Sunday, July 29, 2007

Chas Kennedy deflates LibDem byelection spin with sober truth...

In the aftermath of Labour's win in the Ealing Southall by-election, much of the media swallowed bizarre LibDem claims that they were the real winners and that the result showed Labour was fast losing ground.

The BBC duly reported LibDem Ming Campbell saying the Ealing Southall result was blow for Brown.

The BBC also broadcast, as if it were a fact, that Ming Campbell was the main beneficiary in Ealing Southall.

ITV reported the result as good news for Ming and the Indy headlined on a night of LibDem cheer.

The truth was that for the first time since 1989, the LibDems had failed to take a by-election from second place.

But the day after the result, LibDem spin went into overdrive: at least one national TV crew ignored celebrations by the real winner and instead followed LibDem activists parading through the streets of Southall celebrating puncturing the Brown bounce.

The LibDems have carred on their charade ever since: Ming's claim of a blow for Brown still appears on the LibDem website

But on BBC's The World this Weekend today, asked to assess Gordon Brown's first month as Prime Minister, Charles Kennedy finally admitted the sober truth.

He said Labour's two by election victories - particularly Ealing Southall - were a good boost for Brown

Chas clearly hasn't read the script. Praps he meant to say blow...


Anonymous said...

Phil - do you notice that noone replies to these posts on how brilliant Labour is, and how bad the Tories are? Why do you think that might be?

I think...people know a sycophant when they see one. You parrot the party line, just like the horde of sycophants who surround El Gordo: "Yes Mein Fuhrer", "at once Mein Fuhrer". You did the same thing with Bliar. Sickening. But then I called this syndrome a while ago. You merely reflect the prevalent ideology of the time. You would have been pro-Kaiser, urging him on with the Ludendorff Offensive. Then you would have been the Weimar Republic's biggest fan, and you would have been there encouraging Hitler when he persisted with Stalingrad. And then, with a straight face, you would have applied for a job in Stasi after the war.

Mindless sycophancy isn't bringing the people out Phil. Some of them are surely bound to ask what the point in electing you is, when a pager from New Millbank Towers would have more mental capacity(indeed your electorate have surely asked the question already). You might disagree with me, but at least I speak my mind. You speak Gordon's.

Good luck with coming up with something original some time soon.

fairdealphil said...


it's not just me that thinks Labour is better than the Tories old son...

you probably didn't notice - and I know it wasn't in the script - but Labour won the past three General Elections.

The British people have decided three times in the past ten years that they Labour is good for Britain and Tories are bad.

And the fact is, he's on course to win a fourth term for Labour.

i realise that people like you cannot deal with the reality that Gordon Brown is getting it right -even Chas Kennedy accepted on radio today that Gordon the solid Presbyterian bank manager is in tune with the times...

If my post is not original, as you claim, please let me know where else you saw it.

i posted about an hour or so after Chas Kennedy was on World this Weekend.

it was all my own work, totally original, not Gordon's or parroted or cribbed from any Labour party line as you wrongly assume.

i had not seen anyone else pick up on Kennedy's comments anywhere else, either before i posted or since.

if you knew deeping st james, you would know why people elected me - in a Conservative area.

I was elected despite being Labour - because local people know I put Deeping St James on the map at county hall - get things done and work hard for my local community.

What do you do for your community michael...?

your insults suggesting i would have been pro-Kaiser and pro-Hitler are quite frankly childish, pathetic aqnd disgusting.

i was prepared to defend my country - Britain - and was proud to be a soldier for 20 years, albeit part-time.

Were you...?

Anonymous said...

You haven't quite understood the point I was making regarding Hitler and the Kaiser. And I haven't the energy to explain it to you. Maybe someone else will.

If you consider some of your ideas(sic) to be serving the community, then my community could do without "service" like that. If you knew anything, you would know why people didn't elect you last time.

You probably didn't notice - and I know it wasn't in the script - but the Tories won four General Elections. It's called swings and roundabouts. Try and not be so gullible.

Now I am sure your pager is telling you it's time for a new post Phil.

Alles ist gut Phil.

Anonymous said...

If Michael Oakeshott has a point (and he could not put a point elegantly if you gave him a set of watercolours and a sheet of parchment) it is that it is not enough to be only a Labour leadership loyalist.

Of course Phil is going to support the party line. He works for them. We understand that.

But he's also writing his own blog and that means that amongst the ocean of unquestioning loyalty to your employers there has to be one or two drops of personal licensed opinion and I'm sure your boss understands that much about blogs.

The alternative? The alternative to expressing a licensed personal opinion from time to time, Phil, is to make your blog entirely predictable and therefore unreadable. I think that is what young neocon Oakeshott is getting at in his saner, less offensive (Ludendorff or otherwise) spells.

fairdealphil said...


can't think why, but you didn't answer either question:

1. you claim my post was not original - please state where you saw anything remotely similar either before or since.

2. following your offensive suggestions that i would have been pro-Kaiser and encouraged Hitler, i mentioned that i was prepared to defend my country - Britain - and was proud to be a soldier for 20 years, albeit part-time.

Were you...?

It's not difficult.

fairdealphil said...


thanks for your attempt at interpreting oakeshott's offensive posts.

as you have observed, my blog, readable or unreadable, is as i see things.

please be assured that as an elected councillor to represent Deeping St James, i always put Deeping St James first.

Anonymous said...

No disrespect Phil(or at least not a disproportionate amount), but...

Your post is clearly not original. It is just Nu Labor prolefeed(Orwell surely got it wrong, for his idea of prolefeed was at least entertaining in nature). I am sure dozens of these emails wing their way out from the Broon propaganda machine, to be distributed as "original" by "useful stooges"(copyright Joseph Stalin) like you. You must be so proud(!).

I haven't served in the military. As I have told you before(in one ear...), my brother and several other relatives currently serve(out the other...). I am proud that they defend Queen and Country, but I personally would be unable to volunteer to defend the current political system and the accompanying corruption. The point about your "service" Phil, does nothing for me. Playing boy soldier on Salisbury Plain with the TA once in a blue moon hardly makes you Hannibal. Your party's determination to sell(or rather give away) our country to the Soviet Union tells me all I need to know about you.

I have observed, your blog, barely readable, is as Gordon see things. He must be honoured to have such a useful stooge.

PS. I bet if I asked to borrow a pen off you in council Phil, you would ask Gordon if it was alright.