So, Why Did Labour Lose The Election?

Ed Miliband is a decent human being who put forward a simple message - we deserve better than eternal austerity and should be entitled to a fair shake of the stick. David Cameron's message could not be more different - we deserve nothing better than eternal austerity because it was the British welfare state that crashed the world economy and anyone who can't afford a £1 million mansion cannot be anything other than a scrounger on benefits. One was the politics of hope, the other the politics of despair. The problem for Ed Miliband was that he struggled to get his message across. This is hardly surprising given the rabidly right-wing press in Britain, but there is a deeper underlying problem that Labour just could not overcome - an ill-educated and largely unintelligent electorate that is simply unable to grasp even simple facts. They have little understanding of economic history and cannot fathom the deep mystery of how a hugely destructive world war with its massive government spending could drag the world out of recession. By 1945 it was obvious to even the dimmest voter that Keynesian economics with its deficit spending actually works. By 1979, when Margaret Thatcher managed to wipe the collective memory, this had been forgotten and was replaced with simplistic economic theories that were apparently easy to understand even though they were utter mumbo-jumbo. Throughout the long dark years of the 1980's and 90's Labour spent a great deal of fruitless energy trying to re-educate the British electorate to no avail. They learned the truth contained in the old maxim; "Never try and teach a pig how to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig." Ed Miliband's mistake was the most basic of all - he tried to teach the pig how to sing. He had to try I suppose but, to be honest, the British electorate (or at least 37% of them) now have the government they deserve. The rest of us too now have the government we deserve. We had to chance to change the voting system for one that was fairer but allowed Rupert Murdoch and other right-wing snake-oil salesmen to talk us out of it. The News in Shorts has a message for all those who voted Tory - "Oink, oink." - its about the only thing you understand.

It's Official - Britain Is No Longer Civilized.

David Cameron has won the general election with a majority of 12. The man who gave us an economic recovery indistinguishable from the recession, who has hounded the weak, the disadvantaged and the disabled, the man who has rewarded the undeserving rich with yet more riches, the man who has all but destroyed the NHS, the man who imposed the bedroom tax and encouraged yet further growth in the number of slum landlords, the man who told us that he would put an end to uncontrolled immigration and then failed to do so, has won the election and seen off all his political rivals. How? Primarily this seemingly bizarre result was the work of a right-wing press that mounted an effective propaganda campaign against the electorates own best interests at the behest of an insane old man who hates Britain - Rupert Murdoch. Second, David Cameron did a creditable impression of the invisible man and dodged all efforts to force him into an open debate so that we could see the vacuous nature and utter barrenness of his political beliefs. The campaign that the Tories mounted was the most negative in modern electoral history, relived only at the last minute with a series of "sweeteners" and promises that Cameron has absolutely no intention of honouring. How else could he possibly sell the idea of unending austerity - a long dark tunnel of despair for the majority with a light at its end promising only greater riches for an already pampered minority? The real villain, of course, is the British "first past the post" system which has allowed 37% of the voting population to impose a Tory government on the the majority of 63% who didn't vote for them at all. Whatever the reason for this disaster one thing is clear, Britain will now abandon all pretence that it is a civilized nation while the Tories mount an unremitting and vicious attack on the poor, sick and weak on behalf of the rich, greedy and selfish.

Why Labour Cannot Refute The Austerity Argument.

There are few economists in the world who do not recognise that austerity as an economic principle is utter nonsense. Ever since the 1930's it has been known - known that is and not simply believed - that the only way out of recession is to stimulate the economy by deficit spending. The Tories understand this like everyone else but continue to wield the axe because they would rather the poor paid for the present recession, caused by criminal bankers, rather than themselves and their rich mates. And, it must be said, it has worked to a certain extent - the rich have grown richer while the poor have grown poorer and those in the middle have all but stood still. So why has Labour not pointed this out and advocated an end to austerity entirely? The problem is that in order to refute austerity some sophisticated arguments are needed and these immediately run into the simplistic argument that the Tories have deployed - that the British economy is just like a household budget. The British electorate, largely unintelligent, ill-educated and led around by the nose by a right-wing press, think they understand this argument and lack the attention span necessary to hear about the alternative. Labour, recognising this but unable to tell the electorate that they are thick, have no choice therefore but to pay lip-service to this Tory cliche in order to prove their economic credentials. Labour, in effect, have ducked the argument on the very sensible grounds that they cannot win. If they argue for an end to austerity they will appear dull and uninteresting and be open to the accusation that they are "out of touch". The Tories, meanwhile, will trot out the "just like a household budget" argument knowing full well that this is simply short-hand for "you're too thick to understand". Paul Krugman, the American economist, has described the Tory obsession with austerity as a "delusion" but the truth is that it is a confidence trick perpetrated by the greedy, selfish and dishonest and accepted by an electorate too dumb to walk and chew gum at the same time.

