Harriet Harman: vacuous bitch

Ding dong: the tedious old witch is still not dead. In this case, no news is bad news...

Via my impecunious Athenian friend*, I stumble across this execrable interview with Harriet Harperson; apparently The Independent have a regular feature wherein politicians answer fatuous questions emailed in by Independent hacks using assumed names in a desperate attempt to convince people that anyone reads their fucking rag readers.

There's some real corkers here, I can tell you.

Why has Gordon Brown made such a poor job of being PM after waiting so long for the top job?
Henry Darlow
Richmond

[Harperson:] Before he was PM, Gordon wasn't just waiting around – he was being chancellor and sorting out the economy.

Aaaaaaaahahahahahaha! I think that what you meant to say, love, is that he was being chancellor and busy flogging off the family silver, constructing unbelievably damaging PFI deals, spending money like water and generally setting the scene for the economic downturn that is going to hit this country like a fucking tyre-iron upside the head, the monocular Scots cunt.

After Iraq, Afghanistan, Northern Rock, the missing data disasters, cash for honours, the David Abrahams affair and Brown's dithering about a general election, could we trust New Labour to organise a party in a brewery?
Jim Miller
by email

[Harperson:] After full employment, low inflation, doubling aid to the developing world, better schools and hospitals, higher pensions and free travel for pensioners, longer maternity leave and more nurseries ... we are too busy to be organising a party in a brewery.

I think that it is fair to say, Harriet, that any attempt by your party to organise a piss-up in a brewery would turn to a stinking pile of shit—just like everything else that you've touched.

PMQs have become irritatingly, if not degradingly, banal. Can some dignity be instilled?
John Romer
Ealing

[Harperson:] Not while David Cameron just uses it for playground taunts.

It seems that you aren't above making a few playground taunts yourself, eh, Harry dearest? Although I imagine the irony of your response will have escaped you: go fuck yourself, you unspeakable harridan.

Fidel Castro: hero of the left, or dangerous authoritarian dictator?
David Newton
Edinburgh

[Harperson:] Hero of the left – but time for Cuba to move on.

What the cunting fuck? That was my first thought upon reading this; obviously, Mr E was struck by the same reaction.

If the deputy leader of the Tories had praised Augusto Pinochet as a "hero of the right", he'd have be sacked by lunchtime.

But then I thought about it for a little bit, and now I think that her answer is entirely consistent and even, from her point of view, completely reasonable.

After all, a dangerous authoritarian dictator is obviously going to be a hero of the left; there is no dichotomy here—as far as Harriet is concerned, the two options are entirely synonymous.

Fuck me, but she's such a loathesome individual, as well as being possessed of a face that one would never, ever tire of slapping.

But this last one is a real cracker.

How many of the MPs in your party are honest in their financial affairs?
Peter Dickinson
by email

[Harperson:] I don't know of any that aren't. If I thought anyone wasn't, I'd report them.

If I recall correctly, the word that I am searching for here is chutzpah. I mean, I have always said that most MPs are utterly lacking in self-knowledge, and it seems that Harriet, additionally, really doesn't know of herself. Which is interesting.

Let us revisit some of your humble Devil's comment on her recent financial record, shall we?

• Jack Dromey is a liar
  

  Either Harriet Harman is a fucking lying bitch—in which case she should be kicked out of office and prosecuted—or she is thicker than pigshit—in which case she should be kicked out of office and prosecuted—and she is certainly not competent enough to be ruling over the rest of us.



• Harriet Harman: totally fucked
  

  Well, we shall all look forward to the answers, obviously. In the interests of good governance, you understand, and not from a sense of vindictive amusement. Well, apart from me, of course: it's vindictive amusement all the way, here in Hell.
  ...
  
  Meanwhile, dear Harriet's arse is about to be handed to her on a plate...



• Harman: evil, hypocritical witch. And not in a good way.
  

  The sheer hypocrisy of these fuckers is what makes them quite so massively unpleasant.
  ...
  
  Harriet Harman QC and her husband—Labour Party Treasurer, Jack Dromey—are both lying shits and they should go forthwith. The only reason that I'd wish for them to stay on is because they will perpetuate yet more highly entertaining scandals; alas, my sides already hurt too much from laughing and, at this rate, I am going to keep on giggling until I'm sick.



• Harriet's finances are a little more than mysterious
  

  As Guido has pointed out a number of times, Harriet Harman needed to raise money for her deputy leadership campaign; not only did she take out a declared £10,000 loan, but she also extended her mortgage (which was not declared).



• It's going to be a good year...
  

  Although why Peter Watt should be the only one facing charges, I don't know; it seems rather unfair that the party Treasurer—Jack Dromey, a.k.a. Mr Harriet Harman—is not also liable. I would love to have seen that tableau: a terrified Dromey being draggged away to chokey by two burly policeman, whilst darling Harriet reaches out futilely to her dear heart, the tears pouring down her normally self-satisfied, priggish, squirrel's bumhole of a face.
  
  Although it would be equally satisfying to see that vignette in reverse, with Harriet "feeding of the £5,000" Harman dragged off to prison whilst her weeping husband curses, wails, gnashes his teeth, and rends his clothes.

That this poignant vignette has not been played out only serves to irritate me further.

Ah well, the cockroaches are nicely sharpened and Igor is, at this very moment, prodding the increasingly enraged candiru fish with a pointed stick...


* A few other people covered it too. But, as seems to be becoming a habit with some, they didn't link to the story, so they get no link from here. It's a new policy that I'm instigating: no blogger is so important that they can get away with not being arsed to link to their sources. How else are people to know that you are telling the truth, or not skewing the story?