Originally posted by shavixmirDeselecting him is like silencing a whistle-blower: It gives credence to the accusations. Keeping him onside and refuting the claims would have been the least damaging approach from the Tories.
I suppose not.
But my view of conservatives is far influenced by the dark side of the force, any humiliation brought upon them makes me smile.
Thus, Howard was right to sack Howard! May the Tories never rule again. (Oh wait, haven't we got the Tories in anyway - under the nom-de-plume "New Labour". Oh damn, thank God I left the country!)
Originally posted by howardgeeI agree what a Shame Charlie Kennendy hasn't got the charisma of John F
Deselecting him is like silencing a whistle-blower: It gives credence to the accusations. Keeping him onside and refuting the claims would have been the least damaging approach from the Tories.
Thus, Howard was right to sack Howard! May the Tories never rule again. (Oh wait, haven't we got the Tories in anyway - under the nom-de-plume "New Labour". Oh damn, thank God I left the country!)
I don't know if we've heard the end of it yet.
Isn't the whistle-blower looking at legal options?
Also, as I understand the (old) Tory party's rules, its the full constituency association which has to deselect him, and they haven't met yet.
They've also got another constituency association which has been suspended. (It might be Slough). Their 1st attempt at a candidate turned out to be some kind of gun nut, so they didtched him. The replacement insisted that the Maastricht treaty was 'an act of treason', but the locals want to keep this one. Central office is trying to impose a 'sensible' candidate.
Just shows the sort of people attracted to the tory party.
Originally posted by RedmikeYeah it is Slough. I think he was sacked for calling the EU a papist conspiracy. It was the anti-catholicism that did him - regarding the Maastricht treaty as an act of treason is pretty much Tory party policy these days.
I don't know if we've heard the end of it yet.
Isn't the whistle-blower looking at legal options?
Also, as I understand the (old) Tory party's rules, its the full constituency association which has to deselect him, and they haven't met yet.
They've also got another constituency association which has been suspended. (It might be Slough). Their 1st a ...[text shortened]... to impose a 'sensible' candidate.
Just shows the sort of people attracted to the tory party.
The amusing thing about the whole Howard Flight thing is that there's barely any difference between what he said and what lots of Tories have said before - including that loon John Redwood just a couple of weeks ago. It seems very strange that Michael Howard should have chosen to make such a big deal of it.
Rich.
Originally posted by richhoeyI think perhaps Howard is trying to do a Neil Kinnock (remember him) and try and look tough with the unruly elements in his party. Like Kinnock and the way he treated certain socialists in the labour party. Suspending constituency parties, imposing candidates.
Yeah it is Slough. I think he was sacked for calling the EU a papist conspiracy. It was the anti-catholicism that did him - regarding the Maastricht treaty as an act of treason is pretty much Tory party policy these days.
The amusing thing about the whole Howard Flight thing is that there's barely any difference between what he said and what lots of Tor ...[text shortened]... eems very strange that Michael Howard should have chosen to make such a big deal of it.
Rich.