For old time's sake
Diggin around the Tories' past pronouncements on the NHS - the ones that David Cameron wants to escape from - I came across a clip of Margaret Thatcher you might enjoy. Not the one about the NHS being "safe in our hands", but her justification for why she planned to go private for an operation she needed.
They were words that caused outrage but, amusingly for those watching how the two big parties are converging, now can be seen as a forerunner of this government's pledge to deliver patient choice within the NHS!
I'm 
Comments
And your point is....? Maggie Thatcher was the best thing to happen to this country and Tony Blair is still reaping the benefits that have resulted from her reign. Compare the state of the country when he came into power and when she did. You have no justification for attacking David Cameron's stance on the NHS and you have no evidence so you have to resort to gutter politics by picking a hate figure like dear old Maggie and trying to associate him with her. David Cameron is the real thing not like that pathetic Blair who has had real power, authority and money and wasted it and is now scrabbling around looking for a legacy.
Margaret Thatcher - just over fifteen years since she left Downing Street and her influence is still felt in British Politics. What a 'backseat driver' she has become!
The Conservative Party are still influenced by Thatcherism, despite Cameron's recent attempts to state otherwise, I am a Conservative supporter, but we've heard this before from the party - who can forget IDS's statement 'The era of Thatcher is dead,' only for Michael Howard to revise some of those policies as leader.
New Labour is influenced by her too. Blair had the 'honour' of her praise, much to the annoyance of Major, in the 1990's. To many people, Blair is Thatcher's heir, and that annoys Conservatives as he is on the wrong bench! Look at the commitment by Blair's Governments to a free market economy, a desire not to nationalise the industries - you could argue that this is the point of 'New' Labour, however, why is a left wing administration dealing with George Bush's right wing US one?
The problem is, both parties have no fixed ideology. Who would have though twenty years ago, of New Labour occupying the territory of the Conservatives, or now, with David Cameron trying to do exactly the same by moving to the left?
Both parties are desperate to occupy the centre ground in politics and are copying policies from the other side. In doing so, both are abandoning their ideologies in order to win votes. Blair speaking of being tough on crime, a Conservative idea, and Cameron speaking of the urgency to stand up to big businesses, a Labour idea, shows how muddy the waters have become.
Thatcher reminds us how little society has actually changed. We still have a Thatcherite Government, under the guise of New Labour, in power with a leader who will ignore his party to his own peril. Everyone comments on the greed of the Thatcher era and the high unemployment and home repossessions, it is ironic - look at the mountain of debt in the UK and picture what would happen if the economy hits bad times...
Have we really moved on, or do we kid ourselves that we have?
You imply that Thatcher's arrogant utterances constitute some sort of evidence for the argument that the Conservatives and Labour have identical agendas, but you seem to conveniently ignore the fact that MT does not suggest that this 'choice' is something that should be offered that all. Instead, it is simply something that is 'absolutely vital' for her. There is no suggestion that this is something that this should be offered to those who cannot afford to go private (a very small proportion, as she explicitly acknowledges).
This clip shows nothing about the convergence of the two main parties, but a lot about the facile, narrow and idiotic arguments of the Tories.