On the face of it, these differences would seem impossible to reconcile, but fortunately for the hideous-looking beast, the conservative side wasn’t conservative and the liberal part wasn’t liberal.

But whatever was to happen, the ConDem would surely be an improvement on the Brown Gorgon.

Or would it?

The beast soon fell passionately in love with the giant bloodsucking leech called EU. This came as no surprise, despite ConDem’s dad pretending to play hard to get before the election. The Dave part of this pushmi-pullyu clone soon forgot about his cast-iron guarantee and the Clegg head had always loved the idea of being dominated.

“Four legs good, two legs bad!”

Or as the first of the “Seven Commandments” in Animal Farm says: “Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.”

That sounds like a good summary of ConDem’s policy.

A llama in la-la land.

In case you missed it, the Love Police interrupted a photo op and press conference for George Osborne, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, and William Hague, the new Foreign Secretary.

Notice how one of the fawning crowd thinks that Charlie is American, when he is clearly Scottish. Perhaps we are far too reserved in this country and so anyone doing such a thing is automatically assumed to be a Yank. We, the people, have the power, if only we realised it. This is why “democracy” is always venerated by those in authority. It gives people the belief that they have influence and control and if they don’t like something, encourages them to sit back and wait until the next election to vote for ‘the other side’ who are just as bad. For the ‘Liberals’ and ‘Conservatives’ to get together when they are supposed to be ideological opposites shows what a farce our politics has become.

I saw this Love Police video on Infowars, where someone left a comment explaining the difference between conservatives and liberals (Republicans and Democrats in the USA).

Conservative / Liberal Explained

If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn’t buy one.
If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn’t eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a person of color is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!)

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labor and then sues.

If a conservative reads this, he’ll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he’s “offended”.

If the Tories learn anything from this failure then it must be that people who want liberal socialism will vote Labour or Liberal, so there is absolutely no point in the Tories offering the same thing. That’s all.

Since then, among many other disgusting and unacceptable things, we have had the expenses scandal and the return of many more body bags from Labour’s criminal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I won’t bore you with the minutiae, but here are summaries from the four candidates representing Labour, the Tories, SNP and LibDems. The very first question was about a local sewage station and the candidates agreed, so I’ll start with the second question:

Q2) Somebody asked what could be done to help people have cheaper petrol and diesel in this and other rural areas when we rely on cars so much.

Labour candidate and outgoing MP, Russell Brown, claimed that the tax on fuel was greater pre-1997. It was also claimed that the SNP (Scottish ‘Government’) had increased rates for small filling stations so they pay the same per square foot as the big supermarkets.

The Lib Dem, one Richard Brodie, called for more tax on aviation fuel which is very lightly taxed compared to what we put in our cars. He was the only candidate who mentioned ‘global warming’ and carbon credits.

SCORES SO FAR: LAB 4; CON 3; SNP 1; LIB 0

Q3) The next question was a concern about a hung parliament and what compromises the candidates would be prepared to make to work with the other parties.

Andrew Wood kicked off for the SNP and said there would be no compromise on scrapping Trident, ID cards and the Scottish Office and rejigging the House of Lords.

Peter Duncan, who was our Tory MP before 2005 when New Labour stole the new constituency with their false promises, sensibly warned against backroom deals. He claimed that the most important thing was tackling poverty at home and abroad.

Labour’s Russell Brown wouldn’t compromise on benefits and pensions or, quite bizarrely, health and safety at work. I think Labour have done enough compromising on pensions all by themselves, don’t you?

The Lib Dem wants a “fairer society” with no income tax on the first £10,000 earned. I could go with that, but he didn’t mention their plans to add VAT to new houses. Funny that.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 0; CON 2; SNP 1 (for ID cards); LIB 1

Q4) The next question was posed by the minister’s teenage son, who asked about lowering the voting age to sixteen and about proportional represention.

The SNP chap put up a good argument for votes at 16. I disagree with him, but I will give him points for making me think more about it. The Lib Dem also wants votes at 16, and obviously PR. Labour’s Russell Brown was “still to be convinced” about votes at 16 and promised a referendum on voting reform. The Tory was also still unconvinced on votes at 16 and ruled out PR due to the importance of the link between an MP and his constituency. He also asked if we were prepared to accept the twenty or so BNP MPs that PR would produce.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 3; CON 4; SNP 2; LIB 0

Q5) Next up was a question from Tory councillor John Dougan about MPs’ expenses: how did the four candidates propose to rebuild trust and confidence?

The Lib Dem wants MPs to be required to have no other employment outside of politics. He wants House of Lords reform (naturally) so that peerages can’t be bought and wants ‘processes in place’ to prevent MPs fiddling.

