Derek Draper is poisonous for the Labour party


4:51 am - April 12th 2009

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

If there’s one lesson for the Labour party to be learned from smeargate – it’s that if Derek Draper is leading your online operations then you may as well give up politics.

The antics of Damian McBride and Derek Draper, the latter now beyond redemption (again), epitomise all that has gone wrong with the Labour Party. That Alastair Campbell, John Prescott and others at cabinet level put their faith in Draper to bolster their online operations has now shown to be stupidity of near epic proportions.

But in case it isn’t already clear to the party why we are angry, it’s because we expect more of the left. We expect more of a party that claims to represent the left. We understand the need for pragmatism, for building narratives, and sometimes the need for discipline. But this episode serves to highlight all that has gone wrong with the Labour party.

I think commenter Alisdair Cameron nailed it when he said:

…one of the reasons I hate the Tories isn’t because of their front-men, the shadow cabinet etc, but because of the bigots, shysters and bullies who lurk in the wings, playing dog-whistle politics and worse. As New Labour seem to have a terrible number of vile people like Draper and Mcbride, just out of the spotlight, but nevertheless on-message and on-stage as it were, then I despise them too.

In fact, Derek Draper’s biggest mistake was to try and ape Guido Fawkes – perhaps the only bigger hypocrite on the blogosphere.
Hopi Sen:

This is the guy who has spent more time propogating political smears on the internet than anyone else. It’s the raison d’etre of his site. Paul Staines regularly smeared Gordon Brown in the foulest and ugliest possible ways, has regularly posted stories that were unsubtantiated and untrue (journalists – if he says “name one” – there’s three on this page alone, and he did itlive on Newsnight). I mean what can you say about a man who helped set up and fund “the Sunlight Centre for Open Politics” but kept that quiet when he publicised its work (until other people exposed the links)?

The more amusing thing is that the small coterie of journalists who write about Westminister politics, and think the world revolves around them, didn’t even know enough to catch Staines out on it. This is the man to bring honesty and integrity to politics? Give us a fucking break.

Sunder is right in saying the last thing Labour needs is a “red Guido”. We, the liberal-left, want more from our side because we aren’t anti-politics like Guido Fakwes and his ilk are.

But this isn’t simply about all that is wrong with New Labour’s approach to the internet; this is about all that is wrong with their approach to politics and supporters. Given that the upper hierarchy has run out of ideas, narratives and policies – it was inevitable this was going to be where they ended up. Who knows, this might even be the shot in the arm they need to get serious about policies and ideas, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

I tried my hardest to avoid hating on Derek Draper when LabourList started, simply because I think everyone deserves a second chance. And he seemed personable and willing to listen. But this episode has illustrated all that is wrong with Labour and that is a difficult proposition to support. At a minimum New Labour should re-think the view that Derek Draper’s online operations will help the party.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Liberal Conspiracy ,Media ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


You’re right that the liberal left does not need a Guido clone, but they do need someone who is as effective at generating publicity as Paul Staines. There’s a real gap for a prominent, tabloid-style, left wing blog – one that is thoughtful, but gets the point across succinctly.

I have this dreadful fear that being an asshole online is the way to get read, and hence to have the opportunity to change minds. I’m not sure how we can change that fact, but ignoring it probably won’t work.

Lazy Student,

You’re right that the liberal left does not need a Guido clone, but they do need someone who is as effective at generating publicity as Paul Staines. There’s a real gap for a prominent, tabloid-style, left wing blog – one that is thoughtful, but gets the point across succinctly.

Agreed that left wing blogs need to boost their popularity. I suspect part of the problem is that political blogging didn’t really kick in over here until 2004/5, by which time we’d had the Iraq War and nearly 8 years of New Labour government. The right wing blogs were always going to have more ammunition. However I don’t think “tabloid-style” and “thoughtful” are workable bed fellows. The tabloid approach is too closely associated with rags such as the Sun and blogs such as Staines. A better option is to aim for entertaining and thoughtful.

