Mutt and Jeff and Gordon Brown

So Gordon Brown says he "misunderstood" what the good lady said. If that's the case, he's quick to fly off the handle over something he's not sure about. Bit like the cabinet ministers who had the rough edge of his tongue. Misunderstood, indeed!

He said this in an interview with Jeremy Paxman. Plus this - "Please believe me, I have never been soft on bankers and I am not soft on bankers now and I have been very, very clear about what the banks have got to do in the future." So clear that the banks cannot muster any backbone for self-control. Sir Philip Hampton, the boss of RBS, is so weak that he has to cave in to his ultra-greedy employees (those who get the massive bonuses). "If we don't pay our top people (appropriately), they leave very quickly," he said. So these top people have no loyalty to the bank, no loyalty to the customers and no loyalty to the country (who bailed the buggers out). All they have is a craven desire to get filthy rich by making "profits" out of illusionary money. Most of it doesn't exist. It's all in some follow-my-leader account-hopping merry-go-round. They can make nothing into something. Must make an alchemist sick!

Gordon Brown hasn't done what he should do. Instead of bawling out Mrs. Duffy, why doesn't he get those bank chiefs in and tell them that it's straight jackets not flash jackets from now on. No funny money stuff. No hedging, no betting, no ducking, no diving, no derivatives, additives, sedatives, or laxatives. Just plain honest banking.

Any chance these modern day moneychangers might be able to clean up their financial temples?

Cameron won on points and poise

David Cameron won the debate last night. Not by a mile, but he did OK. A school report would say "much improved this term!". Nick Clegg came second and Gordon Brown limped in a reasonable third. To be fair to the PM, I think he did better than some said he did.

All three seemed to get through OK. However, all clammed up on questions they didn't want to answer. Transparency has some way to go it would appear. Linked to truthfulness, of course.

Cameron was much more relaxed. Nick Clegg had moments when he looked like he was piggy in the middle. And what on earth happened to Gordon Brown's make-up. I thought Phyllis Diller may have had a hand in it.

It's still a three-horse race with several loose horses cantering along beside.

Leave Gillian Duffy alone!

Good heavens, she only popped out for a loaf of bread. Now the media is camped outside her daughter's house. These guys are like a dog with a bone. They just can't leave well alone.

We all know what Mrs.Duffy said, we know what she thinks about it. At least the Prime Minister said something sensible today, which was to forget about it all. What on earth does the media think Mrs. Duffy has to add to the story.

Look, she's had her Andy Warhol moment. For heaven's sake leave the poor woman alone! A friend says, "She can't do normal things. She can’t go to get her hair done tomorrow like she wants to. She's got to have a full police escort. I am worried for her health and I'm sure her family are too. It's changed Gillian's life."

I bet it's that bloody Murdoch and his minions. I wish he'd never left Australia!

Kinnock windbags Labour's hopes

Lord Kinnock, stoker first class on the EU Gravy Train, has come out to say that it "doesn't look like" his party can win the general election, but insists it remains "within reach". I hope the Labour Party's reach has been severely forshortened.

Kinnock waffles on to say that the prime minister has been "poisonously misrepresented by the press". If he's talking about the encounter with Gillian Duffy I think there's been zilch misrepresentation. Not a word out of place. Brown said it all himself. If it's over the past 13 years, there might have been the odd phrase or two, but that's it.

No, Labour has itself to blame for the muddle and mess. Mrs.Duffy asked him a straight question on the economy. Gordon Brown just raised his caninus muscle and gave a few platitudes and spotted that her use of red in her clothing was a good sign. Then he got into the car and revealed himself as he really is.

I think it was summed up quite nicely by Brown's biographer, Tom Bower, when he said yesterday on BBC News that "Gordon Brown has never understood the working class of England". So face to face with a representative of the species and he's spun off his axis bigtime.

Who knows what will happen tonight. My hunch is that Cameron and Clegg will be relaxed, Brown will be like a cork in a champagne bottle. His body language will show him up if he lets it loose. He'd be better off grabbing the podium for dear life and keeping deadly still.

This election is now like a steeplechase with unknown nags in the race. I can see all three parties winning seats and losing them. There will be some very startled new MPs by the end of next week. And a great many startled voters.

Another poncy Labour reaction!

Nick Colbourne, who is standing in Montgomeryshire as the Labour candidate, has said he will not share a platform with the National Front (NF) at a debate for the parties in a Powys church. He refused to attend Thursday's event with "an extremist political party" saying, "I will not take part in an event that affords an airing for an extremist political party to take a completely opposite standpoint and air those views to a wider audience". So all he does is make himself look like a pompous self-righteous prat.

The people of Montgomeryshire won't be voting for this paragon of supposed political virtue. They'll probably keep their allegiance with a man who is not afraid of debating with his opponents and many times trouncing them. I'm sure Lembit Opik could wipe the floor with the NF, but I expect he will just expose their totalitarian views in exemplary fashion. He says, "Firstly, I take very seriously the importance of the church-organised event - they're always superbly well managed and raise important ethical and topical issues. Secondly, I've always said that the key to addressing these matters is to engage in proper dialogue about them. It's no good staying away just because you find the attitudes of these groupings distasteful. Ignoring them is a failed strategy, and not one I subscribe to. As we've seen with the British National Party, it's a lot better to actually have the discussion and look at the facts of the issues rather than pretending that doing nothing will simply mean they'll 'go away."

"Ignoring them is a failed strategy". Absolutely! Not only that, it allows them to appear martyred. Anyway, I don't suppose Mr.Colbourne's got much to say. Best all round he stays at home with his feet up.

Gordon Brown caught on camera - and mike!

Here's how the internet works!

It's hard being Gordon Brown in Rochdale

Gordon Brown won't be heading back to Rochdale in hurry, I'll wager. It's hard being a cowboy in Rochdale, but it's a hell of a lot harder being Gordon Brown in Rochdale!

Bigoted Gordon Brown rounds on Rochdale granny!

Well, well, the truth is coming out. Gordon Brown is getting grumpier, he can't stand being questioning by "ordinary folk" and he blames others (Sue Nye his loyal aide) for it all. Fancy calling someone a "bigoted woman" just because she asked a couple of civilised questions.

Who exactly is the bigot here? I'd say it was Brown. He's bigoted against the electorate. So why on earth are there any people out there still wanting to vote for him. According to Amanda Platell, he looks washed out. Blimey, I get grumpy when tired. He must be like a volcano right now. One week its an Icelandic eruption, the next its a Scottish one. Well, limited to one Scottish person, that is.

The woman in question, Gillian Duffy, simply asked him about the deficit, pensions and Eastern European immigration. So is everyone who talks about immigration a bigot? That makes Brown a very big bigot. He's talked quite a bit about it recently.

His body language on the Jeremy Vine show (Radio 2) said it all. Heaving and shifting like a dozy seal that's just been given a kick to get back in the water. And he told Vine "If I said it". IF?

IF I SAID IT?

What a creep! How can he possibly say that? He knows damn well he said it. It just shows him up for what he truly believes and thinks. That the great British public in their voting habits are some kind of unwashed, thoughtless morons.

We all say things in unguarded moments. But, hey, this was no unguarded moment. He was miked up, ready to go. Has he learnt nothing about broadcasting techniques?

I suggest every potential Labour voter does as Mrs Duffy is going to do. Not vote Labour!

David Cameron and the wisteria bill!

So there I was, talking about David Cameron and his expense claim for wisteria removal and, lo and behold, he's still giving answers on the subject. Answers that don't quite assuage the public, if the London Evening Standard is anything to go by.

Cameron says, "I took the decision that because of some of the very bad things that had happened, I thought it was very important to show some leadership ... so I paid back one very important claim, which was a claim for household maintenance which included the famous wisteria on the house because, of course, the chimney didn't work so I couldn't actually heat the house." But does one fireplace heat a whole house? It's all a bit schoolboy-in-front-of-headmaster stuff. I'd have preferred him to say that he should not have claimed for the wisteria removal in the first place, that he was sorry, that he would pay the money back and that a line would be drawn in the sand. A new start.

Instead, he is still trying to prove a point. He claims leadership but has been quite brutal to others by suggesting they were that much more wrong. How is the duck house or the moat clearance any different. I'll tell you what I think. I think he thought it a good time to get rid of the likes of Douglas Hogg and Sir Peter Viggars. Make them look like stale bread in the Modern Conservative Party.

It really won't do. There is NOT ONE BIT OF DIFFERENCE between Douglas Hogg's moat and David Cameron's chimney. Both got a thorough cleansing at taxpayer's expense. I just think it is all wrong to scapegoat those who can be thought of as dispendable politically.

Nasty intolerent liberals come bubbling to the surface

I've now found out what Tory election candidate Philip Lardner said. This is it, probably in part, but I took it from the BBC's website.

"As your MP I will support the rights of parents and teachers to refuse to have their children taught that homosexuality is 'normal' behaviour or an equal lifestyle choice to traditional marriage. I will always support the rights of homosexuals to be treated within concepts of (common sense) equality and respect, and defend their rights to choose to live the way they want in private, but I will not accept that their behaviour is 'normal' or encourage children to indulge in it. Toleration and understanding is one thing, but the state promotion of homosexuality is quite another."

David Cameron has apparently gone ape about this. Why, may I ask? There are very many people who do not think homosexual activity is normal or correct. Are those who think so to be expunged from political life. I say to David Cameron, get a life yourself. A proper political life that allows diversity of opinion. Otherwise you are fast becoming a just another no-it-all liberal who is exactly the opposite of liberal.

Chris Bryant says "These comments are completely unacceptable and betray the nasty, judgmental truth behind the Tory camp". Really? This from a man who posed in his underpants on a gay porn site looking "for fun". I'm afraid I can't take Bryant seriously.

This action over Mr. Gardner is political intolerance. It is political censorship. It is very un-British. It is a kind of selective political brainwashing. David Cameron should look in the mirror tonight and ask himself if he is becoming just a tad too precious. Oh, and he still hasn't explained that wisteria removal to my satisfaction!

Anti-Tea party teacher back in class

Americans are going to tea parties again. I'm not sure if much tea is drunk at them. Most of the tea in the United States ended up in Boston Harbor and it's been a suspect drink ever since. Iced tea is OK, so is a pot of Earl Grey for the refined, but your average tea bag gets short shrift.

But now it's all changed. "More tea, Vicar?" isn't exactly what you'll hear (except in select Episcopalian parishes!) - no, it's more like "More tea, Governor Palin?". For it is she who appears to have galvanised these modern day tea party gatherers into something of a political movement.

I get the impression, though, that this is something for the more waspish conservative than the Conservative WASPS! I mean, the very thought of a dainty doily being sullied by the hairy hand of a redneck, well, it's unthinkable.

In Oregon, a teacher behind an effort to embarrass the tea party movement has been allowed back to work. Good news, I say. Conestoga Middle School teacher Jason Levin was put on paid leave for about a week and a half while officials investigated whether he used school time and resources to build his website, Crash the Tea Party.

District officials determined Levin was not a danger to students and did not share his political views with them. The investigation is ongoing. I wonder what they hope to find? When I was last in Oregon there were road signs up (apparently aimed at those venturing in from another state) which said "Do not Californicate Oregon". Now that may have worked, but in the defence of free speech it may not have.

The very fact that some penpusher has thought it fit to "expose" the teacher as a weirdo liberal says something about American politics currently. Free speech is always to be cherished. It's a pity that in the Land of the Free some are not expected to be as free as others.

Conservative candidate pilloried for views!

Woe betide anyone thinking of standing for Parliament with traditional views. Especially if these views touch on the subject of homosexuality. If any candidate so much as squeaks, the politically correct hyenas pounce. Conservative candidate for North Ayrshire and Arran, Philip Lardner, has been suspended for what are considered "deeply offensive and unacceptable" comments about homosexuality. He apparently posted them on his website. I haven't seen them so don't know how "deeply offensive and unacceptable" they were. But what I do know is that there is an insidious undercurrent of Stalinist put-downs every time someone of traditional values expresses an opinion on the subject.

Catholics are portrayed as being a suitable target for shutting up. If David Cameron believes so much in the family, why on earth try to silence people in such a manner. The people of North Ayrshire and Arran can make up their own minds. If they vote for Mr. Lardner, what will Cameron do with him? Put him on the naughty step, so all and sundry passing through the Palace of Westminster can see what happens if you speak your mind - and that mind is out of favour with the liberal elite?

This is very worrying. Are those who feel they have a contribution to make in public life to be silenced if their views are contrary to others? Homosexual practices are not acceptable to many as an ideal basis for a lifestyle. Are they to be pilloried for thinking this way? It is all rather Stalinist. I find it distasteful.

David Cameron gave some wishy-washy response to a question about the Pope's visit. So did Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg. They didn't exactly embrace weasel words, but I guess a fox wouldn't find such sentiments unhandy. If this instant attacking of traditional values doesn't stop, we will end up in some sort of 1984 mind state. Thank goodness for the internet. Some of us can speak up.

