When dads hit the dance floor trying to be hip and trendy, everyone else cringes with embarrassment. It's the same with David Cameron's modernising push for gay marriage. A new poll of LGBT people reveals that almost two thirds flinch at his motives. He's trying to look hip and trendy, but he just looks fake and phoney.
In the space of a month, Jessops closed with 2,000 jobs lost, Blockbusters closed with 4,000 jobs at risk and HMV, employing 4,300, entered restructuring with an uncertain future.
If there was any silver lining to the postponement of the speech, then it was the fact that circumstances meant he had to deliver it in London. It's about time that Conservative prime ministers (Churchill, Thatcher) stopped addressing foreign audiences about Britain's role in Europe and started delivering a few home truths to their British fellow citizens.
Even before Prime Minister David Cameron's speech on Europe this Wednesday, we know that it will be disappointing.
It may be an unfashionable take given trust in our parliament fell to new depths in 2012, with less than a quarter of people tending to trust the UK parliament to make important decisions, but politics does a lot of very important things- and therefore so do MPs.
Firstly, to the well-dressed people of Great Britain, I would like to repent. My confession: I was one of the first journalists in the country to spring the 21st Century's greatest crime against fashion on to an unsuspecting public.
Conservative Future is at its strongest for years. With a small but significant number of tweaks, it could become a powerful and fulfilling organisation for many years to come. The next national chairman should be willing and able to support you, listen to you and be your voice in CCHQ, the party and media.
I would still argue that the pace has been too fast, and that the very large cuts to public investment were wholly misguided. But we should at least give the government credit for not making things even worse - which a misguided attempt to stick to the original plan undoubtedly would have.
This Thursday, LBC launches 'Call Clegg' - a weekly phone-in with the deputy prime minister on Nick Ferrari's breakfast show. (Personally, I think they should have called it 'Nick, Nick' or 'Let's Have Clegg for Breakfast!').
The problem is that this policy implicitly encourages women to make the choice to go back to work, even though there are millions of women that choose fulltime motherhood and believe that the choice of caregiving represents a significant contribution to society.
today's re-launch didn't tell us a huge amount. We were promised action on childcare support, support for first-time buyers and, yet again, greater investment in infrastructure... But detail remains largely absent, with more to be dripped out between now and the Budget in April.
People should be able to live how they want, not how some illiberal nanny state that thinks it knows best and forces laws onto its unwilling subjects wants them to.
While it may seem obvious on many levels that of course the government should take money from higher earners in a difficult economic environment - in particular when one of the other political debates raging at the moment is about introducing real-terms benefit cuts for those on the lowest incomes, a move likely to plunge even more children into poverty - it has always struck me as singularly unfair that the only higher earners being asked to pay more are those with children.
Today, Cameron and his family are at Chequers, enjoying perhaps the happiest new year of his premiership. He is the undoubted master of Britain's political landscape. His Labour, Lib Dem and Ukip opponents have turned in on themselves. His own backbench rebels have fallen silent. He is already dreaming of how to win his third general election in 2020.
Although it has been gaining in terms of publicity and exposure, that means scrutiny will increase of Ukip's actual policies. On some issues it no doubt is able to chime with popular sentiment, on Europe and on immigration, for example. However, on social issues like gay marriage all the indications are that it is out-of-step with mainstream opinion.
We need to open the debate up further and to talk more openly. We already understand how low body confidence can affect 15 year old girls. But what happens when those 15 year old girls reach 25, 35, and 45? How does their low body confidence translate into social confidence? How does it affect their performance in the workplace? How does it affect their families? The government is already doing a lot to support women, but we also need to ensure that we can nurture and support the aspirations of women and girls.