Dan,

I have this dreadful fear that being an asshole online is the way to get read, and hence to have the opportunity to change minds. I’m not sure how we can change that fact, but ignoring it probably won’t work.

Being an asshole is certainly one way, but how about entertaining? Whatever approach is adopted, the temptation to let “anything go” in the interest of building traffic must be avoided.

Draper is surely toast now. McBride was protecting him I believe. He should walk. But we should bear in mind that, so far at least, the narrative of this nonsense being binned and the dynamic duo shelving the sleaze site, is holding up. Guido has been the one causing all this stuff to be published. Although the NOTW trailed a view that TheRedRag was still a live project in their tease, they don’t seem to have stood this up.

Cold comfort I know, but if they did spike all this themselves that is something. A corrollary question would be: “Will Draper simply go away? Or having got a taste for blogging and notoreity will he try to continue in his own name?”

Guido is like the Daily Mail. People who are diametrically opposed to the views of both still read them because they still care what they think, and thus both look much more popular than they actually are because their stats are fed by those who don’t actually like them, or read them because they find them amusingly ridiculous. The problem is that when stats are published all those readers are assumed to be true believers.

The reason the same doesn’t happen to the Graun and the leftie blogs is that right-wingers just don’t give a toss what anyone who disagrees with them thinks, and care much less about engaging properly with their opponents. So they don’t talk about us or link to us to anything like the same degree.

Excellent post.

I think what we are seeing now is the direct and logical continuation from the situation Andrew Rawnsley examines in his book Servants to the People.

Whils from 1997-2001, Blair, Brown and Mandelson got into bed with the City because they’d sacrificed all ideology for power, from 2001-9 it’s been a steady decline into gutter politics and lies, for the simple reason that those in power have no idea what they are in power for.

Except for Jack Straw, who knows exactly why he’s in a position of power: to curtail freedom and disfigure the liberal traditions of this country in line with the Stalinism he so vigorously adhered to as a younger man.

Which puts me – and I imagine, many readers of this blog – in a very bizarre situation. I hate the Conservatives. I really do hate them. And hate is not too strong a word. But you know what? I don’t want to see Labour win the next election. Those at the upper echelons of the Labour Party have betrayed everyone (except themselves) and devalued everything.

So the 2010 election offers a prospect I don’t have a description for: a goodbye to the rotten lot of the past 12 years, and a hello to a bunch who may be even worse.

“Whatever approach is adopted, the temptation to let “anything go” in the interest of building traffic must be avoided.”

Quite, or else risk becoming New Labour.

8. Chris Baldwin

It disturbs me that people like Messrs Draper and McBride will be seen as representing “the left” in all of this. They’re liberals at best.

Chris, Draper is a liberal in the same way that Thatcher was a socialist.

The whole thing’s just depressing beyond belief, and the idea that what we need is more left-wing blogs pumping out our bullshit to counter the government’s bullshit, the media’s bullshit and the bullshit of hard right-wing bloggers is insane.

It’s the bullshit that’s the problem, not its provenance. Labour have already befouled the political atmosphere by spending years pumping truckfuls of lies and smears into the press, to the point where we now have an incurious bullshit-centric media, stripped down to a state where it’s incapable of covering anything more than bullshit press releases from other bullshitters.

Even in a compromised political process like ours, the least we could expect is that debates around it would try to concentrate on stuff like transport, economics, energy policy, small businesses, access to justice, health, penal policy and suchlike.

This story? It’s a self-referential, Westminster-centric circle jerk between a gaggle of despicable frauds.

The previous thread features people who should know better taking small comfort in the fact that a blogger can now propel a story to national prominence. The real lesson is that politics is now in such a shitty state that lying hacks and propagandists like Draper, McBride and Guido now have a national podium from which to pump out their bullshit, and there are hundreds more where they came from.

Some seem to welcome the emergence of bullshit bloggers as newsworthy figures as a good thing, and an opportunity to push their own message. To me, it’s just another indication of plummeting expectations, and those who welcome it reveal everything you need to know about the value of their efforts.