So Why Won't Dave Debate?

It's the burning political question of the day - why is David Cameron so afraid of a public televised debate? First and foremost, of course, is his record in government. How can Cameron answer when asked "Why are you allowing Iain Duncan Smith to kill British citizens for money simply because they are disabled?" The closest anyone has come to this is when Jeremy Paxman asked the PM about foodbanks. What was Cameron's answer? Evasion. Then there is the embarrassment of Grant Shapps. Why is the Tory election campaign being led by a confidence trickster who trades under the assumed name of Mike Green and then lies about it? Meanwhile the Tory campaign is firmly mired in the dirt with the spectacle of Afzal Armin trying to do a secret deal with the English Defence League to steal the election in Dudley and Ed Miliband being physically threatened by Tory activists in Rotherhithe. Faced with such questions that touch upon both his integrity and honesty it is hardly surprising that Cameron would shy away from a direct debate with the leader of the Labour party. Instead he has resorted to dirty tricks, name calling and false promises. The whole debate-ducking debacle was nothing more than a dirty trick in itself, designed the shield Cameron from direct questioning about his shameful record as PM. As an alternative Cameron offers empty accusations such as describing the Labour party as "hypocritical holier-than-thou, hopeless, sneering socialists”. What is this if not sneering? The Tories told us that they would not raise VAT and then promptly did it. They promised no "top-down reorganization" of the NHS and then did exactly that. What is that if not hypocrisy? And what is more holier-than-thou than pointing at the working poor, the unemployed, the sick and the disabled and telling them that they are nothing more than an expensive liability? As for being hopeless simply look at the state of the British economy which, despite Tory claims, is now geared to deliver only for the rich. The truth is that David Cameron is trying to hide from the electorate. A shifty, double-dealing conman with no possible way to defend his disgraceful premiership is hiding from you and me, hoping against hope that we won't notice his cowardice.

Inside The Tory "Mind".

Every now and then a Tory MP manages to avoid his party whip and tells the media what he really thinks. This week David Tredinnick, Tory MP for Bosworth in Leicestershire, did just that and revealed, as if we didn't know already, that the Tory party has just as many dingbats, nutters and morons in its ranks as UKIP. While the BBC News website is carrying a story that homeopathy has finally been shown to be the ridiculous idiocy it always was, Mr Tredinnick has been championing it on the basis that "Ninety per cent of pregnant French women use homeopathy". So its science nil and 90% of ignorant uninformed pregnant French women one! Case closed. Not content with this stunning revelation Mr Tredinnick then went on the outline why astrology - that's right, astrology - could solve many of the problems facing the NHS. "Astrology," he tells us confidently, "is a useful diagnostic tool enabling us to see strengths and weaknesses via the birth chart." To clinch his argument he also informed us that "Hippocrates once said, 'A physician without a knowledge of astrology has no right to call himself a physician.' Unfortunately Hippocrates (c. 460 – c. 370 BC) also believed that "the body contains within itself the power to re-balance the four humours and heal itself." In other words patients, no matter what their infirmity, should be immobilized and left to get on with it. None of this would be of much import of course - after all irrational thought processes are to be expected in a political party that believes that taxing rich people returns less revenue and in times of famine rich people should be fed bigger meals - but it just so happens that Mr.Tredinnick is also the chairman of the All-Party Group for Integrated Healthcare. This, as I'm sure you'll agree, is a bit like making Scarlet O'Hara a relationship councilor. Still when you have a government with Iain Duncan Smith in charge of the DWP, Michael Gove in charge of Education, Jeremy Hunt in charge of the NHS, George Osborne in charge of the economy and Boris Johnson as mayor of London, its probably not that unthinkable after all.

Devious Dave Dodges Debate.

