Return of the Safety Elephant

Charles Clarke is the gift that keeps on giving. Writing in CiF, he tells us all about the current Labour leadership:

But I am sorry to say that many in Labour are also failing to face up to the grave situation which we face. Our leadership is weak, uncertain, tactically unsure and lacks vision.

Tell it like it is, Charlie.

We are unpopular,

Nooooooo! Never!

These ratings have declined consistently since 2008 despite an apparently unending sequence of new relaunches, a string of policy initiatives and significant political changes, such as the arrival of Peter Mandelson into Gordon Brown’s government.

Dear, oh, dear, oh, dear… Relaunches, policy initiatives, Jeebus, they never learn, do they? And the arrival of Mandelson is not a good thing. The man is a proven charlatan and fraud. That he has been forced to resign from cabinet twice before for such impropriety should be some sort of indicator, but apparently not.

This level of performance is likely to lead to cost Labour more than 100 seats.

Jolly good.

There are those who estimate there will be as many as 150 losses.

Even better.

Some in Labour, principally those around the prime minister and his close supporters, believe that a degree of economic recovery will bring with it increased confidence and popularity as the public gives Gordon Brown the credit he rightly deserves for the leadership he offered internationally in fashioning a global economic response to the crisis. And they believe that with an increase in Labour popularity the Conservative party will implode as its own weaknesses and contradictions lead to deeper divisions and turmoil, out of which a Labour victory could emerge.

Gordon Brown squandered this country’s finances during the good times so is in part (a large part) responsible for the meltdown. His is not (repeat after me) the saviour of the western world. The man is a legend only in his tiny, delusional mind and that of the sycophants who surround him, feeding him the fantasy of his greatness. Still, old Safety doesn’t go along with this view apparently.

It’s a respectable view,

No, it’s a pile of old cack.

though not one most people in Labour, including myself, share.

So there is some semblance of sanity in there somewhere.

And it would require the heroic improvement in our political performance, which continually fails to materialise.

And may that failure to materialise continue.

Others in Labour believe that if we go on as we are, defeat, possibly disastrous defeat, is certain.

Oh, yes, please.

They believe that the “pendulum” effect in British politics will, more or less inevitably, return Labour to office in a few years – possibly as early as 2015 – and all of our efforts should be focused on preparing the policy agenda for 2015 and determining the leadership of Labour which will take us into that general election, which they expect to take place after Tory failure in government.

One would hope that such a return will not occur as early as 2015. Recent history suggests that it will take longer anyway as that pendulum seems to swing rather more wildly than it once did.

Despite all this, Safety thinks that Labour could win. I suppose that is still possible, but would hope that the electorate are sufficiently clued up to give this bunch of thieving rapscallions the hefty kick up the arse they so richly deserve.

Labour should be promoting our record in office as a big reason to vote Labour again,

Er… On second thoughts, please do, go ahead, be my guest.

but if we are to do that, we need a far higher level of candour about what we did and didn’t achieve, what we did right and what we did wrong.

I’m sorry? What, precisely did you do right? And what precisely did you achieve? Apart, that is, from over 3,000 new criminal offences, criminalising the whole population, politicising the police force and turning them into the paramilitary arm of the Labour Party, stifling free speech and eroding the rest of our civil liberties and building a fuck-off surveillance state? Oh, that was your achievement…

We will only get voters to listen to what we have to say about the future if we address some of their concerns about our past conduct,

Ripping off the taxpayer by flipping homes, making laws and then breaking them and engaging in wars of aggression based upon lies. The spin, the deceit, and the sheer contempt with which we, the people have been treated by you and your fellow travellers. That past conduct?

which is why getting our explanation of our record across is so important and why we have to remove any doubts about our commitment to the honest conduct of politics.

Oh, you’ve got it across alright and we are in no doubt about your honesty.

The way to win is to be able genuinely to provide answers to the voters’ questions.

Okay, here’s one; when are you going to fuck off?