In the print edition of today's Daily Telegraph an article by Andrew Pierce is headlined: Cameron: Labour ran despicable campaign. (Once again no link can be found on-line)
The article begins: David Cameron accused the Labour Party of waging a 'despicable dirty tricks campaign to limit the scale of the Tories' win in the Norwich North byelection. He is quoted as also saying: "I have seen a campaign in this by-election that I would describe, and I choose my words carefully, as utterly despicable."
I cannot understand why Cameron is getting all 'hot and bothered' over this. What difference is there between this 'despicable campaign' and the 'despicable campaigns' waged by Labour, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives, during the European election, when not one of the those three parties would actually discuss, or debate, the subject of Britain's membership of the European Union? It is a debate that the UK Independence Party wanted to have and one that the three main parties shied away from as, to use a 'Maggietollah' word, they are 'frit'.
To pick up on Cameron's use of the word 'despicable', is it not just as 'dispicable' for a front-line politician - and a Party Leader - to decline, three times, to partake in a public debate - issued by the Witney branch of the UK Independence Party - in his own constituency on the subject of Britain's membership of the European Union? Is it not 'despicable' to deny the constituents that you are supposed to represent the opportunity of hearing your views and your justification for holding those views?
Politicians have abused the electorate, their paymaster, over the use of the expenses and allowances systems - the last thing the electorate need is for our MPs to completely ignore us!
4 hours ago