...a blog by Richard Flowers

Sunday, January 21, 2007

Day 2211: If the Conservatories do it, it cannot be Right!


Before Dale Winton gets his knickers in a twist, today’s title is a CUNNING PUN on the latest words of wisdom from my Daddy Alex.

Obviously there are LOTS of things that the Conservatories CAN do right, usually it only takes a little pointer from the Liberal Democrats: just look at their thoughts on Green Taxes, Opposition to I.D.iot cards, and Iraq (subject to direction wind is blowing).

So, the defection of Conservatory peer NUMBER THREE to the UKPNuts Party should be a non-story.

The question is: why do they KEEP doing that?

Their problem is not wanting to do the right things but wanting to do the right WING things: in particular: slash taxes, privatise the health service, and quit Europe. (Geographically, if possible; exiting the European Union would be a satisfactory start, though).

The public, of course, are not nearly so “hot to trot” on these topics – tax is the only one where the Conservatories can get people’s attention, because we probably are at the top end of the amount of tax it is fair for Mr Frown to take. But the Conservatories have entirely SURRENDERED the high ground on the issue of taxation by promising that they will not cut SPENDING. The simple fact is, you cannot spend more than you earn. When Mrs Thatcher explained this almost thirty years ago, people understood it – and they haven’t forgotten.

Meanwhile, people LOVE their NHS, and in spite of the ASTONISHING amount of effort on the part of Labour to mess it up, people STILL get wary of the Conservatories the moment they mention “business units” when they mean “local doctors”.

And most people are actually pretty BLASÉ about Europe, so long as they can go there for a sunny holiday and cheap booze they are not so very much bothered. That’s actually pretty amazing when you remember all the years that the press have been peddling their made up “straight banana” and “metric martyr” stories.

Mr Balloon [Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher] knows all this. The electoral MATHEMATICS has not changed since Mr Something of the Night… or Mr Iain Drunken Swerve… or Mr William Vague worked it out: the Conservatory Party CANNOT win from the RIGHT, there is less than 30% of the votes out there. They have to come into the centre and appeal to ordinary, middle-of-the-road, non-nutter people.

Lord Blairimort worked out a SIMILAR thing back at the start of the nineties, and promptly abandoned his party and replaced it with the Labour, which had all the same people but none of the calories. By seizing key right wing positions on certain policies, he was able to rob the Conservatories of anything to say other than “we hate foreigners!”, “we’ll cut the NHS to the bone!” and “moo!”

The obvious example is Law and Order, where it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Conservatories to be any MORE right wing than the Labour. This week the Labour went BEYOND satire and into complete pottydom with Mr Blanket the former Security Blunket saying that if ASBOs aren’t tough enough, then they should just BULLDOZE problem communities. What is this? Apartheid era South Africa? Something Clementine-Coloured Catspaw Mr Peter Hain would have NO RECOLLECTION of, of course.

Presumably, with a BULLDOZER poor old Mr Dr Reid could no doubt sweep LOTS more Home Office FAILURES under the CARPET!

(This is my Daddy Alex’s joke!)

Anyway, this is why Mr Balloon [Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher]… can you hear chanting?

This is why Mr Balloon has spent all his time trying very hard to HUG things – huskies, hoodies, homosexualists, all the “H”s really – and so very little time saying anything of any substance AT ALL, to try and create the impression that the NuConservatories are nothing at all like the Old Conservatories.

Which, funnily enough, is what Mr Vague tried. And Mr Drunken Swerve. And Mr Something of the Night.

Plus ca very fluffy change.

One thing HAS changed, though: the Conservatory Party itself. They have, in fact, turned themselves UPSIDE DOWN, or possibly INSIDE OUT. It used to be taken as COMPLETELY OBVIOUS that the Conservatories were run by an ELITE from Eton who told everyone what to do and the Grammar Schools Tykes jolly well kept in line and did as they were told. And they were glad to do it!

But then Lady Thatcher came along and changed all the rules and, not least with Lord Norman Skinhead as her Party Chair, she put the Grammar School Tykes in charge. They are the ones who worship her as the Cult of Thatchianity and, of course, they are the activists who are expected to slave away for “the Cause”.

Now along comes Mr Balloon [Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher] and he and his Team of Toffs are trying to take it all back. And the Conservatories do not like it. He is no longer “ONE OF US”! They picked him because they though that he was Mr Heir of Blair. That doesn’t mean they want any of this namby-pamby Liberal Conservatism if they DO win. And certainly not from a spoiled brat like HIM!

So IRONICALLY now that it looks like he might get them a Conservatory majority, they feel much more comfortable snuggling up with a party that expresses what they really feel.

Enter stage very far right UKPNuts!

I know, I know, I have got in trouble before for calling the “let’s ask the Queen to break the treaty that we signed Party” “nutters”, but BE FAIR: Conservatory Chair Auntie Maude calls them “nutters and closet racists mostly”. It is not like there are many OTHER Conservatory policies that I could copy!

Actually, Auntie Maude might be in a bit of a minority on that one, as apparently the Conservatory Party are backing a campaign that says they are “Better Off Out”. (As Buffy the Vampire Slayer would say: “great acronym, mom!”) Polling of their own members has 30% say they support the campaign, and another 33% say that they agree with the position, if only they would keep a bit more quiet about it. Only 33% of Conservatories were AGAINST. And the remaining 4% asked for another gin.

So dissention in the ranks, trouble at t’Mill, and hence no more Heir of Blair, now it’s Child of Thatcher.

Which, funnily enough, is what Mr Vague tried. And Mr Drunken Swerve. And Mr Something of the Night.


Anonymous said...

Good evening Millennium!

I know this is not very related to your article (only a very small bit of it), but I noticed you used the word "homosexualists", and I'm just wondering what it means. I've only heard it once before, and in slightly odd circumstances.

Last year, I was part of the committee that helps to run the Oxford Union, which is basically a big student debating society. We had a debate one evening, and one of the guest speakers was a pretty touchy man called Peter Chickens (although some people there were also calling him Peter Hitchens). One of the things he said was that he wanted to change the law, so that if two men, or two women, fall in love with each other, and either of them is younger than 21 years old, then both of them should be criminals.

I wrote him an e-mail, saying that this wasn't a very nice thing, and asking him why this would be a good way of changing the law. He wrote back to me (and I can send you a copy of his email if you're interested), saying that the law needed to be changed because of a group of bad people called "homosexualists". Apparently, these "homosexualists" want to talk to young children, and teenagers, and persuade them to be gay or lesbian, when they might actually not be. I've honestly never come across any of them. Just wondering if you could shed any light on the situation!

Nice article, by the way!

Anonymous said...

I mostly agree, but I think Mr Frown takes much more than is fair of our money in taxes... especially when he spends it on I.D.iot cards and Iraq

Millennium Dome said...

Hello, Mr Jonny!

As I understand it, "homosexualists" is a word for "Gay Daddies" used by people who are too ASHAMED of their secret prejudice to be able to speak properly. Does this help you?

Millennium Dome said...

Hello, Mr Tristan, too!

You may well be RIGHT – Mr Frown is NOTORIOUSLY greedy for all of the taxes that he gobbles up. I take my lead from Mr Power Cable when I say this much and no more!

But there IS a case to be made for saying we should be the LOWER tax party – especially since all Mr Balloon's promises to match Mr Frown's spending mean that HE won’t be cutting anyone's taxes anytime soon!