Is he having some trouble composing himself today?

Flying Rodent,

The whole thing’s just depressing beyond belief, and the idea that what we need is more left-wing blogs pumping out our bullshit to counter the government’s bullshit, the media’s bullshit and the bullshit of hard right-wing bloggers is insane.

Precisely the point I was trying to make. If we want open political debate – and I’m assuming that we’re all in agreement on that – then we need to encourage participation. Just like teaching if we want to engage with other people then it has to be enjoyable. So whether we like it or not, we must address the popularity issue. But it should be done in order to draw diverse opinions to the debate, not as an excuse to drop our pants and thwap away at our webstats.

At the same time we need to avoid adherence to partisan dogma like the plague. There is a desperate need for new ideas to replace the flawed policies of the past. People like Paul can stick to their nihilistic attitudes, but that’s a position we can’t afford to take. Even if/when the Conservatives form the next government we need to offer positive alternatives rather than simply stick the boot in just because they’re Tories and the right wing bloggers do it to us.

Some thoughts:

“The fact that Alastair Campbell, John Prescott and others at cabinet level put their faith in Draper to bolster their online operations”

Is this true? Are you sure?

#10 – there’s plenty you can argue New Labour are responsible for, but the prominence of self-referential, Westminster-centric circle jerk stories is not one of them, except insofar as the right-wing media focussed on this kind of story from 1997-2002 when they couldn’t find much else to attack Labour for. These kind of process stories are damaging to the government rather than the opposition 90% of the time, and are more attributable to 24 hours news media, the declining popularity of print media and cuts to media organisations’ operating budgets. Alaistair Campbell in particular has spent his entire post-Blair career attacking this way of reporting stories.

Finally, the Mirror is both thoughtful and a tabloid. It has a mix of tittle-tattle and serious stories, sometimes intended to challenge its readership’s perceptions. (It’s the only daily I can think of that attempts to do that, in fact – even if you like the Guardian you have to admit it tends to confirm the opinions of its readers.) It’s possible to do.

#12 – agree with that completely. One thing that not everyone in the Labour Party seems to understand is that Labour supporters hold the Labour Party to a higher standard than Tory supporters hold the Tory Party to. That’s one of the many reasons why a Red Guido site would never have worked.

Just add this to the long, long list of New Labour copying the Tories.

Illegal wars for oil…… Tick
Funding of the party from a small group of very rich individuals……Tick
Giving said rich donors honours for their cash (Tories have been doing that one for 200 years.)… Tick.
Taking away our freedoms by claiming to be tough on crime……….Tick
Turning a blind eye to Police corruption (except when police arrest one of your own) ….Tick
Deciding that deregulation and free markets are the fantastic……Tick
Corporate welfare for the rich…..Tick
Privatisation of profits and socialisation of costs……Tick.
Smearing your opponents ….Tick.
Attacking people on benefit ,while at the same time taking millions from the state in expenses…. Tick
Attacking people on benefit ,while at the same time letting the rich get away from paying tax…Tick
Creeping to Non English media moguls to gain support from them in their right wing rags…….Tick

New Labour, Tory in every way.

“One thing that not everyone in the Labour Party seems to understand is that Labour supporters hold the Labour Party to a higher standard than Tory supporters hold the Tory Party to. ”

Could not agree more. As long as you cut taxes, and bash unions, and brown people, the Tories will welcome any knuckle dragging Brown shirt.

Clive, agreed.

One thing though – People like Paul can stick to their nihilistic attitudes.

It’s a serious mistake to regard Guido as a nihilist – whatever he is, he isn’t that. Say what you will about the “libertarian” jokers who cut their political teeth on bumfoolery with the lackeys of Abramoff and Savimbi, but you could never accuse them of nihilism. They had some very, very strong beliefs indeed.

Guido’s keen to tout his conversion from hard right-wing suck-up to loonies, to his current I-totally-heart-democratic-politics-me stance. I strongly doubt his I am Political-Insurgent-Man, