Harriet Harman is a grade A hyprocrite when it comes to castigating people for political offence. She has been making offensive remarks most of her political life. Probably because she fits so badly into the clothes of a socialist. A wolf in sheep's clothing? More like a female polecat on the make.
Today she feigns outrage at comments the mayor of London has made about the Two Eds. That they would be "quietly satisfied" with disorder on a day of protest in London against cuts. Harman says it was a disgraceful remark. As if she has ever been full of grace herself. Who was it who likened the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to a "ginger rodent"? Why, it was the Harperson herself!
Harriet Harman, or Harperson when she is being all equal, has just lammed in on the Liberal Democrats and Danny Alexander in particularly. I thought she was above all this. Didn't she push through some kind of equalities bill? Isn't it a diabolical crime to say nasty things about people in the workplace? I would have thought calling someone a "ginger rodent" is enough for at least six moths in the slammer. She could then do corrective training and come out a totally rehabilated person. I think the rozzers should pay her a visit. Not for the first time, mind you. She's got form, what with mobile phone driving.
At their very worst Labour can be a bunch of self-righteous shysters. This isn't that bad, but Harperson's the type that thinks she's above it all if she can say she has a track record in this, that and the other. Humbug, basically. Glad they didn't get in.
This all came about because she was ranting on about people not voting for a coalition. She must have low grade O level general politics if she thinks that. People voted as they voted. The result may not be as they wanted, but we live with a party political system that offers only Government and Opposition. She's the latter. Everyone knows that the Tories couldn't make the numbers so a Coalition it is. Simple. Stop wingeing!
The Labour Party has been invigorated by the election of its new leader, according to Harriet Harman. Fortified is the word she used. It will also be united. Sounds very cosy. But what will the policies be. Que sera, sera? If Dianne Abbott's view, as expressed on Question Time last night, is anything to go by, it will be all guided by some new blame game and its set of rules. Deny the past, see no problems, just talk about cuts as if there is a big set of scissors snapping at the clouds above.
If Labour has been fortified its been on weak beer supplied by those union bosses eager to be a part of the anti-coalition action. High dosage Phyllosan would be hard going on them. The Labour Party needs some kind of shock therapy to be really fortified. A woman's work is never done, eh, Harriet!
New Labour in the personification of Harriet Harman certainly knows how to be illiberal when it wants to be. Now she has unleashed a load of anti-Catholic bile onto the nation. Maybe not personally, but her craven desire to make life difficult for the Church has encouraged all manner of diatribes against the Pope.
Now I'm not suggesting everyone has to believe in the basic tenets of the Christian Faith. If they wish to walk by on the other side, I'm not going to force them to think or behave otherwise. And it's not as if the Church is seeking to cajole securalists into the fold. It is just a very strange thing that those who say they are liberal and in favour of free speech seem so keen to rubbish the beliefs of Christianity in such a mean-spirited way.
Harriet Harman is besotted with control and legislation. In her zeal to prove a point, she has become the one who has opened the bottle and let out a rather unpleasant genie. Probably the New Testament is lost on her currently, but we are told "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." They certainly have today.
Careless driving, eh? Following on from careless expense calculating and careless politicking. She is alleged to have been driving without due care and attention and driving while using a mobile phone. She "strongly refutes the allegations and will deny the charges". Umm! Does she now.
If she has been falsely accused, then I'd be the first to back her to the hilt. There are many who have had to endure falsehoods without the ability or resources to establish the truth. If she is found guilty, then it is a very bad example indeed of arrogance and an above-the-law attitude.
Every day I see mobile phones being used. There is an exceptance by quite a few that it doesn't matter and that they won't get caught. Good examples of perpetual law breakers are delivery van drivers. I see them most mornings. It is quite outrageous that household name businesses should be letting their employees loose on the roads without a hands-free kit.
Harriet Harman knows the law. The Crown Prosecution Service has said there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to prosecute. Yes, they should prosecute. Not because it's her, but because this activity (alleged in this case) is both anti-social and potentially life threatening. And it will be a lesson to all arrogant drivers who abuse other road users through attitude and high-mindedness that their minority actions are actually not tolerated.
She looks stunned and stupified here. Whatever she may say, The Sun's belated divorce from New Labour has stung her. And I'm not sorry really. She's a woman who believes in equality on her terms. Equality to get the best expenses, equality to get the best schools for her children, all that kind of equality. Hypocrisy is a word that comes to mind.