When Julian Lewis was attacked by that pompous prig Alan Johnson, his opinions were traduced big time. Johnson just abused the airwaves with something he thought passed for democratic comment. It was nothing of the sort. It was just plain bullying. Alan Johnson has the veneer of a nice man but essentially he comes across as a political bully. Julian Lewis made some points about homosexual relationships. Immediately he was pounced upon. Now everyone is entitled to speak their mind in a free democracy so long as it is not unlawful or inciteful. Also, I would add unpleasant. I can't see anything as such in what Mr.Lewis said. He went on to say "On the other hand (though no-one seems to have noticed), I voted in favour of the civil partnerships bill". Alan Johnson didn't notice.

No, Johnson seems to be an anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, anti-free speech former trade union official who is far more comfortable trying to belittle his opponents by besmirching them than he is protecting their democratic rights. This election is certainly proving to weed out the political pharisees.

SNP in court battle for TV exposure!

The Scottish National Party thinks it is being hard done by. Alex Salmond reckons he's got just as good a chance of going to see the Queen as the other three who have already partaken in the "Prime Ministerial Debates". Odd notion of equality, I'd say.

"Oh, Mr. Salmond, do you think you can form a government?". "Oh, yes, Your Majesty! I've cobbled together the best ragbag grouping I could get my hands on. None of them will defy my leadership. If I can become Prime Minister, I'll give up on this devolution business. I'll be your best Prime Minister yet. Is it a deal?".

"Well, I don't do deals, Mr.Salmond, but if you have, as you say.....you can command a majority of your peers.....well, we'll see. I will, of course, being speaking with Mr. Brown, Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg...all on Privy Council terms, you understand...."

All too much of a daydream, I think. Better stop now before I fantasise as much Salmond does!

Free speech banned by Labour!

The Labour Party is becoming a party of pharisees and philistines in equal measure. It is an unholy alliance. I hope the shower come fourth or fifth in this election. A good humiliating result is needed.

Labour apparatchiks have rounded on their candidate, John Cowan, in South East Cambridgeshire because he has said "he would not want any children of his to marry a Muslim". Now I may not agree with him totally, Gordon Brown might get sniffy, but I think it is a legitimate sentiment. Mixed marriages on religious grounds can be quite hard going. A lot work out. A lot don't.

Caroline Flint got rid of her first Muslim husband by declaring him an illegal alien. What does Gordon Brown think of her behaviour and attitudes? Self-righteousness knows no boundaries in the modern Labour Party. They have infected political life by being anti-democratic and anti-free speech. Not only that, loads of them are anti-Catholic, anti-countryside, anti-nobility (inverted snobs, that is!) and anti-anything that they don't fancy on Mondays.

Come on, you hypocrites! How many Labour candidates other than John Cowan relish their sons and daughters marrying Muslims? I bet they won't be poking their heads over their parapets!

It isn't a case of saying such marriages are wrong. I know several successful ones. However, many are not. That is just a fact of life. Labour can be such a nauseating party. It was far better when it was real Labour. Now it's just a bad version of load of dodgy door-to-door salesmen.

If Labour lived in the real world they'd know that adherents of Islam have a very different approach to marriage. Someone I once knew, a good friend at the time, was very typical of a Muslim man married to an English woman. His family urged him to get her to change her name and to renounce most of her cultural past. In the end the strain broke up the marriage.

Mr. Cowan hasn't said anything that outrageous. He just expressed an opinion. But he has been made out to be the week's worst racist by a self-serving bunch of humbugs. What he's doing in such a party Heaven only knows. I think he should leave well alone and leave their prissy precocious politics behind.

Ed Balls in traffic crime shame!

Well, it may not be a crime to many. Also not much shame in it either. Ed Balls was caught using his mobile phone whilst driving a car and has been fined the princely sum of £60. I doubt very much if he is ashamed of his behaviour. This particular law, that of not using your mobile phone whilst driving, is flouted on a daily basis. Those I spot are usually either the arrogant types or the selfish types. Either way, these people are the sort that only obey the laws they want to obey.

Ed Balls has a touch of arrogance about him. It is inconceivable that it did not cross his mind to think that he shouldn't be talking on a phone in a car before he did so. He just thought he could get away with it. He thought "why not?" and just did it anyway. Is this the sort of man who should be in Parliament?

The Conservatives are targeting so-called safe Labour seats. Ed Balls' seat is one of them. It's a pity he wasn't given a more suitable punishment than a £60 fine. How about the stocks for ten days? Then put in an ample supply of rubber balls for chucking at him. Nothing hard or hurtful, you know. Just enough to let him get the message.

In some ways Ed Balls lives up to his name. Not in the way most would think. No, definitely more like a rubber ball. Whatever shame befalls him he bounces back. Whether it be MPs' expenses, sacking people, policy detail, cabinet confidentiality or just taking the law into his own hands, Ed Balls bounces along with a cheery smile (or is it a smirk?).

Well, let's hope the Conservatives can bowl him a googly. Then his rubber balls won't come a bouncin' back!

Two comics - One talent!

Gordon Brown has taken to telling jokes recently. I think he's got ideas from that show pony who is kicking up a fuss currently. Fancy telling Harriet Harman to "shut up!". Mandelson was never very pleasant when moody. I'm surprised the Labour Party keeps him on.

Gordon Brown without a tie looks decidedly wrong and out of place. If he's going to take up joke telling as a profession, then he should do it properly. Dressing up, that is. Take a tip from the master. Harry Hill's got the dress sense to make a mark on the memory.

A few good catchprases ("I'm with Nick" is no good), a more comedic hairdo and a glitzy suit as starters and Gordon may have a chance.

But what I've seen so far, well, it's very disappointing. Gordon needs a new manager, a different stage, and a totally new set of gag writers. From May 7th he'll have all the time in the world to perfect the perfect act. Why not bring Prudence back? Oh, and a small glove puppet called Taw-Nee. I can't wait!

Let David Cameron be himself!

The Conservative Party has suffered too much in recent years from wannabee Warwick the Kingmakers running around spinning a yarn here and slipping in a soundbit there. Each leader since Margaret Thatcher was bundled out of office has been "advised" on speech delivery, body language and everything from hairstyles to walking styles. Now I hear, to my great delight, that the public are pleased to see the real David Cameron. The more they see and hear the better they like it. And who wouldn't? This is definitely not a political X Factor. The only x's we want are in a ballot box.

So, rather like the Queen of Hearts would say, "off with their heads", and let's do away with these backroom boys, and girls no doubt, who have put David Cameron in a straight jacket. A loosened up Dave is coming to town, folks!

St George's Day - England's Day

Happy St. George's Day. My daughter has gone to school to celebrate with face painting and decorating biscuits. It's something she's been looking forward to. Children from all kinds of backgrounds will be joining in and having fun.