David Cameron, according to Jacob Rees-Mogg speaking on Channel Four News, is avoiding a televised debate during the forthcoming election campaign because the media is full of "left-wing people". This might come as a shock to the Tory party but, after five years of their right-wing lunacy, so is the rest of the country. Most of us are used to the Tories avoiding debate of any kind and simply pursuing their insane slash-and-burn policies at the expense of everyone else, but it seems that the media and the other political parties are bemused by Cameron's complete refusal to engage in democratic debate. There are two very good reasons why they shouldn't be. First and foremost is that David Cameron, like all Tories, doesn't like democracy too much and would prefer to return to the good old 19th Century system of only allowing rich people to vote. Second, and far more important, is Cameron's reluctance to defend his record in government. Pretending that the country is recovering economically, that unemployment is down and that wages are now beginning to grow will only get you so far it seems - especially when none of these things are actually true. The reality - the explosion in the need for food banks, the shame of growing homelessness, an entire wasted generation (yet again), the cancer of zero-hour contract low-paid work, fewer policemen on the beat, fewer doctors and nurses, the lack of a credible defence, rising immigration, tax cuts for the rich and spending cuts for the poor, the selling of the country's assets to various organised crime syndicates, and the all too evident greed and selfishness of the Tory party - is difficult, if not impossible, to defend. Cameron's solution, it would seem, is not to bother while, at the same time, dangling carrots in front of the electorate that he has absolutely no intention of honouring after the election. To say, as much of the press and all of the opposing political parties are doing, that Cameron is "chicken" misses the point entirely. Cameron is no more "chicken" than any other confidence trickster, shyster or snake-oil salesman. Avoiding any meaningful debate about his disastrous premiership is simply part of his make up and stems from his insufferable upper-class arrogance and complete disconnect with the rest of us lesser mortals. The fact that the Tories have to wheel out the aristocratic (in his mind at least) Jacob Rees-Mogg of all people to defend themselves tells us all we need to know about the public school "Boys Own" London club that the Tory party have always wanted to be. The Tories are and always have been a complete disaster for this country. Masquerading as the friend of business they have always sought to undermine commerce by attacking the very basis of its success - demand. The Tories are no more interested in the capitalist system than was William the Conqueror, Ghengis Khan or Vlad the Impaler. Their vision is for a kind of updated 21st century feudalism in which the rich, greedy and selfish do as they please and the rest of us peasants gratefully tug at our forelocks.

Cameron: Why Children Should Be Taught To Be Greedy And Selfish.

David Cameron has been outlining his thoughts about the proper way to bring up children to the Institute of Directors Magazine. Children, he told the magazine, should be taught "how to turn a profit" in order to combat the evil "job killing regulations" coming out of the European Community. "The arts and science are as nothing when compared to making money," Cameron told our reporter when we quizzed him about his interview. "We must instill in our children a love of money above all else and rid them of any fanciful ideas that they might become astronauts, pop stars, painters, sculptors, novelists, scientists or, God forbid, charity workers. Its time we turned our children's eyes away from the stars and back to the gutter where I and my rich mates live. As for protecting the rights of ordinary working people, or the peasants as I like to call them, why bother? Anyone whose interests are not solely concerned with making money doesn't deserve any protection. Bankers, on the other hand, need all the protection we can give them whether its actually legal or not. Where would we all be if bankers had to answer for their criminal activity? The Tory party wouldn't exist for a start and that, as I'm sure you'll agree, would be a tragedy. Greed and selfishness are the core values we need to instill in children before they even start thinking about such rubbish as the meaning of life, what constitutes good and evil and what the future might hold. Once greed and selfishness have taken hold such questions become irrelevant. What is the meaning of life? Making a profit, obviously. What is good and evil? Good is being richer than your neighbour and evil is missing an opportunity to turn a decent profit out of someone else's misery. What does the future hold? More and more money - what else? The real strength of Tory philosophy is its "Can do - if I can get away with it" attitude and in its complete disregard for thinking instead of simply grabbing what you can. As Descartes once said; "I'm greedy, selfish and don't think too much, therefore I am."

Straw And Rifkind Defend The Indefensible

Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind have been defending their corruption and money-grubbing today, both telling us that they've done nothing "improper". While Jack Straw was recorded in an undercover press sting informing us that he "works under the radar" to influence policy decisions that favour the rich, greedy and immoral, Malcolm Rifkind was telling us that his working day in Parliament is only 75% of what we pay him for. "You'd be surprised how much spare time I have," he told the reporters. "I spend much of my time reading books and walking." Both men admit that they can earn between five to eight thousand pounds per half-day for selling their "influence" and seem amazed that taxpayers might object to paying these clowns 100% wages for 75% effort. We shouldn't be surprised though. Corruption is so widespread in Westminster that a reporter cannot throw a rock without hitting a crook. We have had years of "accidental" expense scams, tax-dodging, bribe-taking, law-breaking and scrounging off state funds from MP's and so-called Peers of the Realm. This is how the British political system works. A bunch of spivs, confidence tricksters and petty criminals tell us lies about their sense of "public duty", we vote them in hoping against hope that maybe they mean it and they then plunder the public purse while bleating about how they don't get the respect they deserve. Respect? They are thieves, pure and simple, scroungers, albeit very talented ones, two-faced crooks with all the moral fibre of a dead whelk. Yet no sense of shame, no inkling that what they are doing is wrong can be discerned as they strive manfully to defend their nasty little scams. Commentators often ask why the electorate seem so apathetic. How can they be expected to be enthusiastic about this continuing tale of corruption or about the unedifying spectacle of MP's fighting to get their greedy snouts in the trough? What is the point of voting when the choice is between one petty criminal or another?