I had thoughts about this when the BNP was poised to get representation in the European Parliament. Now that they have, the BBC is pondering what to do about asking Nick Griffin, the BNP leader to appear on Question time. The Labour Party has always taken a poncy approach to the BNP. It is this "smell-under-the-nose" look and self-righteous manner that has done much to embolden the BNP. New Labour is significantly worse that most in failing to address the debate. The Conservatives would appear on the programme it seems but they would need to address their current attitudes. Just slagging the BNP off will do no good whatsover. One million people are prepared to support this party in votes and a fair few more may mutter appreciative comments when confronted with political activity they dislike. How many times have I heard "I don't support the BNP but on this they've got a point!" The three main parties have, in effect, created the BNP. If they had addressed the root problems of society there would be no need for a party that can offer "I told you so" slogans as solutions.
Sleaze, corruption, banking crises, these all help to feed fear and revolt. Forget immigration as a cause. MPs themselves have given the BNP far more ammunition than a lorryload of asylum seekers ever will. I sincerely hope that Harriet Harman will divest herself of her "politically correct" hairshirt and use her inate intelligence to think a bit. Just playing to the gallery, one in which Giglamps Rentamouth from the UAF is blinking from, will not do.
However, debate is one thing - violent disruption is another. The so-called Unite Against Fascism (an odd title for a distinctly fascist outfit) is hell-bent on shutting the programme down if Griffin appears. We don't need self-appointed Taliban-lite morons strutting the streets telling us who we should vote for or not. David Cameron is still down as a supporter of this rabble-rousing outfit as are a few other Tory MPs. The Conservative Party needs to be positive in presenting policies that will create opportunity for all citizens and be bold in offering solutions that have some likelihood of succeeding. For instance, immigration must be firm and fair - the EU should not see itself as just a conduit to Dover!
I welcome the chance for the three main parties to debate with Griffin. He appears ready for it - are they?
It is now a tragedy rather than farce. The Daily Telegraph has done us a service by publishing leaked details of the expenses of Cabinet members. Details they wanted to keep secret. Harriet Harman has been on the radio and television this morning "defending" her Cabinet colleagues over these expenses. She is still trying to say that it was all within the rules. This woman has gone from toff to twat in a political generation. She claims the expenses were made in "good faith". Come off it! Just because the rules may suggest you can claim for mock tudor beams in your second home doesn't mean you have the absolute right to milk the system dry. Has she lost her marbles?
All this craven support for the morally corrupt behaviour of politicians gives daily ammunition to the BNP. As Harriet Harman waffles on, protecting the unrepentant sleaze merchants from their own failings, the BNP is proudly parading a dumper truck round Manchester with some fat pigs in it. All to show the electorate how sleazy the politicians in Westminster are. Harman might as well drive the truck herself. She's given them more publicity material than they could ever hope for.
Whilst sticking to her mantra that all claims were within the rules, she feebly admits "I know this looks bad and people are angry." Too true! It's gone from casual sleaze to gratuitous fraud. These people are no longer accidentally making accounting errors, they are systematically defrauding the system.
Jack Straw claimed his entire council tax bill for his second home despite already enjoying a substantial discount from his local authority, worth a reported £1,500 a year. Now don't tell me that was an oversight. It's fraud and it's against the law!
So Harriet Harman has no defence for her chiselling cronies. All she is is one big recruiting sergeant for the BNP!
Very strange things are happening at the top of the New Labour edifice. The cracks are appearing and various characters are out night and day with pots of glue and sheets of brown paper. Or is it vinegar and brown paper?
Harriet Harman is the latest to sound off about her loyalty to the hapless leader. She has publicly declared that she is not remotely interested in the leadership. So if, Gordon Brown falls on his sword, let's hope there are those capable of holding her back. Known as Harriet Harperson for her slavish adherence to all things sexually equal, she is the complete opposite of a soft-boiled egg. She's soft on the outside and pretty hard inside. A perfect political operator and one Brown should be wary of.
It is said quite often that Gordon Brown is grumpy and moody. It is now being reported that he often flies into rages, is unpredictable, can be extremely morose and prefers to maintain close contact with only a small coterie of close companions. Is this the type of man we want leading the country? Is Gordon Brown really stable enough to cope with the complexities of a financial meltdown? It depends on who you believe.
The Cabinet is coming to the Brown rescue by saying he's the best man for the job. Whilst falling short of saying they'd die for him, they seem quite happy and pleased about it all. Has the prime Minister ever bellowed at one of them? Has he cowered them into submission?
