I sorta take your point on diversity. On the other hand, there’s no reason a white MP can’t represent their non-white consitituents, or vice versa. And Tory Party makeup isn’t even that suspicious given that they mainly draw support from very white areas.

As for getting rid of Warsi, well, good for them. Let’s hope they DON’T get rid of Osborne, because that would also be good for them.

Who is “I” in this article, BTW?

Given that she’s the only brown face in government, I can’t see this helping the notion that the Conservative Party hasn’t diversified enough to represent modern Britain.

They should keep a ‘brown face’ in the government, even though she’s a religious fruitbat who ranted like a lunatic about EVIL SECULAR TOTALITARIAN FUNDAMENTALISTS during her audience with the pope?

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/nelson-jones/2012/02/warsi-faith-religion-militant

Given that she’s the only brown face in government, I can’t see this helping the notion that the Conservative Party hasn’t diversified enough to represent modern Britain.

It is because of that kind of appallingly racist statement that we so often find women and people from ethnic minority backgrounds given jobs they are not equipped to do.

Coming so soon after the Bradford debacle I can’t help but guess they’re linked.

I do wonder if this is the Tel publishing stuff that some of their hacks want to believe. There is a continual background of carping about Sayeeda Warsi, partly because she’s in charge of taking difficult decisions, such as stripping out the wingnuts and fruitcakes from the Tory candidates’ list.

It’s the same kind of carping that comes from the Mail and particularly the odious Quentin Letts (let’s not), who hates John and Sally Bercow and so keeps churning out knocking copy about them in the belief that he can see off the Speaker. Letts believes Bercow is terminally unpopular partly because there are a few Tory MPs who dislike the Speaker and who will willingly tell Letts what he wants to hear.

Letts got into trouble with Labour MP Jamie Reed recently when he alleged Reed had a “sulphorous dislike” of the Speaker, which he did not. Reed has since secured an apology from the Mail.

The source of much of the bile directed at Sayeeda Warsi comes from places like ConHome, which suggests that poor old Monty is paying too much attention to the folks who are on the wrong end of those difficult decisions.

If the Tories do get rid of her, and appoint someone more acceptable to the grumblers, they’ll more than likely make the party even less pleasant, so it’s their own look-out. More excellent spectator sport!

@ Tim Fenton

partly because she’s in charge of taking difficult decisions, such as stripping out the wingnuts and fruitcakes from the Tory candidates’ list.

So, it’s a bit like set a thief to catch a thief? It would be hard to make a case that she’s the brightest,sanest and most capable.

Coming so soon after the Bradford debacle I can’t help but guess they’re linked.

I doubt it as Bradford – or Blabckburn, as Galloway calls it – demonstrates that communitarianism works.

Warsi’s a bigot who thinks that secularism is totalitarian. A commitment to secularism should be an absolute minimum qualification for an MP in a liberal democracy.

@ Shatterface

“A commitment to secularism should be an absolute minimum qualification for an MP in a liberal democracy.”

Do you mean we should restrict who can be an MP based on their beliefs RE secularism, or are you just saying it’s a shame that people vote for idiots? Warsi’s not an MP, anyway.

Do you mean we should restrict who can be an MP based on their beliefs RE secularism, or are you just saying it’s a shame that people vote for idiots? Warsi’s not an MP, anyway.

People shouldn’t vote for them, anymore than they should vote for people who oppose democracy itself. Warsi plays to those who believe religion should be privilged.

And whether or not she plays the race card too, the OP writer does. If this were Nadine Dorres trying to foust her superstitious claptrap on unbelievers we’d be cheering the Tories on if they sacked her, but Warsi’s a ‘brown face’ and to distance themselves makes the Tories ‘racist’.

@ Shatterface

Agreed on all counts.

She’s a pig ignorant, wilfully anti-intellectual bigot.

So a perfect fit, no?

Good riddance, wait a sec – you said she had a brown face, now I feel guilty about something I haven’t done. hmmm. I can’t decide. Let her and her brown face stay. Having a brown face is a good a reason as any I suppose.

I’m not sure I agree with those calling for Warsi’s dismissal on the grounds that she says a lot of stuff we strongly disagree with. What do you expect? She’s a Tory. At least she opposed the Iraq war, which only a few fellow Tories did.

I presume Warsi’s speech about secularism must have been cleared with No10 and probably represents the views of the government anyway, doesn’t it?

I presume Warsi’s speech about secularism must have been cleared with No10 and probably represents the views of the government anyway, doesn’t it?

I don’t know if it was cleared by No. 10 but her speech was, in effect, a declaration to a foreign head of state that a law-abiding majority of her own country represents a common enemy.

Lets not pretend she’s a victim here, just because of her colour.

@15 But what is the point in wanting a new Tory chairman? She would be replaced by another Tory. I suppose if she were to be replaced by a better Tory, that would probably be better for the country. But how likely is that? Is she any worse than the average Tory? Not as far as I can tell. Did Cameron or the rest of the government disagree with her speech in Rome? Not as far as I can tell.

The real reason is that she is probably to HONEST to be one of them ! (Tory).

She’s a bigoted idiot, but that’s not really a reason for some elements in the Tory party to want to get rid of her as they’ve got plenty of them.

Plus she’s amusing, who else remembers her ‘I agree with Nick’ moment on question time, when she was sharing a platform with Nick Griffin.

@ 18 Ben 2

“She’s a bigoted idiot, but that’s not really a reason for some elements in the Tory party to want to get rid of her as they’ve got plenty of them.”

Agreed, but it DOES justify the rest of us being pleased with the idea of seeing the back of her.

“Plus she’s amusing, who else remembers her ‘I agree with Nick’ moment on question time, when she was sharing a platform with Nick Griffin.”

Please link that!