To be fair, we do have enough evidene of Johnson being, at the very leat, inconsistent, and probably pandering to the specific prejudices of his audiences.
Can we have discussion on that, or will it continue to be ad hominem?
Mmm.
Here's my contribution to that discussion: I wasn't hugely happy when Boris was elected; I didn't vote for him and I was very concerned that his efforts would be focused on the middle classes in suburban London and that Ken's good work on diversity, transport and entertainment would be dropped. I knew that people who live in Surbiton and Highgate can afford to entertain themselves and were grumpy at the use of their taxes to pay for things like the Rise! festival - things which as a person on a low income living in Dalston, I had really, really valued. London is expensive and free, high quality entertainment, accessed by reasonably priced, frequent buses, does encourage social inclusion - Ken's one LondON idea, I suppose.
I was also a bit concerned that Boris has outdated ideas on homosexuality, doesn't appear to have any idea at all about age prejudice, and has used racially inappropriate words in his writings.
Fortunately, I then read Boris Watch a few times and I'm beginning to quite like the man. Boris is in fact a victim of near constant misrepresentation who is unable to wipe his arse without some fanatic dribbling into the blogosphere that he uses white toilet paper, the racist git.
Boris Watch appears to be fuelled entirely by dislike for Boris, rather than by anything he's actually
done - and certainly by nothing he's done since becoming Mayor.