It doesn't add up. Peter Oborne reported in the Daily Mail that Brown was getting increasing bunker-bound. Oborne says, "The fundamental fact is that Brown has lost control of a very large part of the Labour Party. For a control freak who deeply resents it when he fails to get his own way, this is intolerable. This powerlessness explains the recurrent reports emanating from Downing Street that Brown's personal behaviour has become erratic. He is prone to fits of rage, and there are reports that only last week he had to be taken to one side and calmed down by Peter Mandelson after a TV interview went wrong." Somebody witnessed that, unless Oborne is making it up, which I very much doubt. So can the likes of Alan Johnson still say he's the only man for the job?
Oborne goes on to say, "Worryingly for Gordon Brown, the conspirators do not just have their candidate. They have their chosen time. Next month's local and European elections are the moment of maximum risk for the Prime Minister. A truly disastrous performance at the polls - as seems very probable - will prompt many more MPs to come forward to call on Brown to go." So that will be that, then?
It is a very sad situation where we have a man in power with obvious qualities, and Gordon Brown does have those, but that his twin flaws of anger and vindictiveness are now outweighing the positive aspects of his nature. Perhaps the Cabinet have just had enough of being browbeaten.
If he goes in June and a new leader is in place, Labour could well get back in contention. I still think it hard for them to win an outright majority, but they could be in with a chance as far as a minority or coalition government is concerned. At the moment, they are doomed to go down like the Titanic.
The Labour Party made the grave mistake of accepting as fact that Gordon Brown was the only choice after Blair. Patently that was an absurd notion. Then, once in place, Gordon Brown made the catastrophic mistake of not calling a general election. He just bottled it. If he had gone to the country he could have won well. Any subsequent problems over the credit crisis would enable him to say he was backed by the country. As it is he isn't and won't be. We have a prime minister who finds decisions hard to make and who is very much becoming emotionallly unstable.
Harriet Harman is fooling nobody apart from herself.
If I was heavily involved in horse betting I wouldn't pop round to Downing Street to ask the Celtic Clowns for any tips. Or any of their chums, either. Harriet Harman is getting very flaky these days. She thinks she can pass a new law specifically aimed at Sir Fred Goodwin's pension. What crazy notions did she wake up with yesterday morning. It was St.David's Day, when all good Welsh people display either leeks or daffodils. This government seems to have only one choice on offer and those are very different leaks. There seems to be a leakage of talent, leakage of ideas and a generally leakage of authority and basic honesty.
Sir Fred Goodwin may be a lot of things, but I think he is probably telling the gospel truth when he says that the government knew all along about his pension arrangements. Whether he is morally entitled to this whacking great treasure chest is one thing. That he is legally entitled to it is quite another.
How much is it going to cost for these treasury legal eagles to spend time sifting through this pension detail? We are not told, but it is bound to be more money wasted on a pointless gesture.
Gordon Brown is just grandstanding. Sir Fred's horse has passed the winning post! Another nag is running round Whitehall with all the equine grace of a knackered mule!
Harriet Harman is the type of socialist that gets you wondering how socialist she really is. Of course, if she's signed up to this New Labour control freakery programme, then she isn't much of one. Her problem has always been an ambivalence to moral certitude. She says she has always been for civil liberties, yet she gives the impression of one who never was a campaigner. Her smug situation today confirms that this is a woman prepared to sacrifice all her principles for power and control. It rather ressembles a Jewish or Muslim butcher selling pork in order to turn a quick profit. The very thought is enough to establish hypocrisy as fact.
The Government has interfered in the Speaker's desire to have an inquiry led by senior members of the House of Commons. The debate was a travesty in that Labour stooges spoke of the events with made up logic. Gerald Kaufman does not understand what a warrant is. He seemed to think that the police had very right to enter without a warrant. No sir, never. This was put very eloquently by Simon Hughes. No police officer may enter any premises without permission if there is no warrant. The case here is that the Sergeant-at-Arms was woefully misguided. Either she has a vague understanding of the most basic right of rights or she had short-term memory loss. It is completely correct that the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have nothing to do with Ms Harman's kangaroo commission.
Let her confront her own devilish hypocrisy and simpering sinisterism before she embarks on a convuluted inquiry that will have the long grass covering the Palace of Westminster and Mr Green severely traduced!
Harriet Harman has some cheek. She is the prim and proper daughter of radical upper class types, who has spent a lifetime cajoling others in the benefits of socialism, but failing to live up to her own words. She has been caught out with dodgy donations; she has, like other New Labour apparatchiks, weasled her way round the education system for her own children whilst espousing "local schools" for others.
Positioning herself as a feminist and Labour party survivor, she has a mean streak which is somewhat unpleasant. So it is not surprising that she accuses the Conservatives of "breathtaking arrogance", saying leader David Cameron was "not quite right". She goes on - "He's the kind of man your mother used to warn you about. He'll promise you the world. But if he ever got his wicked way with you - in the ballot box - you'd never hear from him again."
