Bad Laws?

Much squealing, wailing and moaning in the Blogosphere and the Twitterverse about poor little David Laws, a man who has plunged from hero to zero in the space of a few hours.

There's also a lot of bickering about the rights and wrongs of the whole shambles, dominated by the pink elephant in the room: "is it because he is a gayer?".

Of course it fucking isn't. An expenses trougher is an expenses trougher, regardless of which end he bowls from. See picture to the right for details.

This furore is absolutely bugger all (oops) to do with Laws' sexuality and everything to do - as always in the ol' expenses scandals - about a genuine deadly sin: Greed.

If 'Genius' Laws had not wanted anybody looking too closely at his 'private' life, wouldn't he have been much better off not asking us, the taxpayers, to fucking well fund it?

He's supposedly a very successful banker - could he have just worn the costs himself? Was his little 'secret' not worth that much? Or did he just think he'd never be rumbled?

Surely, if you ask the we, the taxpayers, to pay for something, then we, the taxpayers, might well wonder what the fuck that something is?

Whereas if you don't ask we, the taxpayers, to pay for something, then it really is none of our, the taxpayers', fucking business?

And if you want your domestic arrangements - whatever they are - kept secret, for any reason then .. well .. duh!

Or is CF missing something here?



larainthewitch said...

Well bloody said!!!
If he wanted to keep his sexuality a secret he should have applied for a different job..if he's so clever he would have known the truth would out!!

Jill said...

Paddy Ashdown was funny on the BBC. Wonder what iDave will do?

I assume now it'll be endless weeks of "investigation" - what do these people do that takes so long with these things? - which will hinge on the definition of partner.

It's no more than four nights a week for benefits-claiming single mothers (including the fathers of their children), if I'm not mistaken, so he'll probably turn out to be within the rules. That'll set the cat amongst the pigeons.

I still think it's cuntly to out people though.

Jock Coats said...

Personally, I think CF is missing something here.

JohnRS said...

WotsIsName needs to get rid of Laws asap. He's just a thieving little trougher like all the others that have been uncovered in the last year. It just shows, despite WotsIsName's holier than thou comments during the election campaign, that all three herds of piggies have very dirty snouts.

They say a real man shoots his own dog...lets see. However CallMeDave needs to make sure Laws is gone and should fire him if WotsIsName hasnt got the cojones to do the job himself.

Witterings from Witney said...

Well said CF! Totally agree with every word.

Now perhaps we can also start on Darling, Blears et all that were re-elected.

Captain Haddock said...

There is, I fear a complete perversity about this whole matter ..

The more people go on about him being a Shit-Stabber .. the more sympathy and backing he'll get from all the other Uphill-Gardeners .. not because of what he's done wrong .. but because they feel the need to support the "wider circle" of their own kind ..

Far better, I feel if the pressure is kept on, on the basis of him simply being a liar & a thief ...

paulo said...

Note for Jill:

There are no rules on "living together." Two, three, one etc nights a wwek are urban myths


AndrewSouthLondon said...

From Guido's "Comments"
61 Common People says:
May 29, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Why is no one asking the right question?

He extended his main homes mortgage to help his “partner” purchase a property that he then rented a room in – it’s like me renting a room in my own house and then claiming housing benefit to pay the rent!


The "gay/privacy" line is a smokescreen for a very much more dirty deed: a very clever dodge to line his own pocket - err.. back pocket, of course.

If he had merely rented property the money would be gone. Fair enough, we expect our MPs to have accommodation away from their main home - how else? This way he recycled the money to himself. Thats what a "clever banker" does -fill his pockets at our expense. Its nothing to do with "economics" or running the finances of the country.

rinky stingpiece said...

I wouldnae worry... this may work for wee Davie... he's a professional finance man, he's probably already scripted the plan and written wee Danny a user guide, and all Danny (the "PR man") has to do is deliver the bad news and take all the shit for it on the British Bullshitting Clique until all the pain has been dished out; then he can return to nutkin spotting in the glens, whilst Dave "I'm not gay, but my boyfriend is" Laws slides back in after a relaxing summer of cocktails and staining Lundie's undies.

None of this matters... it's just a red herring to throw Campbell off the trail, and exchange a ginger nut nibbler for a ginger chicken snagger.