to go fly fishing or build a shed on a Sunday.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 7:29pm Blip wrote:

Sarah, what on earth are you going on about? Have you actually READ and understood the contents of the other posts? You are attributing opinions and attitudes that have not been expressed.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 7:35pm Sussex Jim wrote:

I always seem to have a mental picture of a man with a conical hat and buttons down his tunic when ever I read about Norman Baker. Basically, a performing clown.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 9:17pm Phfellow2004 wrote:

I find myself in a difficulty with this entrance of Norman Baker into the pop world. Quite frankly...........good luck to him if this venture for him is only a hobby.
However I cannot forget that prior to the 2010 General Election, he announced to his Liberal Democratic constituents that he was going to take 'time out' to write a book about about Dr David Kelly who was the guy who supposedly took his own life in connection with the Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction issue.
Norman Baker followed this matter forensically and he generated a book and massive Daily Mail Coverage which, all in, must have yielded him personally upwards of £250000. My complaint has always been that that he declared that he would take no interest in his Constituency for a year whilst he was writing his book and I thought this was a disgrace.
I continue to be mystified by Norman Baker's behaviours and I am now beginning to wonder if he is planning for his journey through the departure lounge in 2015!
I think that Norman Baker should stop pissing around with matters musical and focus upon the Coalition Minister task he has and for which he is very well paid.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 9:26pm grafter wrote:

Did he ever apologise for the lies and falsehoods he propagated and profited from over the death of D.Kelly? I don't remember.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 9:41pm Just_Sarah wrote:

Thank you for your delightfully patronising suggestion that I have neither read or understood any other comments on this site. And I love the Duh comment.
Obviously all that Zumba has made me illiterate, girlish and stupid.
In fact what you are saying is that you personally feel unjustly criticised.
In fact, I am replying to other people's posts ( yes, such a thing is possible ) on this and the two other relevant threads on this forum and a Daily Telegraph article as I previously made clear.
No more no less.
I read your comment and understood it. And in what is possibly distressing to your ego preferred to reply to other people..
Are you this kind to all the ladies in your life?

On 19 Mar 2013 at 10:01pm Compass wrote:

This is nonsense, so a politician has an interest outside politics , big deal. And how does that impact on his ability to do his Job?

On 19 Mar 2013 at 10:03pm Just_Sarah wrote:

Ummm Compass..it doesn't. We agree. And that should be it.

On 19 Mar 2013 at 10:05pm Compass wrote:

Oh and you the good people of Lewes elected him, you know what you have to do next time.

On 20 Mar 2013 at 1:36am Itsjustnotverygood wrote:

Sarah, I would normally agree with you, but the point is that Mr Baker isn't just quietly getting on with his hobby, as a distraction from his public persona, he is on radio 4 talking about it, only because he is an MP. Can't have it both ways.

On 20 Mar 2013 at 7:30am Deelite wrote:

Err.. he can actually. Radio 4 want to talk to him because he is a politician with a hobby. It's unusual for a politician to retain a hobby it seems, sadly. If more did perhaps they'd stay a little more attached to the real world.

On 20 Mar 2013 at 10:01am Blip wrote:

Oh dear, Sarah!
I don't know why I am bothering to reply to you, but I will just refer you back to my original comment on a different thread, which was simply that I liked the song and now hoped he would pay some attention to the potholes in his own town. Where did I say he shouldn't have a hobby? Everyone needs some interest apart from work, and I am glad he has it. So this is why I suggested you don't read things properly. Just where am I supposed to have rubbished him and said he shouldn't be singing? Just be prepared to read a bit more intelligently and don't pile other people's opinions with which you might disagree onto one person.
End of.

On 20 Mar 2013 at 11:04am Blip wrote:

I think the problem is, Sarah, you need to be more specific as to which post you are replying to. Then we would know who you were addressing. What you did was to give a sort of "cover all" opinion that in your mind answered everyone.
It makes it hard to sort out which of your remarks refer to which post. Sorry to have sounded patronising.

On 20 Mar 2013 at 11:49am Clifford wrote:

Baker is preparing for when he has to look for a job after the next general election. Who can blame him?

On 20 Mar 2013 at 2:12pm Itsjustnotverygood wrote:

Deelite. I am sure neither of us care that much about this but just to clarify, while i am having a cup of tea. You are saying something different from me which is fine, I wouldn't disagree with you, but your point is not the same as mine..
If you re-read what i wrote you will notice that i said that you can't have 'a quiet hobby as a distraction from his (life as a ) public persona', and also be on radio 4 at the same time talking about it. You are writing about an ability to be an MP and talk about a hobby on radio 4 at the same time.
That is fine, but it would not then be a 'quiet hobby as a distraction from ones public persona' would it?
the area of opinion can decide the quality of his very public hobby, and what it says about him, and what it does not.
I think it says a little something about his ego and how he sees the world. Different people can decide what it says, for themselves.
:-)

On 20 Mar 2013 at 2:56pm brixtonbelle wrote:

The only reason he was on R4 was cos he's an MP. Otherwise his hobby, like mine, would be of no interest to anyone. And frankly I'm not sure why his hobby is interesting at all - hundreds of thousands of people are musicians of one sort or another. His band clearly has very little talent, they've ripped off The Kinks and let's face it, they're not marketable for their fashion, style, good looks or substance. It's just his MP status has already brought him publicity and possibly sales, and there's something vaguely unethical about that.
Meanwhile I'd like him to comment on the massive profits made by rail operating companies last year,and his continued justification that they should and were allowed to increase fares by so much.... but we haven't heard a peep about that.