Well, we heard from her alright. Her party has caused the Treasury pot to become empty, she has been over zealous in her determination to support all the anti-freedom measures of this government, such as ID cards, 42 days detention, surveillance of the individual and a cavalier attitude to international law. The inept handling of sensitive computer material, the lax approach to prison releases, the slapdash way the state of our hospitals is handled, and the general "briefing" in the press rather than confronting Parliament with the facts all add to the mayhem.
The Labour Party has a coterie of sleazy hangers-on, all supping at a table with "New Labour" ideas laid out on it, which the rest of us find unpalatable. All in all, Harriet Harman has brass neck - I'll give her that.
She is the kind of woman no Tory could really feel comfortable with. A whiff of hypocrisy, the scent of duplicity, but above all a cold fish attitude to those she disagrees with.
I'd hazard a guess that most fathers would warn their sons of her "charms"!!
Harriet Harman, or Harperson when she is being all equal, has just lammed in on the Liberal Democrats and Danny Alexander in particularly. I thought she was above all this. Didn't she push through some kind of equalities bill? Isn't it a diabolical crime to say nasty things about people in the workplace? I would have thought calling someone a "ginger rodent" is enough for at least six moths in the slammer. She could then do corrective training and come out a totally rehabilated person. I think the rozzers should pay her a visit. Not for the first time, mind you. She's got form, what with mobile phone driving.
The Labour Party has been invigorated by the election of its new leader, according to Harriet Harman. Fortified is the word she used. It will also be united. Sounds very cosy. But what will the policies be. Que sera, sera? If Dianne Abbott's view, as expressed on Question Time last night, is anything to go by, it will be all guided by some new blame game and its set of rules. Deny the past, see no problems, just talk about cuts as if there is a big set of scissors snapping at the clouds above.
New Labour in the personification of Harriet Harman certainly knows how to be illiberal when it wants to be. Now she has unleashed a load of anti-Catholic bile onto the nation. Maybe not personally, but her craven desire to make life difficult for the Church has encouraged all manner of diatribes against the Pope.
Careless driving, eh? Following on from careless expense calculating and careless politicking. She is alleged to have been driving without due care and attention and driving while using a mobile phone. She "strongly refutes the allegations and will deny the charges". Umm! Does she now.
I had thoughts about this when the BNP was poised to get representation in the European Parliament. Now that they have, the BBC is pondering what to do about asking Nick Griffin, the BNP leader to appear on Question time. The Labour Party has always taken a poncy approach to the BNP. It is this "smell-under-the-nose" look and self-righteous manner that has done much to embolden the BNP. New Labour is significantly worse that most in failing to address the debate. The Conservatives would appear on the programme it seems but they would need to address their current attitudes. Just slagging the BNP off will do no good whatsover. One million people are prepared to support this party in votes and a fair few more may mutter appreciative comments when confronted with political activity they dislike. How many times have I heard "I don't support the BNP but on this they've got a point!" The three main parties have, in effect, created the BNP. If they had addressed the root problems of society there would be no need for a party that can offer "I told you so" slogans as solutions.
If I was heavily involved in horse betting I wouldn't pop round to Downing Street to ask the Celtic Clowns for any tips. Or any of their chums, either. Harriet Harman is getting very flaky these days. She thinks she can pass a new law specifically aimed at Sir Fred Goodwin's pension. What crazy notions did she wake up with yesterday morning. It was St.David's Day, when all good Welsh people display either leeks or daffodils. This government seems to have only one choice on offer and those are very different leaks. There seems to be a leakage of talent, leakage of ideas and a generally leakage of authority and basic honesty.
Harriet Harman is the type of socialist that gets you wondering how socialist she really is. Of course, if she's signed up to this New Labour control freakery programme, then she isn't much of one. Her problem has always been an ambivalence to moral certitude. She says she has always been for civil liberties, yet she gives the impression of one who never was a campaigner. Her smug situation today confirms that this is a woman prepared to sacrifice all her principles for power and control. It rather ressembles a Jewish or Muslim butcher selling pork in order to turn a quick profit. The very thought is enough to establish hypocrisy as fact.
Harriet Harman has some cheek. She is the prim and proper daughter of radical upper class types, who has spent a lifetime cajoling others in the benefits of socialism, but failing to live up to her own words. She has been caught out with dodgy donations; she has, like other New Labour apparatchiks, weasled her way round the education system for her own children whilst espousing "local schools" for others.