The Tory says that MPs should view their job as a community service and that constituents should have the right of recall if they are not satisfied with their MP.

The Labour man promised a tighter regime in the next parliament and that every detail would be published. It will be ‘a world apart’.

The SNP chappie called, not unreasonably, for everything that was wrongfully taken to be paid back. He also issued a timely reminder that the power lies with the electorate. Well, it should, but it doesn’t because nine out of ten people still vote for the same old parties that promise, but never deliver.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 0; CON 4; SNP 3; LIB 0

Q6) A young lady asked why herself and fellow graduates had difficulty finding employment and therefore also housing, when single mothers seem to get everything they need on benefits.

The Tory said local people should have a priority when houses become available, which doesn’t really address the situation even if it might sound appealing. He identified that more needs to be done to address the changes in society that have increased the demand for housing.

The Labourite admitted there are fewer and fewer employment opportunities in this part of the large constituency and that there are “no easy answers” and also conceded there is a “real lack of housing”.

What a damning indictment of thirteen years of New Labour’s mismanagement! No jobs and no houses. Just millions of graduates with nothing to do, stuck at home with their parents. The situation is so dire that Russell Brown didn’t even try to weasel his way out with outrageous lies.

The Lib Dems propose a £10,000 income tax threshold and to bring thousands of derelict houses onto the market.

Mr Wood for the SNP correctly identified that more council houses are needed to replace the ‘right to buy’ sell-offs and reflect the changes in society. He claimed that the Westminster government has £300 million pounds for new affordable housing which they won’t release.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 0; CON 1; SNP 2; LIB 1

Q7) An elderly lady asked about euthanasia. It wasn’t clear if she approved or was worried.

The biggest surprise to me was that Russell Brown, outgoing MP for abortion-loving, warmongering, criminal-excusing, blood-stained New Labour ‘couldn’t support euthanasia’ and wanted more palliative care. Peter Duncan for the Tories was against ending life at either end. Mr Wood for the SNP wouldn’t rule it out completely, but as Mr Duncan said, where do you draw the line?

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 3; CON 5; SNP 0; LIB 0

Q8) Sam Scobie, brother of Labour councillor Willie, asked about spending priorities and in particular about education and NHS cuts.

Of course, nobody would admit to ‘frontline services’ being in any jeopardy. The Lib Dems have apparently identified £15 billion worth of savings which can be made, including scrapping ID cards.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 0; CON 0; SNP 0; LIB 1 (for mentioning scrapping ID cards)

Q9) The final question was about us being cheated out of the referendum on the EU constitution.

Russell Brown claimed the Lisbon Treaty was totally different to the original Constitution (naturally). Mr Brodie for the Libs thinks Britain can be in the ‘centre of things’. Mr Brown claimed that an independent Scotland would need to reapply for EU membership. Like we’d want to. The SNP chap wants the UK to have the same relationship with the EU as Norway. He was reminded that Norway isn’t in the EU, but he was adamant that they are.

SCORES FOR THIS ROUND: LAB 0; CON 2; SNP 1; LIB 0

So let me tot up the scores and see who has won…….

Here are the results…..

1st – Peter Duncan (Tory) – 21 points

2nd equal – Russell Brown (Labour) – 10 points

2nd equal – Andrew Wood (SNP) – 10 points

4th – Richard Brodie (Lib Dem) – 3 points

His crime? Writing on his website that he believes homosexuality is not normal and that it should not be promoted to schoolchildren.

We haven’t seen the likes of this outrageous behaviour since, oh last week, when a Conservative Party candidate in Hampshire,

defended his views against equalising the gay age of consent, saying he feels there is an increased risk of HIV infection.

Dr Julian Lewis, the incumbent MP for New Forest East and shadow defence minister, was accused of being a “paranoid homophobe” at a local hustings by left-wing activist and student Andrew Tindall.

And of course, a couple of weeks ago, Chris Grayling had the nerve to suggest that people who run B&Bs in their homes should be able to decide who resides there.

Yesterday afternoon, the Pink News exclusively revealed Philip Lardner’s views on homosexuality – simply by reading his website. Yes, this is how easy it is to get your exclusive mentioned in the national press and ruin someone’s career in the process.

Look at the headline: Exclusive: Scottish Tory candidate says homosexuality is ‘not normal’.

Indeed he did, but the Marmalade Sandwich has cleverly noticed how the MSM have reported it,

All [The BBC, the Times, the Independent, the Telegraph, the Scotsman  - and, for all I know, several other news providers as well], without exception, have printed a sub-headline which is not true – at least not according to the stories they printed underneath. All say that the Philip Lardner, the Conservative candidate for North Ayrshire and Arran was suspended by the party for describing gay people as “not normal”. All then proceed to quote the remarks which Mr Lardner apparently made. Nowhere does he say that gay people are “not normal”.

