This is not for the Director of Public Prosecutions.
This is for Parliament.
So we need to get our people in next year.
Not least here in North-West Durham, where a meeting bordering on a riot at the weekend saw the Constituency Labour Party told once and for all that, yes, it really was going to be made to have an all-women shortlist. Since you cannot be on such a list unless you are in favour of abortion on demand up to and including partial birth (no other policy commitment is required), so anyone thus selected will presumably be more than sympathetic to assisted suicide, too.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You're repeating the lie that you have to be in favour of abortion on demand to be on an all-women shortlist for the Labour Party. Not true. You need to be a woman and a member of the Labour Party. You do need to support abortion on demand to be funded by Emily's List, but only a very small proportion of Labour women candidates are.
ReplyDeleteAlso, you can be in favour of abortion on demand while being against assisted suicide. For example, I am in favour of abortion on demand and against assisted suicide.
"Not true"
ReplyDeleteAccepted axiomatically in the twin metropoles of media London and Catholic Consett. Because in fact the case.
Gordon Brown is also in favour of abortion but not of assisted suicide. But I doubt you'll ever find a supporter of assisted suicide who is not also pro-abortion.
There's a useful list of the Labour women selected through all-women shortlists here.
ReplyDeleteCelia Barlow was selected through an all-women shortlist, and she voted to cut the abortion limit last year.
ReplyDeleteKitty Ussher voted to cut the abortion limit last year, and she was selected through an all-women shortlist.
ReplyDeleteWell, they're in now. This is about how they got there. The off-chance that a candidate either is not being entirely frank, or might change her mind, is not a chance worth taking.
ReplyDeleteThanks Evra. I hadn't realised Geraldine Smith was selected via an all-women shortlist.
ReplyDeleteShe attacked them very strongly a couple of weeks ago. I don't think that that list is correct, actually - it's been fed in by New Labour to its own nefarious ends.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, you can all argue that black is white to your hearts' content. Everyone knows that what I am syaing is true. In my experience, full-time national religious and political journalists of considerable distinction are among those who simply take it as read. Rightly so.
"The off-chance that a candidate either is not being entirely frank, or might change her mind, is not a chance worth taking."
ReplyDeleteOr that support for abortion on demand is not, in fact, a requirement to be on an all-women shortlist.
That's not a chance. It's a fact. Universally acknowledged as such. Including by those who go through the motions of posting hostile comments on blogs that point it out.
ReplyDeleteThis seat is facing a Labour candidate who not merely holds that view, but quite possibly holds no other political opinion whatever, having been plucked from the typing pool and given this seat as a present for her coming out ball.
The full list of MPs who have been supported by Emily's List is here. It's very short - there are 12 of them. One of them is Claire Curtis-Thomas, who has consistently voted for lower abortion limits since her election.
ReplyDeleteWheels within wheels. Come on, feigning to be naive isn't going to work on here.
ReplyDeleteClaire Curtis-Thomas took the money and ran (all the way across the Tiber, in fact), and good for her. But that's not a chance worth taking.
You can't get onto an AWS without the Emily seal of approval, whether or not one penny of the early money is (officially) like yeast in your case. Come on.
The problem, David, is that this is absolute nonsense, and all you can come up with in response to people pointing this out is "Ah, but everyone knows". That's not really an argument.
ReplyDeleteIndeed it isn't. It's a fact. One of the many facts that are going to lose New Labour this seat. Based on the weekend's and other events, and on my inbox and other communications, I honestly don't know who is even going to sign the nomination papers of Her Royal Highness The Infanticide. Not only on this issue. But certainly including it.
ReplyDeleteIt's really none of your business who the Labour candidate for the seat is. But I'd suggest to Labour members who care particularly about this issue that they ask prospective candidates about their views on abortion and assisted suicide, and vote accordingly.
ReplyDeleteThere'd have to be any members left. And even of those that there are, you think they're going to be given a say? What do you think this is, the Eighties?
ReplyDeleteAs David has explained, Hendip, ther'd be no point asking even if they could. On abortion anyway, only people of one view are allowed on the short list.
ReplyDeleteJames: David hasn't explained, he's asserted, without evidence. Others have explained, with evidence, why he's wrong.
ReplyDeleteThey either don't know what they are talking about, or they are professional liars. The latter, quite clearly. Well, it isn't going to work.
ReplyDeleteWe'll get you into Parliament just in time for you to be presented to the Pope on his visit to Britain, as the man who beat the abortion machine's candidate.
ReplyDeleteIt might be more useful if I were presented to him *before* the Election, but I doubt that that would be allowed...
ReplyDeleteWasn't the old bishop who died all ready to hold some High Mass anointing you in the run up to the Election?
ReplyDeleteA great man, and a great loss.
ReplyDeleteAre you seriously suggesting that not even ten of the 21,312 people who voted Labour at the last election will be willing to sign a Labour candidate's nomination paper? Gosh! That's quite a collapse!
ReplyDeleteIt's the activists who sign nomination papers, mostly councillors or would-be councillors.
ReplyDeleteThere are precious few activists now; even most councillors couldn't really be so described, and they are not going to ruin their reselection or re-election chnaces by getting involved with this person.
This AWS business has caused such anger, even over and above what there was already, that by the spring, I really wouldn't be surprised if there were not ten people prepared to sign up. And I cannot begin to imagine who would deliver the leaflets.
Who's going to deliver yours?
ReplyDeleteWouldn't you like to know...
ReplyDelete