Bercow’s Bad, But May’s Enforcers Are Evil!


When a position of power has existed for centuries, it’s hard to single out one holder of that position as the worst ever.

But the smarmy little specimen who is currently Speaker of the House of Commons is surely in the running, John Bercow, whom I met more than once in my years in the UK.

What was he then, a champion dissimulator or a worm innately programmed for turning?


Image result for yea slimy things

He used to talk the patriot talk but when he had crawled the slippery slope to Westminster, he cast off all trace of conservative values.

Turning his back on his past, he embraced all the worst elements in the realm, not least the pervert lobby, whose top demand, that queer sensitivities take priority over religious liberty, Bercow was delighted to endorse.

Few Speakers of the House of Commons have shown such shameless disregard for the position’s tradition of impartiality as this notorious turncoat,

I can remember him in the 1980s, sporting longish hair and patriotic pronouncements, an arch-conservative young fellow indeed.

Alas, patriotism and conservatism were not then, any more than now, twin keys to political advancement.

Even so, of course it’s a lot more than his emulation of the Vicar of Bray that leads people to abhor the little slug, but…



….his blatant disregard for the obligation of a Speaker to be non-partisan, the most notorious example being his rabid pro-Brussels bigotry.

John Bercow does not speak for Britain, just for his own monstrous ego


All or even some of what’s written above ought to have been reason enough to turf the little squirt out of his ornate chair  – and the luxurious lodgings the Speaker gets for free.

But instead he’s under pressure to quit because of a scandalous situation in which, over a period of years, women have been subjected to repeated molestation ( not by him) on parliamentary premises.

The BBC report covers the story quite adequately

What caught my attention, though, was the light it sheds on the sleazy nature of the system by which Party Whips force MPs to vote against their principles.

In the climate of recriminations and counter-recriminations, a source in Parliament blamed government whips – in both main parties – for pressing to limit the range of admissible complaints in the past.

“They wanted to use the information privately to help control their MPs.’

Well ain’t that sweet?


Related image

Can we call it blackmail?

Or does that word only apply to demanding money with menaces, rather than voting as ordered to avoid exposure?

What about perversion of democracy?


Image result for blackmail is a crime

Is there nothing in parliamentary rules that prohibits coercion of MPs by threats?

And who appoints these bottom-feeding scoundrels called whips?



You know who!

Theresa the Traitrix, whose whips, even as you read this, will be using the whatever amoral intimidatory tactics they can dredge up from their swamp of secret sins, to get her Tory MPs to ditch their duty to the British people and instead endorse her betrayal of Brexit.