I really hope the people of England can now begin to realise that celebrating being English is as good as celebrating being Irish, Chinese or Caribbean. People from these lands know who they are and are justly proud of it. I've never heard anyone say there was anything suspect in a St. Patrick's Day parade. I wonder when we are going to have a St. George's Day parade. I bet if I asked for the streets of Birmingham to be cleared for a jolly flag-waving meandre through town some flinty-eyed pointy-head would react and say it would be a problem.

When the English Democrats launched their general election in Dartford, some fresh-faced copper lunged forward and started to suggest that the very sight of an English flag would be provocative (to some people he had in mind!). He tried to follow this line of argument, but was persuaded of his ridiculousness and he withdrew.

Isn't it a crying shame that the police, council officials and other such people are now infected with this crazed notion that to be English is somehow offensive. It isn't, but these political Pharisees are continuing to infect our politics, our country and who we are.

I want to see a new lot of MPs who will cast aside this political incorrectness and bring back common sense and decency. Being English is not about DNA mixtures but about a sense of values and of belonging. Those who impugn Englishness as they do are decidely not very English in their attitudes. In fact, it's all an alien doctrine they are trying to impose.

Tolerance and decency. That's being English. Ever known a politically correct apparatchik to be tolerant and decent?

Hung drawn and quartered parliament?

If the ComRes poll was replicated in seats for the House of Commons, the BBC predicts the result would be - Con 30% (198 seats), Lab 30% (304 seats), Lib Dem 33% (119 seats). In my book, that's a recipe for disaster after the election, especially if Gordon Brown did a deal with those holding some of the 29 remaining seats.

Even if the Tories and Lib Dems put their combined share of the vote together, at 60%, they could still only muster 317 seats. That's 9 short of a majority.

No wonder Gordon Brown's new smile is outdoing the Cheshire cat's!

Nick Clegg wins the debate

ComRes for ITV asked who won the debate and 30% said Gordon Brown, 30% said David Cameron, and 33% said Nick Clegg. Three-way split and no mistake!

Sky leaders' debate

Just got up from watching the Sky leaders' debate. First reactions are that I was a tad disappointed. At one point I thought I had drifted into Gardeners' Question Time. David Cameron moved up on the points table, though, I thought. Better body image and better presentation. Substance wasn't too bad either.

Now I know that Gordon Brown wants to "deport 'em" - illegal immigrants, that is. Is he borrowing phrases from the BNP or giving them to them? "British jobs for British workers". That one slipped in too.

The audience seemed more animated than last week. Maybe it's the Bristol air. Lastly, I think Adam Boulton overdid the sales pitch for this show. He implied it was going to be a ratings buster, along the lines of some show of Simon Cowell's. I'd like a bit more pepper in the politics. This was more like MasterChef when an aspiring cook gets given praise laced with "but you must pay more attention to your flavours!".

All in all, it was a bit bland tonight. Let's hope the last one will be a bit more punchy.

Clegg in their sights - Rag, Tag & Bobtail!

I've made my own mind up about the LibDems immigration policy. I don't think it will work. And I think I could have a very constructive debate about it. But that seems to have passed the minds of the Daily Express and Daily Mail journalists by. They are just out to dig the dirt and then dish it out like a drunken seed broadcaster fighting off the gulls and the pigeons.

Nick Clegg's opinions on immigration, Trident and the rest, won't be trounced by the mindless rantings of a pornographer's paper. This very same rag that announced on 1st September 1939 that there would be no war. The very same outfit that told the world they had found Martin Bormann alive and well. Left to the Daily Express to fight the Nazis and we would all be in some frightful empire by now. The Daily Express is a paper I advise people never to read unless they want to turn into some BNP-lite opinion former.

The Daily Mail is more subtle but still rather devoid of reasoned opinion at times. Paul Dacre, the editor, is a man who guards his own privacy in much the same way as a cornered tiger would. But give loose-worded reporting a go and he's your man.

As I mentioned before, crazed reporting aimed at whipping up people to vote against the LibDems is bound to backfire. Reasoned argument should win the day. The Express has dug up an article Clegg wrote in 2002. They must be desperate. In it he said Britons have a greater “cross to bear” than the Germans do over their Nazi past. Then an Express reporter rings up Nicholas Soames, "wadya think of Clegg and his Nazi stuff, Mr.Soames?", and getsSoames to say, “Any person who takes this view about Britain’s role in the Second World War is unfit to lead a national party, let alone the country.”

Of course it's all twisted around to suit the pornographer's paper and his views. What Nick Clegg wrote all those years ago does actually have some validity. This was not about anything DURING the second world war but about us, the British, in the 21st century. Yes, there are lot's who are Little Englanders. I'll give you an example. When BMW took over Rover, the Germans had to endure such comments as, "my grandfather always said that the best Krauts were dead Krauts" and such like. It was just as if the war was only a couple of days old.

The Daily Express may like to think there are no wrongs in this country. They may like to confuse the likes of Nicholas Soames into agreeing with their BNP-lite propaganda, but I find it all rather offensive. We keep hearing of the need for a proper and reasoned debate. I hope I hear that tonight. But I am dead certain I don't want the Daily Express pandering to the lowest common denominator in the process.

Clegg under pressure - sort of!

Nick Clegg is obviously being got at by those in the press who are not LibDem fans. The Daily Telegraph is reporting that he is "under pressure" over expense funding. That pressure is happening because the Telegraph has just adjusted the thermostat. I do love the terminology that the media uses. Yesterday the BBC said Clegg "attacked" Gordon Brown. When I saw it the scene looked like a toothless terrier that was just barking serenely. I'll tell you what a verbal attack is. George Osborne rounding on Alistair Darling. Now that was rather personal.

If we are going to have politicians attacking people, let it be like John Prescott trying to lay a punch on the public or Quintin Hogg lashing out with an umbrella. That's attacking stuff.

The media misuse words in much the same way as they allege misuse of public funds by MPs. This morning, Nick Robinson the political editor of the BBC (who seems to end his carefully scripted reports in rather the same manner as an episode of The Archers) reported that a voter who had thought of voting BNP had now switched to the LibDems on the strength of Clegg's performance last week.

Nick Clegg has got as far as he has on suggesting a plague on both your houses. The BNP suggests a plague on all three. If the Daily Telegraph pumps this up too much all that will happen is that those that are wavering will flow towards those with a strong and vulgar message. That former BNP voter could become a bit firmer by returning. Also, the Tories are not clean on the expenses issue, highlighted of course in the Telegraph exposure (on a relentless basis). The scandal still excites as witnessed by STV's Scottish leaders' debate when a couple of audience members amplified their disgust.

What is that saying? Oh yes, "Be careful what you wish for!".

