Aye. Quentin Letts was absolutely obsessed with John Bercow for a while (perhaps because his job, which seems to be simply watching Prime Minister’s Questions, is so vacuous and empty).

So, yes, a conservative claim to respect differing opinions is pretty bad.

Bercow was literally torn apart by Letts, verging on the obsessional, an article a day. Let’s not forget the way Ken Clarke was smeared and ostracised (not at present, obviously, but only cos he’s keeping his opinions to himself) for years too.

Check your facts.

Bercow was hated a long time before that vote. Nice try though.

Bercow was literally torn apart by Letts

I doubt this.

Politicans have the freedom to say stupid things and we have the freedom to call them on it.

(BTW, Quentin Letts is being sued for libel by Alan Sugar. Will those against UK’s silly libel laws stand with Quentin Letts?)

ToryBear @3:

yes, but what for? if the answer is, as I suspect, “Being a compassionate Tory”, or “being a liberal Tory”, then the point in the article is pretty well made anyway.

One of the things that has always been true about reactionary parties is they get worse, not better, over time. Look at the Republicans. Back in the 60s, you could be a viable senior Republican candidate and support the New Deal, or oppose Vietnam. You might even, god forbid, support religious freedom for non-Christians. Look at them now after only 8 years in power.

Look at the Tories now. Can you imagine how much more hysterical and theocratic they will sound if they get 12 years in government?

Will people stop referring to John “Hang Nelson Mandela” Bercow as a ‘liberal Tory’, please? Some people may have forgotten about the FCS in the 1980s. I haven’t.

Hypocritical Tories? Surely not?

Check your facts.

Sorry, which facts are you disputing exactly?

Tories hate John Bercow because they see him as an oleaginous git, rather than because of his opinions. It’s not a freedom of opinion issue, it’s because he’s a tit.

But the idea that the Tories respect or foster different opinions within the party is patently rubbish.

Then can you explain why Michael Gove and George Osborne are quite openly more inclined to Blairite liberal interventionism whereas Hague, at shadow foreign, definitely isn’t? Or why Ken Clarke is in the shadow cabinet despite having a very different view on European policy? Or why Zac Goldsmith and John Gummer are in the same party as John Redwood and Nigel Lawson, when their environmental opinions are so radically different? There’s a pretty wide range of opinions in the Conservative Party, across a whole spectrum of issues, and the fact that Tories don’t like John Bercow is not evidence to the contrary. You’ll have to do better than that.

Tories hate John Bercow because they see him as an oleaginous git, rather than because of his opinions. It’s not a freedom of opinion issue, it’s because he’s a tit.

I don’t buy this, given all the posts attacking him are centred around the fact that he ‘may as well defect to Labour’. Oh and not forgetting Nadine Dorries’ personal vendetta for obvious reasons.

11 – well if it’s a personal vendetta doesn’t that rather suggest it’s for … personal reasons?

The calls for Bercow to defect were based more on his attitudes, rather than his policies – applauding Labour speakers in the House while mocking his own side (he even did this during the Speaker elections), writing creepy little notes to ministers congratulating them on speeches, mingling more with Labour members in the bar and tea rooms. None of that is about policy – it’s because Tories saw Bercow as having crept in close to Labour.

As I said above, given all the evidence of heterogenous opinion within the Tory party you really have to do more to prove the opposite than merely point out that Tories don’t like John Bercow.

given all the evidence of heterogenous opinion within the Tory party you really have to do more to prove the opposite than merely point out that Tories don’t like John Bercow.

I’m afraid it’s not as you’re painting it. There is a diversity of opinion in all parties. But to deflect the criticism at Hannan, Tories adopted the line that they valued ideological plurality. But they shunned Ken for yeas because he was soft on Europe.

The same applies for Bercow – he opposed Dorries on the HFE Bill and argued against her in parliament. He was the most prominent Tory to stand up to the wingnut section of his party who refused to listen to the evidence, and said he didn’t want abortion limits reduced. Hence Dorries’ anger.

‘creepy little notes’ – er, what MPs are not allowed to be nice to each other now? The hostility towards Bercow stems from the view he’s too nice to Labour. Hence the character assassinations – especially during the Speaker contest – and the whispering campaigns.
My point is that if a Tory deviates from the line from the liberal wing they come down hard on him. If he / she does so from the Christian / hard-right wing, then suddenly they start arguing for plurality.

I have no problems with the Tories trying to install discipline in their party. But it’s all one sided – that’s what I’m pointing out.

So the charge that anyone shouldn’t be allowed to say nasty things about poor widdle Hannan, who only goes on to praise the most poisonous of all Tories over the last 50 years (on race), is disingenuous.

burkesworks: “Will people stop referring to John “Hang Nelson Mandela” Bercow as a ‘liberal Tory’, please? Some people may have forgotten about the FCS in the 1980s. I haven’t.”

Some things are hard to swallow. At university in my time, a Tory student got the boot for spray painting anti-semitic slogans. He took a year out and learned about life. He thus entered green politics. That’s fine by me.