Are The Fatcats Getting Desperate?

As the General Election in the UK looms ever closer there are signs that the selfish, greedy and anti-social are beginning to panic. We've already had the usual suspects being wheeled out by the Tory party to warn the electorate that voting Labour will "threaten the recovery" and that bankers, those heroes of the economic battlefield, will leave in droves if they are regulated to stop their crime spree. Meanwhile HSBC has apologised for being found out, yet again, breaking the law and has promised that it won't do it again - honest. The BBC, with their accustomed impartiality, have tried to tar Ed Balls with the "out of touch" label over cash payments to small businesses while asking various Tory ministers if they'd like to explain why they are so wonderful and so in touch with ordinary people. Andrew Marr sat with undisguised admiration while Iain Duncan Smith explained why persecuting the unemployed, sick and disabled is the Christian thing to do and how his multi-billion pound single benefit scheme has come in under the budget he snatched out of thin air five minutes before. Asked why wealthy tax dodgers are treated with kid gloves while ordinary people who simply get their complicated tax form wrong are criminally prosecuted, Iain Duncan Smith explained patiently that rich people pay more tax if you're nice to them while ordinary people deserve harsh treatment because they're peasants. That would explain why the Tories have ignored the evidence presented to them over the last five years outlining HSBC criminal activity while simultaneously blaming Labour for not doing something before the evidence of the crime became known. Little of this has washed with the electorate who now know beyond doubt that the Tory party is an organised crime syndicate, so Cameron & Co have called in the big guns in the form of Merrill Lynch, one of the USA's most successful bunch of crooked bankers, to warn us that we will all turn French if Labour wins the election. A Labour government, they warn us, would create "an economy structured like France, which has strict laws on working hours, minimum wages and contracts." Quelle disaster! "How will criminal bankers and greedy business executives finance their film-star life styles if ordinary people get decent wages and are given rights?" a spokesperson from Merrill Lynch told our reporter. "If they are forced to pay their fair share of taxes as well it will be disastrous for the British economy. You have to understand the difference between an honest profit, which is very difficult to achieve, and the much easier money to be made through the kind of exploitation and extortion that we prefer. Profit involves hard work, something we are complete strangers to, and risk, which we are completely averse to. It will much better for all concerned - well us at any rate - if we keep the present system of crime licensed by an understanding Tory party."

Selfish And Greedy Line Up To Knock Labour.

As the general election campaign gets under way the selfish and greedy are busy queuing up to tell us all why voting in a Labour government would be a disaster. Orchestrated by Lynton Crosby so-called "celebrities" such as Gary Barlow are bleating about the possibility of a mansion tax while the likes of Stefano Pessina, the acting head of Boots, and Digby Jones drone on that Labour will be "bad for business" because, as we all should know, business is the be-all and end-all of everything. When it was pointed out that Stefano Pessina is nothing more than a greedy, selfish tax dodger, Boris Johnson leapt to his defence by pretending that it is Pessina's sacred duty to dodge UK taxes in order to make his likewise greedy and selfish shareholders happy. Boris did at least have enough political common sense to add that it was "disappointing" that neither Boots nor Pessina pay tax, but rather spoiled this by adding that "to have a strong, healthy society, you have got to support the businesses that create the tax revenue and employ people and put bread on the table for people, otherwise you can't begin to pay for the poorest and neediest, for the welfare state and hospitals and everything else." So how does that work when they refuse to pay taxes then? Essentially the Tory message couldn't be more clear - greed and selfishness is here to stay and it is our duty to sacrifice our standard of living in order to support the film star lifestyle of the undeserving rich. Of course the Tory party is entirely funded by these greedy tax dodgers who see their "contributions" to the party as a cost-effective investment to guarantee the continuation of fat juicy tax loopholes. This is sold to hard-of-understanding Tory voters through the medium of press propaganda which paints all the unemployed, elderly, sick and disabled as "feckless scroungers". The truth is that it is the Tory party and their fellow-travellers who are the real scroungers, eager to take everything they can get their sticky fingers on and avoid any real contribution to our society.