A challenge to the Tory diehards
I am interested by the fact that my opponents, on the 'Don't Vote Tory' issue never actually argue about the central point. They just pretend it isn't there. Could one of them please try, just once, to address the issue?
I'm told that my efforts helped to bring about a Tory defeat in 2005(if only) resulting in 'the shower we have now.’ Does he think a Michael Howard government would have been substantially different from what we have now? Why? This wiseacre parrots the cry of the loyalist down the ages ‘Do you really want another 5 years of Labour?’
He also hides behind a silly name which ('SickofSpin') is highly inappropriate, since he is a sad victim of spin, believing the crudest propaganda of the Tories.
About 80% of my argument rests on the following contention:
That if the Tories win, we will get Liberal leftist government as we have done, in all important respects under every Tory government since the war. The country will continue to bankrupt itself to maintain a work-destroying welfare state; it will continue to permit limitless mass immigration; it will continue to use the schools as an engine for egalitarianism; it will continue to pursue the anti-Christian, anti-marriage agenda of political correctness; it will continue to pursue the cultural revolution against tradition and conservative institutions; it will continue to weaken criminal justice, in the belief that crime is a social disease rather than a manifestation of unrestrained wickedness. It will continue to surrender its sovereignty to a foreign power.
Therefore, if the Tories win, or if Labour win, we will get 'another five years of Labour.' And another five years after that; and another five years after that; because until the cycle of openly socialist Labour and covertly socialist Tory government is broken, that is what you will get. My question to Mr 'SickofSpin' is ‘Do you want another 20 years of Labour?’ In fact ‘Do you want Britain to have socialist governments forever?’ For that is the effect of what you propose. How can anyone, after the last 50 years, and the behaviour of Mr Cameron himself, still harbour any serious illusions about the Tory Party? I'd really like to know. My question to ‘Emmanuel Goldstein’ is similar :Why will Labour be 'manifestly worse' than a Cameron government? Details required. Why is Labour the worse of two evils, when a Labour victory (or a Tory failure) might actually trigger real change, whereas a Labour defeat or Tory victory will leave us as described above?
Alternatively, let him explain, with evidence and details, what substantive and non-negotiable differences (no vague slogans please, details) will distinguish a Cameron government from a Brown one, or a Blair one, or a Major one, or a Macmillan one? I'd be unsurprised to learn that both these contributors voted for Anthony Blair. If Mr Cameron can fool them, then Mr Blair probably could too.
D.Smith is a victim of conventional wisdom. New Labour is considerably to the Left of Old Labour. Its acceptance of economic liberalism (which deluded the ill-informed into thinking it had accepted conservatism) allowed it to pursue constitutional and moral revolution on a scale it had not previously dared to attempt.
To the ludicrously-disguised 'Lickyalips,' I note that I am asked for advice on how to vote, and give it. I do not 'tell' anyone how to vote. I have no such power, and the only decision I can make is my own. This is a foolish, thoughtless intervention and I am not surprised its author hides behind a puerile false name.
How many people do I think I'm talking to? No idea. I just hope it's enough, and that enough of them listen. I can only do what I can do. I do write a column for the Mail on Sunday, as well as this blog.
Those who want to see the back of Harriet Harman should realise that if the Tories win they will instead get Tory wimmin who support many of Ms Harman's ultra-feminist proposals. Why don't people get it about what and who the Tories are?
William Hague did not fight the 2001 election on a 'very right wing, socially conservative and anti-European manifesto.' This is a myth, frequently advanced by Cameroons. I challenge 'Josh' to produce his evidence. He wouldn't even commit his party to absolute unchanging opposition to Euro membership.
My views on devolution are accurately set out in the Wikipedia entry about me, in the 'foreign policy' section.
It was not I who drew attention to Jack Straw's Jewishness. It was Mr Stone. I was drawing attention to Mr Stone's curious interest in this unimportant fact.
Random Posts:
Loading…
No Comments
Sponsored Links:
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.