But then it's a turn to the right.

Let's do the timewarp agaaain....

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I love this term, it neatly encapsulates one of the most annoying aspects of the politically pious.

I don't think it is over-used but rather there is so much virtue signalling going on in today's politically correct culture that it can be mapped to behaviours everyday.

If people lived by the principles that they themselves would have others live by.....then I think it would be applied less often.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

And what would they be?

One of my biggest gripes is "celebs" that seem to believe their opinion is more valid than that of anyone else because they happened to do a funny fat man dance on The Office 15 years ago or so (for example).

My mate argued, "well they have the ear of the people and therefore what harm is done if they use that platform to spread important messages?"

Which is fine if they are up on a soapbox saying poverty is bad, or something you can't really disagree with. But that's not what they are doing. Ricky Gervais (oh, now the cat's out the bag who I was referring to) said something along the lines of (and I know I am only paraphrasing) "If you voted for XYZ you are a c**t" and he got lots of Twitter likes. But there's a problem there, his gripes are with HIS perceived motives someone might have for voting for XYZ. And all of his idiotic fans go "Well, I liked that scene in The Office where Gareth's stapler was in some jelly" and think that Gervais must be a sage commentator on politics and that they must align with his thinking in some way...ok my example is a bit over the top and I appreciate not everyone is retarded enough to follow this line of thinking. But some do is my point and that almost makes it irresponsible.

So then I went on to debate with my friend actually about how I hate that the media give these people credence. in actual fact headlines that read "Ricky Gervais/Lily Allen/Jim Davidson (I threw a bone to the lefties with that one) have said voting for XYZ is good/bad" ought to be no different than headlines which read "Binman in Slough says voting for XYZ is good/bad".

I started this comment thinking I'd make a valid point. If there was one in there then it was probably more by luck than judgement.

I think hypocrisy is the natural state of people. However, you can still be correct in a belief, even if you do not adhere to it. Now I think if you do the complete opposite, your integrity is called into question, but it doesn't mean that something you said is devoid of value or meaning.

That's dangerous reasoning, which ends up with the idea that someone who's rich cannot have views of value about the poor (irrespective of whether their views make sense).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]