Pearl & Dean sold for £1

Now here's an irony. All those times sitting in cinemas like the Regal and the Hippodrome watching Pearl and Dean commercials, waiting for the chance to see cowboys in colour, and they are themselves sold now for just a pound! Bargain for someone. It appears that quite a few companies are now being sold for a pound. My twitching antennae are telling me that that's not all there is to it, that the world of business is more about deals than about common sense these days. According to the BBC Pearl and Dean have been for sale for nearly four years. What was the original asking price, I wonder? And if businesses can be sold for a pound does that encourage those with time on their hands rather than those with deep pockets?

"Promiscuous women cause earthquakes"

Are there any mad mullahs about? At least one, there is! And his name's Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi. He told worshippers in Tehran last Friday that women had to stick to strict codes of modesty to protect themselves. "Many women who do not dress modestly lead young men astray and spread adultery in society which increases earthquakes," he said. Not only is that fruitcake theology, it's fruitcake morality, fruitcake logic and definitely fruitcake vulcanology.

Mr.Sedighi is either some kind of tongue-in-cheek comedian or he's in need of radical brain surgery. I can't believe any man sat through his diatribe with a straight face. He has a nerve, though. He links three things to make one nonsensical proposition.

Whoever is in charge of Islamic teaching in Iran should put this guy out to grass. Preferably in a part of the country that doesn't get earthquakes.

Toxic bankers need rounding up

The General Election in Britain is literally under a cloud. The volcanic ash cloud is vying for top billing on the news channels with the leaders' debates. However, such a natural disaster as a volcano popping off dangerous substances should not stop us knowing what our political parties are going to do about the financial crisis that will engulf us far more seriously than this Icelandic cloud.

Today we hear that Goldman Sachs are dishing out bonuses to people who have made a fast buck out of thin air. Over the weekend we are told that the SEC in the USA is getting tough and have charged the bank and one of its bosses with fraud for selling customers sub-prime mortgages as the American housing market collapsed. A senior vice president in the investment bank's London office, Fabrice Tourre, was named in court papers as the "architect of the scheme". More like a simply conman it seems to me, but I musn't get prejudicial, must I?

I remember seeing a British TV reporter interviewing an African-American mother of two or three children as she sat on the delapidated porch of her erstwhile house as she decried the fact that she had got in over her head with a sub-prime mortgage. She was in debt bigtime as she spoke. But when she took out the loan she was on welfare. Any loan arranger could have seen straight away she was not in any way suitable for the mortgage market. Cut to the loan arranger. He was now out of work bemoaning the fact that he had let himself put greed before conscience. Both were a sorry pair indeed.

But they are just pawns in the game played out by the likes of the real paper shufflers in the banks. Goldman Sachs probably doesn't have a dime of its own. Most of what they have is very similar to this Icelandic ash cloud. In this sub-prime fiasco they took these ridiculous mortgages and repackaged them as highly desirable "investment vehicles". The South Sea Bubble brigade were their amateur predecessors by comparison. The SEC's director of enforcement Robert Khuzami has said, 'The product was new and complex but the deception and conflicts are old and simple.' Precisely!

As Goldman Sachs continues to run its casino, the bonuses keep coming. Fabrice Tourre is the executive charged with fraud. The bank bosses let him go on working in London despite a lawsuit against him by the US regulators. Have these people got any integity?

What we need to know during this election is what is going to happen to these casino banks? They have no money other than what's shown in their computers. It's legalised gambling commonly passed of as hedge fund administration, leveraging and other such Humpty Dumpty phraseology. It's financial Chinese whispers played to the game of musical chairs.

The truth of the matter is that these banks are so big that no auditor on earth can give us a truthful picture of what is happening. But it is not the political parties who will hold power after the election, it is the bankers. How many more people are shuffling money around that has no origin in reality? Are the sub-prime loans still doing the rounds? There's much talk from politicians but no real answers.

Let's get the transparency that we are seeking in politics rushing through the banking system. Otherwise there will be more like Tourre drifting in on the financial ash cloud.

Lord Mandelson - Cheeky Git!

Lord Mandelson says that a hung parliament might give "disproportionate power" to the Lib Dems. Does he know what disproportionate power is exactly? If he doesn't, then I'll tell him.

Firstly, it's throwing your weight around in cabinet or the corridors of power, spinning against your colleagues and generally acting as a prince of darkness.

Secondly, it's deluding yourself that you can govern a country when only 20% of the total electorate have actually decided to affirm your party as the right one to govern.

Peter Mandelson does actually know about disproportionate power. He has lived with the knowledge that all his dealings and dodges have been about making sure the scales are weighted in his favour. So he's the last person in the country to be talking about disproportionate power!

Eddie Cochran remembered!

Eddie Cochran died fifty years ago yesterday. I was not yet ten years old and in those days I never much heard about him, as it was only the Light Programme. I did as a teenager and in my twenties. He was only 21 years old when he died. But what a legacy of real rock 'n roll he left us with. Still a fan. I bet he would have been a star today except the hips might not be swivelling so much.

His records still sell and he's a regular on most golden oldie stations. Eddie's recording career may have been short but he's able to hold is own with the best fifty years on.

Here's the real Eddie in action -



And he's a really good tribute to him!

A three horse race - plus a few nags!

The general election has come alive for politicos. For those who have a vague interest it seems to resemble the barbeque my wife is just now trying to fire up! I am beginning to think that we may have a worse result in democratic terms than we did last time. In 2005 Blair warbled on about a third term victory but he failed to emphasise that only 20% of the electorate had bothered to support him and his cronies. The British electoral system is ideal for two parties. However, if those parties shatter into smaller groupings then the possibility of being governed by a minority is high. It is made even more so if large numbers stay at home twiddling their thumbs.

Nick Clegg has sent the political establishment into fantasyland. What if? How come? They are working out all kinds of scenarios. The bookmakers are now taking bets on Clegg being prime minister outright. If he were to become the top politician I bet he wouldn't have secured it by a real majority. Just like Blair won a landslide on the back of a divided opposition so too could Clegg achieve gold by just getting a better share of the vote than the others. 30% of the turnout could do it. If the turnout was only 55% of the whole, it says a lot for mandates and the like.

However, this is now a three horse race. Any kind of result could ensue. I saw Philip Hammond, Conservative treasury spokesman talking about the need for a Conservative win. Whilst I might agree with him his logic was flawed. The Conservatives are almost as untried in government as the LibDems are. Only Ken Clarke and William Hague have some real knowledge of cabinet. The rest would be starting with a clean sheet of paper. After thirteen years that is the facts of it all. Hammond suggests that the LibDems can't be electable because they've never been in power before. That argument holds no water with the electorate. Conservatives should win on their current message not on their historical activities. In local terms new parties do come to power on a tide of change. The Boston Bypass Independents and Kidderminster Health Concern are two prime examples.

