August 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

« Hiroshima and Le Monde | Main | Chávez and Farc »

May 23, 2008

Comments

Jim S.

Two points:

Is fighting against unemployment and gross inequality as important as fighting against inflation?

And, is the power of big business to be subjected to the rule of law as much as union power?

simon

Oliver, I apologise for derailing this thoughtful and insightful post with a comment about David Lindsay. But I would be doing your readers a disservice if I did not draw their attention to David's observations on the by-election result.

As you may recall, David had confidently predicted that the Tory poll lead would be 'exposed as a lie by their failure to win the Crewe and Nantwich by-election', so his fans were waiting anxiously to see how he would respond to the news of a Conservative victory. He hasn't disappointed us. He tells us that he spent the day attending a 'traditional Latin Mass' followed by 'a superb dinner .. at which I was seated next to a delightful peeress'. This, he explains, is 'real politics' - unlike a mere by-election, which is of no importance whatever.

Bartholomew

This caught my eye:

The issue of race also reared its head, with Labour highlighting that Timpson and the Tories were against ID cards for foreign nationals.

The Tory MP Eric Pickles, who masterminded Timpson's campaign, was furious that the issue had been raised in a town where, for the most part, locals rub along easily with workers from eastern Europe.

Talk about the world turned upside-down,

Ross

"As you may recall, David had confidently predicted that the Tory poll lead would be 'exposed as a lie by their failure to win the Crewe and Nantwich by-election', "

His electoral predictions also include this gem from late last yeat:

"Meanwhile, Boris is dead in the water. A Tory was never going to win an all-London, one person one vote ballot anyway.
......
But even if he did stand and win, then he'd only have the job for about six weeks, after which there'd be no such job to have. The position of Mayor of London was invented specifically for Livingstone, in order to get him out of the Commons and thus prevent him from standing against Brown when the time came. "

http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/2007/08/doreen-lawrence-boris-johnson-and-ken.html


In fairness though, that was a more plausible prediction than Harriet Harman becoming Labour's next leader.

Michael

The position of Mayor of London was invented specifically for Livingstone, in order to get him out of the Commons and thus prevent him from standing against Brown when the time came.

I do hate to use the words "gibbering mentalism" to describe the political analysis of Britain's next Prime Minister, but that's so wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin.

But perhaps Lindsay could enlighten us as to why Labour went to such reputation-embarrassing lengths to prevent Livingstone from running for Mayor in 2000?

And if this was part of a cunningly Machiavellian strategy all along, how much did they pay Frank Dobson to act as the stooge and wreck his career?

The comments to this entry are closed.