Dear Claire,
Well, we’re definitely
on for a hung parliament, despite Cameron and Miliband both insisting they will
have a majority government come Friday morning.
On the 6 o’clock news
this evening, Cameron said “Judge us on our record”. Are you able to tell me
which record that would be Claire? Is that “A contract between the Conservative
Party and you”, as issued by Cameron before the 2010 general election?
As we have already shown
beyond doubt (see letters dated 27th, 28th and 30th),
the Tories have failed to deliver on every single promise they made. People
would love to judge the Tories on their record. We’d love to see Cameron answer
some questions and face a challenge in a debate. But he’s not really making
himself available for any of that is he? As we all know, he has chickened out
of at least 5 or 6 opportunities to face any questions from any other
politician or local candidate.
Cameron claims that no
one wants to see him and Miliband go head to head. Don’t they? Has he asked
anyone? Of course he hasn’t. It’s that old Tory arrogance again: ignore the electorate;
we know what’s right for them and for us. Having just seen the monster-shiny-forehead
on the 10 o’clock news once more, I see it’s ‘Action-Man-Dave’, in shirt
sleeves, trying to get down with the proles and display his new-found passion,
leering rictus on his unpleasant features. “That’s why we need 5 more years of
Tory government, so that we can finish off what we’ve started”. That’s what
frightens me Claire, the fact that people genuinely don’t seem to know what
your party has done. It’s nothing short of a huge catalogue of ineptitude,
incompetence and spin.
Incidentally, I challenged
you at a 2010 hustings meeting about proportional representation. You responded
that it led to ‘weak government’. Well if the collection of inbred mutants, used
car salesmen, liars, hooray henries, spivs, maladjusted misfits, estate agents,
chinless wonders, genocidal maniacs, banking fraudsters and
personality-disordered social rejects, all with undeclared conflicts of
interest – if this lot is anything to go by, we have just ‘enjoyed’ the most catastrophic
period of weak government in living memory.
Anyway, in today’s
accompanying picture, I am illustrating what effect proportional representation
would have on the no. of seats each party might get. With PR, it would
certainly give quite a different picture of which parties might try and form a
coalition.
It was quite revealing
during today’s Daily Politics debate chaired by Andrew Neill, which today
looked at Welfare and Benefits. It featured our favourite Minister, IDS. What a
mendacious conman he is! Every time he opens his mouth, he lies. That he has
the audacity to criticise his rivals when they say we need to support the most
vulnerable just beggars belief.
The Tory party is a con.
It is utterly self-serving. It focuses on protecting those that need it least, at
the expense of those that can least afford it.
In 1952, Aneurin
Bevan defined the Tory party way thus:
“How can
wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power?
Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century.”
Kind regards,
Polly
No comments:
Post a Comment