Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Johnny UKIP or John Bulls***? From the behaviour of its supporters, there's no difference between the two.

Johnny UKIP or John Bulls***? From the behaviour of its supporters, there’s no difference between the two.

Praise is due to the Royal Mail employees who delivered a missive to VP Mansion, despite the fact that the top line of the address was missing.

It was a poison pen letter from a supporter of UKIP, clearly incensed that Yr Obdt Srvt has dared to use the letter pages of the local papers to question the actions of its elected MEPs.

“Dear Sir,” it began. “Are you some kind of a nutcase of have you caught a member of UKIP shaging your wife. However, I am voting UKIP next election with enemies like you they cant be wrong” [reproduced as written].

It was signed “John Bull, Newtown, Powys” – an obvious nom-de-plume but also a faux pas, as John Bull was created to be “a heroic archetype of the freeborn Englishman”. Any Newtown resident using such a disguise clearly has his national identity confused.

But then, he is a UKIP voter.

The irony is, the debate in the newspapers was winding down but now – thanks to “John”‘s Bull(ying behaviour), it seems these Kippers deserve a little more battering.

For information: UKIP’s people here in Powys had got into a terrible froth after Yr Srvt reminded them that UKIP MEPs had voted against a resolution calling on member states to legislate against marital rape.

Their arguments were easily countered with reference to exactly such a law which is currently passing through the legislative process in the Welsh Assembly. The question was: If UKIP had any Assembly members, would they support or oppose this Bill? If they supported it, they must be hypocrites; if they opposed it, then there would be no evading accusations that they approve of violence against women.

A UKIP supporter had responded by saying the party had been formed to regain democratic self-government, therefore “to oppose a measure because it was enacted by our democratically devolved government would be inconsistent.”

He continued: “Personally, I suspect that the practicalities of enforcement will largely vitiate a well-intentioned measure. Rape and assault outside the home are not prevented by laws criminalising them.”

In two paragraphs he managed to present the worst possible case. UKIP would hypocritically support such a law – not because it would protect women (this Kipper didn’t think it would) but because its members like the Welsh Assembly more than the European Parliament.

How unstatesmanlike.

There’s a four-letter word that is often appended to “John”‘s surname – and UKIP is full of it.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Buy Vox Political books and help
batter UKIP!

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
Y
ou can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards