The UK election is now done and dusted. New Labour got back in with a much reduced majority, but they got in. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are both congratulating themselves on gaining seats and they're also saying that the New Labour vote was remarkable in that it put Labour into power with a smaller percentage of the majority than ever before.
"The
result that matters"
When the polling booths opened no party had
any seats. In other words they started level, just as the runners in a race.
Labour won that race, despite having been in power for 8 years and therefore
ready to be sniped at by anyone who had a mind to do so.
In this respect they started with a handicap. 8 years of scrutiny by an ill-informed media and people who take undue notice of that media. The last session also involved the Iraq war, unpopular in some quarters and an end to fox hunting; far more damaging in the eyes of others.
Nevertheless, New Labour, carrying their burden still won. They were first. Nobody says of a race winner "(S)he only won by .01 of a second", do they? Runner's-up are forgotten. At most they can claim a personal best.
"So why
did New Labour win?"
The answer lies with the leaders of the Conservatives
and the Liberal Democrats. Over a long period of time they've shown themselves
unfit to be Prime Minister. In these pages I've often said that both these
parties needed new leaders.
Mr. Howard has all along been tainted with the legacy of the Thatcher years and, far from being the elder statesman that his party insisted he was, he was no statesman at all and adopted belligerent and bullying tactics that don't go down well in the UK.
He surpassed himself by constantly calling Mr Blair a liar. This just confirmed to the electorate that such conduct doesn't befit a modern British statement.
On top of this he has surrounded himself with no-hopers who echo his every word. I had high hopes of Liam Fox, but he has gone the way of everyone Mr Howard has touched. Where are the people who will rescue the party? I don't know but I hope that they will emerge now that Mr Howard is going.
Mr Kennedy is a lightweight with nothing to recommend him. I think that the Liberal Democrats have some good ideas and would like to see them flourish, but I'm afraid they won't until they get a better leader.
Paddy Ashdown started the Liberal Democrat recovery. His policy of congratulating the Government when he thought their policies agreed with those of his party made people listen more when he disagreed - and earned him respect.
Mr Kennedy annoyed many of us older folks with first-hand experience of World War 2 when he spoke at the Anti-War rally in London. Nobody wanted to go to war but at that time, when it had started, we felt that he was exposing our troops to extra danger; stabbing them in the back. Bad enough for anyone to do, not clever for a member of parliament, inexcusable in a party leader.
It's my honest opinion that his and his party's continued wimpish behaviour over Iraq is giving "comfort to the enemy" ie. insurgents and terrorists, and making our troops lives more dangerous.
Mr Blair, in my opinion, conducted his election campaign with great dignity and refused to be drawn into the cesspit that others turned the election into. Even when he was reviled on the election podium by a losing candidate, the father of a soldier who lost his life in Iraq, he stood there and took the unfair beating.
I hope that this bereaved father, when the dust has died down, doesn't regret his action. His son chose a career in the army, was evidently an outstanding soldier and died bravely. What would he think of his father now?
Mr Galloway, apologist for Saddam Hussein's regime, got in as MP for Bow on an anti-war vote among Asian and Arab immigrants. He is another who offers comfort to the terrorist, whether he realises it or not.
The US, UK and other allied forces cut through the Iraqui army like a hot knife through butter with unbelievably low losses. I believe that was nothing to do with the bravery and prowess of the Iraqi soldiers; it was because they had no passion for fighting for their country as long as it was in thrall to Saddam Hussein and his evil regime.
And to those who voted for him and are still demonstrating against the Iraq war, I would remind them that they are free to vote for whom they want in this free UK.
Iraquis can now vote freely for the first time for decades because of the action of the Allied forces in kicking Saddam Hussein. I wish them well; things will get better for them provided people like George Galloway help, not hinder.
"The Losers"
So who were the losers in this election?
The whole establishment. Allegations of lying, cheating and sleaze tars all
politicians with the same brush. The voters wanted to hear about the new and
bright ideas that politicians were thinking about and wanted to implement.
Instead they got a murky mixture of rubbish that nobody could understand,
not even me, and God knows, I tried hard enough.
I don't believe that the election results would have been any different if all the politicians had stayed in bed. If they want to get people out to vote they must behave like adults, not immature kids.
"Northern
Ireland"
The election
in Northern Ireland showed that the Irish people do not want peace; otherwise,
why did they vote for the two most militant parties in Ireland and throw out
the moderates on both side?
After the election we had the usual rants from Mr Paisley while two of his goons performed on large drums. I'm not sure what that signified but is in keeping with the "triumphal" marches the Protestants make through Catholic territory.
Were I an Irish catholic (I'm neither...) I would be upset by these morons parading past my home in funny hats, uniforms and making a discordant din with their fifes and drums, celebrating a battle nobody alive can remember.
They are at least
as dangerous at keeping the class battle alive as the IRA.