He says “I will not accept that their behaviour is “normal.’”

So the original story in the Pink News may be prefaced by the only correct headline, although they fell in line with the others with the update: Updated: Tory candidate suspended for saying gays were ‘not normal’.

According to The Times,

A would-be Tory MP from Scotland has been suspended after describing gay people as not “normal”, it was disclosed today.

No, he did not. He described the behaviour as not normal, rather than the people.

The comments made by Philip Lardner on his campaign website were branded “deeply offensive and unacceptable” by a party spokeswoman.

Under the heading “What I believe in”, the North Ayrshire and Arran candidate had written: “Homosexuality is not ’normal behaviour’.”

Ah, so the journo gets it right with a direct quote, but notice how he uses a quote within a quote: ‘normal behaviour,’ as if to ensure he distances himself from the remark or perhaps to highlight the ‘offensive’ part.

Mr Lardner has been dismissed for stating his personal beliefs, but these beliefs are mainstream no matter how often party officials call them things like: deeply offensive and unacceptable. He also has science on his side because homosexual acts are certainly not natural. Not only that, but he is also lexicographically correct. It is not normal. It is abnormal, but he chose to use the phrase not normal to make it softer.

This latest episode reminds us of what a government led by David Cameron would/will mean.

1. You have to watch what you say and write at all times lest you be accused of a thought crime.

2. Traditional, moral values mean diddly squat.

3. Your children will be indoctrinated à la New Labour.

4. There will be no place for dissent and the harassment of people of conscience will become more severe.

Ironically, Mr Lardner also writes on his site,

Someone must change things – please vote to make that person me.

It doesn’t look like it will be him, sadly, but he is right, someone must change things and very soon.

If it is any consolation for him, he is better off away from these backstabbing sycophantic socialists who have assumed control of his former party.

Today, I noticed that signs on wooden poles had been erected in several front gardens. Each and every one was urging the town to re-elect our Labour MP. The only good thing about this is that Cleggmania doesn’t appear to have arrived.

I had the urge to pull one of the signs out, put I thought, no, even truly stupid people have the right to express their opinion.

The tax of between five and seven per cent would add up to £14,000 to the cost of buying an average newbuild property, with this figure increasing as the housing market recovers.

First-time buyers are already struggling to get on the housing ladder because mortgage lenders are demanding deposits of up to 25 per cent.

Young couples have traditionally looked to buy newbuild ‘starter homes’, which are cheaper than older properties and attract special deals cutting the costs of stamp duty and deposits.

Alistair Carmichael, the Lib Dems’ Scottish affairs spokesman, risked infuriating first-time buyers by saying they should buy and improve older properties.

Of course they should. While working and bringing up a family. Stupid man. Notice how all the parties pretend to care about the young and the old, families, the sick and disabled and unemployed and yet poop on them endlessly. People have to start taking their lives back and stop trusting politicians to deliver them into a paradisiacal Britain: all fair and equal and pink and fluffy.

But developers described the plan, which is buried in the Lib Dem manifesto, as “sheer madness” and said it would worsen the deepest housing crisis since the Second World War.

I would call it sheer sickness rather than sheer madness. They know what they are doing, so they aren’t mad. Just a nasty party like the others.

The Home Builders Federation, whose members build 80 per cent of new homes in England and Wales, led criticism of the proposal.

Stewart Baseley, the organisation’s chief executive, said: “The Lib Dems’ plan is an extremely poorly thought through proposal that would constrain much needed housing development still further and potentially increase the cost of housing.”

Homes for Scotland, which represents the house building industry north of the Border, said its members had already lost half their directly-employed workforce.

Jonathan Fair, the organisation’s chief executive, said: “Any measure increasing the cost of new homes is sheer madness and will simply exacerbate the problems we as a country already face.”

Opposition parties have vowed to increase scrutiny of Lib Dem policies since Mr Clegg’s victory in the first television debate and the surge in support that followed.

Oh good. The masses might be treated to some policy for a change. Will it matter?

The party’s general election manifesto promises to “equalise VAT” on the cost of buying a new home, which is currently zero-rated for the tax, and repairing an old property.

It’s our old friend equality aimed at messing up lives again.

This would require VAT to be charged on the sale of all new homes, the average price of which in Scotland is £201,701.

If the levy was set at seven per cent, at the highest end of the scale allowed, this would increase the cost by an average of £14,119.

Scottish Executive figures show there were 2,346 new private homes built between April and June last year, barely half the 5,853 total in the same period two years previously.