I can see why Adam Boulton is so fired up. He's going to be in charge of round two. And as a referee he may let the verbal punch-ups go on longer than the seconds may like. Be prepared for the same sort of conversation after the contest as Frank Bruno had with the late great Harry Carpenter. "Bit below the belt there, 'Arry!" and other boxing metaphors.

Stormy Daniels quits Senate race

It seems money does talk in elections. Big time! David Vitter is a US Senator for Louisiana who got caught up in telephone sex and other seedy stuff. Stormy Daniels is a porn star who has been thinking of running for the senate this year against Vitter, who has $5 million in his campaign coffers. Stormy has considerably less and it is this that has convinced her that she should pack it all in and return to the day job (or is it night job?).

When I first heard of Stormy Daniels and this election bid I thought it had a lot of sense about it. Why not? I'm not in any way in favour of what she does as a "career" but that's not the point here I think. She came forward, admittedly after some student set up a Draft Stormy campaign, because she saw hypocrisy in action. As I said before, if she ever did get to the Senate she may well do a hell of a job. For one thing, she wouldn't be taking any of the nonsense that already festers the place.

I think she should reconsider her position and make a run for it. If the people of Louisiana want transparency over the same old politics then they have a choice. This may be a missed opportunity. Of course, Ms Daniels would have to be a politician above reproach in the Senate. No more moonlighting. I just think someone like her at the heart of political power could obtain results nobody else could. Louisiana folk may think they should persuade her to reconsider.

UK flights grounded for second day

All flights out of the UK have been grounded at least until 01.00am tomorrow. Most people accept that such an act of nature is something that happens and it is far better to be safe than sorry. However, whilst accepting the weather patterns and natural phenomena they find it hard to accept the attitude of those running travel businesses today. And it's not just travel companies. Customer service is appalling in Britain.

This morning I saw two women being interviewed at Birmingham airport. "It's just that nobody tells us anything," one said, with an air of passive acceptance. But why is that? Is it beyond the commercial understanding of businesses to realise that this lemming-like approach to customer avoidance just heaps up the resentment of passengers?

It should be a prerequisite that staff are on hand to explain what is going on. What is the point of having a board of directors if they just run away as soon as something difficult happens? I'll vote for the person who suggests mandatory customer liaison lessons for British businesses. Goodness knows we need it.

Come on you travel industry types. Get down to those airports and tell your customers exactly what's going on! Oh, and they know there's a volcanic cloud in the air.

Leaders' Debate - Who won it? Seems it was Nick Clegg!

Just dragged myself away from interminable political opinion making on ITV1. The last speaker being Lord Pearson who has been given a slot for his views. Much of all this has been hyped up and the people most excited about it all are the TV companies and the pollsters. I think the level of excitement offered by the three leaders was less energised.

When this was first mooted (a leaders' debate) everyone thought David Cameron had most to lose as he was the more telegenic and that Gordon Brown had most to gain. In the event both were deemed to have been outshone by Nick Clegg. I think Clegg did well and his natural approach is obviously appealing. David Cameron's political content was mostly sound but his body language seemed at times to give away his nervousness. Gordon Brown got it one fairly good strike about the Conservative posters of himself smiling and Cameron's controlled smirk seemed to suggest he was ill at ease over Brown's newfound Cheshire cat routine. But I think the most telling thing for me was at the very end when they all shook hands. Brown was keen to leave the other two and go to the audience as friendly host thanking his guests. Cameron and Clegg spent few moments in exchanging words. They seemed relaxed in each other's company. Whilst only a fleeting period and one can't read too much into it, it would tend to give a little bit of support to the suggestion that the two could work well in any coalition arrangement.

The pollsters are now crunching the numbers, but they all seem to agree that Nick Clegg was the outright winner. Which will mean that, as William Hague rightly points out, the LibDems will come under greater scrutiny. I hope it will be by proper debate than by a kind of musical chairs game.

BNP accounts to be investigated

The BNP is to get its accounts for 2008 investigated so the Electoral Commission has been telling the media. So the media has splashed it about suggesting that the BNP is running a kind of political ponzi scheme. I've become very suspicious of quangos lately but not for the same reason as the BNP. I think they think they are doing us all a favour by these antics. The truth is nearer to them being cackhanded helpers of the BNP cause.

According to the BNP they have had mega hits on their site. They are being watched daily by loads of people. So what do they say about their 2008 accounts?

Quote - "Responding to the EC’s announcement, BNP treasurer David Hannam said that he had spoken with that organisation’s head of enforcement, Natalie Birtle, earlier in the day. “I received an assurance from Ms Birtle that the investigation would be closed next week after we had met with her to discuss some final points. To open an investigation on the basis that it will be closed the following week, seems to me to be lacking in logic and indicates there must be some ulterior political motive,” Mr Hannam said. “This is further evidence of the increasing politicisation of the Electoral Commission, which is supposed to be an independent body,” he continued."

So basically there's nothing much wrong with the accounts. But the media is flagging it up as if it were. When will those opposed to the BNP get it into their thick heads that trying to undermine this party by furtive methods is never go to work. In fact it does the complete opposite.

Hard on the heels of the Electoral Commission and their antics come the church forums who are totally against inviting BNP candidates along. A lot of poncy clerics and self-righteous spokesmen talk about "giving them the oxygen of publicity". But all they do is pour loads of petrol on the BNP's network of publicity beacons. Surely these fools should know that they could out-debate a BNP candidate? Or are they so feeble-minded as to know what to say?

Banks, bonuses and botch-ups

When the Queen asked "Didn't anyone see it coming?" she may not have been looking directly at the prime minister at the time. Maybe she should have prodded him with a stick or got a corgi or two to nip him. Only now is it possible for Gordon Brown to admit that he was duped by the banks.

Brown says now, "In the 1990s, the banks, they all came to us and said, 'Look, we don't want to be regulated, we want to be free of regulation'. All the complaints I was getting from people was, 'Look you're regulating them too much'. And actually the truth is that globally and nationally we should have been regulating them more. So I've learnt from that. So you don't listen to the industry when they say, 'This is good for us'. You've got to talk about the whole public interest." Well, Well. You don't say!!!

It's taken him all this time to recognise that the banks don't just take people's money in and invest it by lending it to others. No, that's far too tame. Far better to have "vehicles" and mix dodgy loans up with the good and flog them off to others who know less about it. Banks are now operating in some kind of Las Vegas style. How many times have we seen that the directors of these banks hadn't a clue what was going on. Northern Rock was a prime example, or would sub-prime be a better expression.