John Bercow has only lived a political life — about which we can talk for hours. He has turned many corners. The analysis has to be on what Bercow thinks now.

Bercow is being given space to grow up: if he fails, so what.

“Tories hate John Bercow because they see him as an oleaginous git, rather than because of his opinions. It’s not a freedom of opinion issue, it’s because he’s a tit.”

Hm, but then, why don’t you all hate George Osborne? A positive oilslick to Bercow’s mere blob of brylcreem.

But they shunned Ken for yeas because he was soft on Europe.

C’mon! He came second in two leadership elections, and was approached for a return to the front benches throughout his ‘shunning’. If anything he was the one that shunned them.

And how can you square

There is a diversity of opinion in all parties

With

But the idea that the Tories respect or foster different opinions within the party is patently rubbish.

Which is it?

The hostility towards Bercow stems from the view he’s too nice to Labour. Hence the character assassinations – especially during the Speaker contest – and the whispering campaigns.

Exactly! Not because of his differing policy opinions, but because he, personally, has been seen as being too close to Labour. It is a personal, and not a policy thing.

Your view that it’s only wingnuttery that gets the generous treatment would also seem to be comprehensively proved wrong by the fact that the last high profile policy-based defenestration was Howad Flight – who was deselected because he said that the Tories would be more radical in tax and spend cutting.

14 – I see Osborne as more abrasive than smarmy really, but I certainly see why opponents would hate him.

Not because of his differing policy opinions, but because he, personally, has been seen as being too close to Labour. It is a personal, and not a policy thing.

Err, no, I’m pointing out that on policy (like the HFE Bill, which is why Dorries hates him) he was closer to Labour on policy.

Which is it?

I have to keep pointing this out. The Tories have diversity – just from the right to the hard-right. Anyone who says anything controversial from the hard-right is fine, but not from the centre of the party.

So it’s really your position that there are no centrist Tories at all? Crikey, it must hurt having to squint so hard out of your left eye.

I’ve been saying that the reason Bercow is hated by the Tories is not policy-based but attitudinal. Looking at one example – of a free-vote bill – on which he voted with Labour really doesn’t disprove this. On whipped votes he voted with the party 92% of the time – he’s not exactly a hardline rebel is he?

Bercow is being given space to grow up: if he fails, so what.

How old is he? And when you say “grow up”, by what standards are you considering the question? Boris Johnson’s?

I know it’s the cliché of clichés, beyond even the realm of hackneyed, worn out, shop soiled, second hand, hand me down, banal, unexpected, “fuck me.. never saw that comin'” stereotypical utterances…but I blame Thatcher. I blame her for making Blair remotely possible and I blame him for instigating a political climate wherein a nasty, nerdish, little fuckpig like Hannan can even be envisged in a political context, even in the widest dreams of a ravin’ schizophrenic warthog. He’s not fit to lick out my toilet bowl.

[moderated]

monkeyfish,

I don’t disagree…..

But then again you could say that about all politicians, not just these extreme examples of politics gone wrong.

IMHO, the last half decent Home Secretary we had was Roy Jenkins. Whatever happened to the idea that good people should enter politics?

That is not fair. I hated him when he was in the Monday Club, when he was Norman Tebbit’s boy and when he was one of us. So that he is now somewhere on the Harman part of the political spectrum makes no difference.

The more you know Bercow, the less you like him – I have know him for over 20 years.

If Bercow were hated for his opinions, then you’d have to ask why other left- wing Conservatives don’t attract the same degree of vitriol from Conservative Party members.

The answer is that Bercow has gone out of his way to praise the government, and mock his own side. That would make him unpopular in any political party.

And, he’s stepped on too many peoples’ toes since university.

No centrist Tories? Do you know who the Tory leader is? A little known character called David Cameron who is…er… to the left of most Tories.

@24
“Do you know who the Tory leader is? A little known character called David Cameron who is…er… to the left of most Tories”

No he isn’t, he’s mouthing centrist platitudes to disguise a far-right agenda, just as George. W. Bush did in 2000. The fact that a significant part of the populace seems to be falling for it even after eight years of trickle-down conservatism brought the US to its knees causes me sleepless nights.

“why other left- wing Conservatives don’t attract the same degree of vitriol from Conservative Party members.”

Who?? Pres tell! Will go on theyworkforyou.com and check out the voting history to see how ‘left’ they are.

Tim J

Uh huh. Damn, you tenacious right wing g*ts. I have to give it to you all. You cause mayhem, it’s all our fault. We cause mayhem, it’s all our fault. Truly mind blowing.

Also, Hannan is NOT an English name. The guy has a Jewish name and he agrees with Enoch Powell??

Wow.

Talk about self hate in the Tory party. Bercow you too! 😉

RP@27; – Daniel Hannan is many things, some of which are possibly broadcastable pre-watershed, but while you’re technically correct about Hannan not being an English name, he’s certainly not Jewish. AFAIK he was born in Peru, his parents are Irish – and he was raised a Catholic, which explains a lot (see also Dorries, N.)

Bercow? Anyone hated by so many Tories cannot be all bad, surely?