First-time buyers in Scotland had to find £15,016 more for a deposit last year than in 2007.

Launching the Scottish Lib Dem manifesto, Mr Carmichael said no decision had been taken on what rate of VAT would be charges but conceded it would be at least five per cent.

“It’s going to be an extra cost,” he conceded before adding: “It will be an opportunity for first-time buyers to come into the market buying existing properties and adding some value to them by doing them up.”

I would love to buy an old property and do it up (or have others do most of the work!), but it’s only an opportunity if that’s what you want, have time for and can afford.

But David Mundell, Tory Shadow Scottish Secretary, said: “Like so many Lib Dem policies the closer you look at them, the less they stand up to scrutiny.”

Among the other proposals in the manifesto are introducing road charging across the UK after 2015 and re-establishing the Bank of Scotland in Scotland.

The Lib Dems plan to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent but think the Trident replacement is unaffordable and want a cheaper version.

They would spend £400 million refurbishing Scotland’s shipyards to build wind and wave farms and ban medium-sized and large firms from asking for people’s names on job application forms.

…and they all lived happily ever after.

it is the first-ever opinion survey that has shown the Liberal Democrats, or their predecessors the Liberals, in first place.

The short-lived SDP-Lib Dem Alliance was briefly ahead in the Eighties. But you have to go back to 1906, before opinion polls or television existed, for the last time the Liberals had the most popular support.

I didn’t watch the debate myself, what with not having telly, so could someone please enlighten me as to the appeal of Nick Clegg? It can’t be the Lib Dems’ policies because they are even worse than Labour’s of the past thirteen years.

Old Rightie reminds us on Subrosa’s blog just how awful the Lib Dems’ ideas are.

Just check out the facts of their manifesto, scary!!

We will not waste taxpayer subsidies on nuclear power and we will block any plans for dirty coal power stations.

A zero-carbon Britain – We are the first party to aim for a carbon neutral Britain so we don’t contribute at all to global warming – making the British economy carbon neutral overall by 2050, reducing carbon emissions in the UK by over 40% of 1990 levels by 2020 as a step on the way.

Share the security burden through more defence co-operation with allies – European countries need to work together more effectively on defence and security. There are huge savings to be made by buying in bulk and sharing military assets. With the defence budget under terrible strain, it would be irresponsible not to do this.

The Euro – Liberal Democrats believe that it is in Britain’s long-term interest to be part of the Euro.

What this translates to is utter contempt for the British people and an astounding ignorance of history and economics. The Libs want neither nuclear nor fossil fuel power stations. This should certainly help to make the country “carbon neutral” as we’ll be spending our winters sitting in the dark, shivering, because there is not enough electricity being generated. What’s left of our industry will suffer further too, but that’s part of the master plan of the globalists: to move production to Third World countries.

They want a Europe-wide police force and army. Just as the Nazis did. They didn’t get their way because other countries were independent, but this won’t be the case if Clegg gets to be the EU’s puppet leader of the UK.

And what does he mean when he says of defence and security, there are huge savings to be made by buying in bulk and sharing military assets?

No, there are huge benefits to the Government buying British-made equipment – and keeping it for ourselves in case we need it in a hurry and can’t get it because the Bulgarian Navy are using it on manoeuvres in the Black Sea. Of course, if we share equipment and buy in bulk from China, then we can reduce our carbon emissions and look really cool as well as feeling really cold.

And to complete the destruction of our country, the Lib Dems want to join the Euro.

But none of this clearly matters, because Nick Clegg looked good on the telly. Was it his smile? Did he appear to occupy the moral high ground against Brown and Cameron (not a difficult task)? Are the workings of the nation’s brains clogged up with volcanic ash?

Someone, please help me understand.

As you can probably imagine, I was seething with anger just at the sight of him. I thought of what to say. What could I say that I didn’t say to him when we met in his office, when trying to get through to him was like attempting to explain particle physics to a Mongolian yak herdman’s grandmother?

I didn’t want to let the opportunity pass without saying something, so I started thinking along the lines of sarcasm, or maybe an all-out rant. There are more and more empty shops in town. There is a row right in the centre where three out of four are closed, plus many others. With this in mind, I thought of chastising him for the state of the town after five years with him as our MP. He was one of the many MPs who voted for Post Office closures all over the country. When branches were threatened in his own constituency, naturally, he mounted a ‘Save our Post Offices’ type campaign.

And failed.

In the end, I just felt such contempt for the man and his party that I couldn’t bring myself to utter a word to him. With hindsight, I’m glad I didn’t, because whatever I would have said in that moment of anger would probably have made him believe he was standing on the moral high ground.

What would you have done?