What I find reprehensible is that the leading politicians find it so difficult to trust the public. They feel it better to prevaricate or lie. It is so sad to think that only 4% of the electorate thinks they are trustworthy. To what depths have we sunk? I suppose we can be pleased Gordon Brown has at last begun to see reason. One wonders if he should have taken his moral compass to the repairers moons ago. But at least it's flickering in the right direction. Won't make me vote Labour though. Somehow it's ingrained in me that there's something strangely foreign about the Labour Party. Yes, we've got New Labour and its precious precociousness but I still remember Red Flags and raw socialism as if it were a communist-lite offering.

So we've got a ray of truthfulness creeping in. Great! But let's not forget that the electorate has to be truthful too. Can't have only one side being good, can we?

Stoking it up in Stoke Central

All around the country there are constituencies where various ding-dongs are going on. Some odd, some peculiar, most just the usual political sniping and squabbling. In Stoke Central it appears to be a mixture of everything. First, the remnants of New Labour got a guy called Tristram to be the candidate in place of posh Mark Fisher. The phrase "pot calling the kettle" comes to mind and New Labour is deftly trying to be both pot and kettle at the same time. Because the Labour candidate is a friend of Peter Mandelson's this has upset the Stoke Old Labour stalwarts, so the factions are getting fractious. This has led to Gary Elsby, a former secretary or whatever of the local party, to stand as an Independent Labour candidate. He's puffing hard on his bravado pipe and causing a skirmish in town. His use of the word Labour has upset the London lot. Hard to say whether he will succeed in knocking much off the Labour vote or not. If he does, anything could happen. It's a volatile electorate at the moment. More Grand National than a two-horse race.

The BNP is also in a spot of bother, with their former stalwart Alby Walker calling his former comrades a bunch of Nazi revisionists. So he too is talking of standing as an independent. Somehow I don't think he will do as well as Elsby.

All these individual constituency scraps must play havoc with the pollsters and their expensive number crunchers. Where on earth would you put Gary Elsby in the scheme of things? More and more it's becoming 650 mini general elections and not one big one.

In Solihull we've got no worries about Gordon Brown and his ideas. Labour are down in the low tens. This is a contest between two opposition parties, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. So even if Labour won the whole thing we'd still have an opposition MP whichever one won. If the Conservatives win nationally we have the joy of knowing Brown's out, but we could still have a LibDem MP. As I say, each constituency does its own thing.

When all the votes are counted I'm sure it will be the strangest result ever recorded. The electorate appears more in a "plumping for" mood than a "standing up for" mood. It's wide open basically and the pollsters are not really sure about what's happening. That's why I think constituencies like Stoke Central excite the media. They can in turn excite the candidates to engage in a real knockabout election.

The Times and its anti-Catholic diatribes

What is it with Murdoch's lot? They seem to have lost all sense of journalistic proportion and become opinionated bloggers. A bit like me and several thousand others.

I don't profess to report news in an accurate way. I don't distort it, I hope. I just have my say. Like Libby Purves and her "arrest the Pope" stuff in The Times. But it's not just that paper. Others are getting all anti-Catholic in a snidy way. Fair comment to say you think that Catholicism is baloney or not your cup of tea. But it's just the cheap innuendo that passes for cerebral journalism that I find hard to take.

Richard Dawkins is a known snide on the subject, as is the ascerbic Christopher Hitchens. But I'm surprised by some of the others. I think it is best to ride out this, as Damian Thompson suggests. Any response will be like feeding red meat to lions.

NHS becomes politically stupid

I don't get it with the NHS mandarins. Obviously they are in need of brain surgery, preferably new brains if possible. Hot on the heels of the Christian nurse being refused permission to wear a crucifix on a chain, we now get the politically muddled becoming politically stupid.

Muslim doctors and nurses are to be allowed for religious reasons to opt out of strict NHS dress codes introduced to prevent the spread of deadly hospital superbugs. So it's OK if you're a Muslim with a need to follow what you think are rules but not a Christian. The department of Health has some nutters in it.

The Koran does not stipulate how a medic washes. Neither does the Bible. Muslim doctors and medical students said baring arms conflicted with the Koran’s teaching that women must dress modestly in public. In public? Are doctors scrubbing up "in public"? I hardly think a disposable sleeve shoved up the arm is going to help fight superbugs. If modesty problems are causing Muslim medics to swoon and faint let them scrub up under some kind of tent or clinical tabernacle!

It's all a load of tripe. It's this sort of nonsense that causes people to think badly about minorities. In any case, once the discreet scrubbing has been done, what part of the hand and forearm can't be exposed during an operation? It's nonsense leading madness. But then we have a lot of nonsensical people in high places producing the maddening policies imaginable.

Computer says "NO!"

I am a fan of Little Britain. I think the characters do two things quite wonderfully. They amplify our fantasies (and anyone who says they don't have even the mildest daydream is lying!) and they debunk authority in a very realistic and meaningful way. The scenes where Carol Beer is in charge of "customer service" are not just funny but so near to being the whole truth in some cases.

We live in a society today where the computer is king and our lives revolve around it. Added to that most companies and organisations routinely instruct their staff not to admit that anything is wrong, defective or out of place. Discussion is minimal. Some stores just take things back without the need of questioning, others endeavour to dig their heels in and brutalise the customer. Either way, the staff member in question never admits to a fault.

Now we are told that computer boffins are trying to get machines to recognise human speech patterns in order to get search engine requests better filtered. But all this is putting the cart before the horse. Unless we can get a more civilised interaction between ourselves with regard to the service culture we are just going to rely on the boffins and the comedians to be at opposite ends of a spectrum.

I think the general election should focus a bit more on getting things done rather than brushed under the carpet. Whether it be the size of the national debt or a localised issue like speed humps, Britain is full of paper-pushers and long grass enthusiasts. If change means anything, let it mean changing Britain's longtime affliction with meaningless short-term fixes and fudges.

I'm approaching 60. All my life comedians and comic actors have made a running joke about Britain's attitude to service. Nobody wanted to wait at tables so we imported Italians. Tony Hancock berated the blood donor service, Arthur Haynes had a go at the health service, the Boulting Brothers gave us satirical films, John Cleese had a nice turn in customer care whilst at Fawlty Towers, and now, bang up to date, Little Britain picks up the baton (as if this is a relay race) and continues to mock the attitudes that beset us.

How long does Britain need to be reminded through humour that we need to get a grip and make some real changes?

Lynne Jones MP praises Respect's Salma Yaqoob

Respect Party candidates are often seen as being left-wing firebrands currying favour with Muslim communities. However, I detect something rather different, particularly in regard to Salma Yaqoob, the leader of the party. Yaqoob is a bright and thoughtful politician. In many respects she portrays a woman whose political theorising is based more on common sense than socialist rhetoric. She is standing in the new constituency of Hall Green which is nothing like the old Hall Green. This is mainly due to the Sparkbrook and Sparkhill areas being included. This will inevitably give Ms Yaqoob a sizeable chunk of support.

What has added a frisson of excitement is that Lynne Jones, the retiring MP for neighbouring Selly Oak has praised Salma Yaqoob saying she would "encourage tactical voting for the person who most shares my values". This is a snub for Roger Godsiff, who is the Labour candidate.

Both Tory and Liberal Democrat candidates think Ms Yaqoob has no chance. I think they may be wrong. In Salma Yaqoob the electors of Hall Green have the chance to vote for a woman who is capable of appealing to the current anti-politician sentiment. She is never likely to succumb to expense scandals or devious political opportunism. In some strange way there is something of the high Tory about her. I suspect she would flinch at such a suggestion. However, I do think her message may well appeal to conservative-minded people with a small "c" and their are plenty of them in Hall Green. Add to that the numbers of more liberally-minded, though unradical, types and she may do far better than her detractors suggest.

Jerry Evans, Liberal Democrat candidate in the constituency has said, "Lynne Jones appears to have got her maths wrong. She quite rightly says the Tories have no chance in Hall Green, but neither do Respect and Ms Yaqoob." Mr.Evans, maths has nothing much to do with this election. There will be more shock surprises that a seismic monitor could cope with. Old party allegiances are somewhere in the clouds. Everyone seems to be either a floating voter or a lethargic armchair critic. Forget the opinion polls - it's every candidate for his or herself against an enigmatic electorate.

Twitter abuse? Yes, says Labour!

A young and inexperienced Labour candidate has been sacked for posting such remarks as "coffin dodgers" and "being sober for the first time in 4 days" on his Twitter account. Not only has he been sacked but his opponents are coming out with pompously self-righteous comments and Jim Murphy describes the episode as if the candidate were a wife-beating monster. Maybe Frankie Howerd was right. "Twitter ye not!" - or at least very carefully during general elections.

My view is that the candidate Stuart MacLennan has been foolish and naive but no more than that. He's probably expressed opinions that most men of his age have done regardless of party allegiance. I think this says more about those commenting about him. Mr. MacLennan didn't curse or blaspheme as far as I know. Plenty of current MPs do both!

It would have been far better to leave Mr. MacLennan where he was as candidate for Moray. I'm sure the voters of this constituency are better placed to judge who they want as their representative than the paragons of virtue who are now "infecting" our political process. I do hope his replacement is not the school swat who has become leader's pet. We want fearless representatives not apparatchiks that act as if they are in toothpaste commercials.

British Army has "mosques" in firing line!

Just as the General Election hots up and gets into first gear we hear of another idiocy from the high command of the British Army. A Muslim group has demanded an apology from the Army after it emerged that replica mosques were being used on a North Yorkshire firing range. In response, a spokesman said, "We have no intention of offending religious sensibilities."

But I think this beggars belief. Did it not occur to some bigwig to think first? Maybe a question like "If we build replica mosques on a firing range and get squaddies to take aim at them, will that be a good idea?". Something along those lines. Maybe it was never discussed. Or if it was, some Corporal Colonel Square boomed out and those with doubts were silenced immediately.

When it comes to election time, idiots and their idiocies are never difficult to find. It just makes me wonder if the part of the human race that occupies the British Isles will ever learn. I've long thought the wrong people get to the top.

One simple question would have been to ask whether it would look good if the Saudi army had done a similar thing with churches. An Army spokesman went on, "Providing the best training facilities for our armed forces ahead of deployment to operational theatres is a priority for us. Facilities at Bellerby have been upgraded in response to operational feedback from Afghanistan as it is crucial that our armed forces train at ranges that replicate the environment they will be deployed to." Sounds good, but those cardboard cutout mosques hardly replicate the environment. And in any event, such an enterprise just creates more problems, as this one has done.

Paul McCartney for Downing Street?

In its rolling news feature, the BBC reports at 1552 "As the Lib Dem leader arrived at a community centre in Penny Lane, one onlooker said disappointingly, "I thought the VIP was going to be Paul McCartney" ". The BBC's Fiona Trott in Liverpool for the election puts this in as vital news.

I wonder what this says about it all. Are the electorate interested in this election, long awaited as it has been? Although I'm fairly involved in political thought it still amazes me that many people don't know who their political leaders are. Nick Clegg is relatively unknown we are told, but surely at a political event during the election the person was never going to be Paul McCartney. Or am I just too much out of the loop?

General Election 2010 - May 6th

So Gordon Brown has uncorked his bottle at last. I can't wait. Today is 6th April. One month to go - 6th May - and the former beau of Prudence (the politically incorrect keeper of the prime ministerial moral compass) will be kicked out without ceremony or sentiment.

As I say, I can't wait!!

Secular society raises its ugly head

It would appear that the Conservative Party is no longer the Church of England at prayer. If fact, it is no longer the party of traditional values. Just as Tony Blair jumped on a vacuous pile of cliches in order to dupe the electorate in 1997, the Tories are rummaging around in the leftovers of the pile.

It is one thing to want to be as fair as possible to competing interests. All political parties have to be coalitions. However, when it comes to the rights of people, some are more equal than others. I certainly don't want to live in a country where homosexuals are pilloried for their lifestyle. Live and let live. However, that particular lifestyle is not consistent with traditional Christian teaching.

The Conservative Party is slavishly adopting the New Labour securalist agenda. Under Harriet Harman's purge of Christian doctrine one can only be a Christian in church. Isn't it weird? People like Harman used to bleat that Christians only went to church on Sundays, implying they got up to all manner of unchristian stuff on weekdays. Now they want Christians to keep the Gospel hidden in the vestry so as not to upset the New Labour horse.

The Mayor of Antrim, Adrian Watson, has been barred from standing as joint UUP/Tory candidate because of his views on gay couples staying in his guest house. He is quite rightly upset seeing as Chris Grayling has amplified similar views.

David Cameron needs to get a grip. He is fast becoming a man, not of principle, but of expediency. Much like Blair, who masters expediency over principle to a tee. Many people are upset about all this. I have my doubts about David Cameron and I don't like doubting people if I have to. He never really explained his need to divest his house of wisteria at the taxpayers' expense. And he railed against colleagues who he saw as far worse culprits. It all smacks of a schoolboy trying to explain away a misdemeanour to the headmaster. "There are loads of boys doing things worse than me, sir!".

I wish Cameron could respect those who hold to traditional views. Mr.Watson is not advocating discrimination, just that people's homes, regardless of whether they are used for business, should be places where personal conscience is respected.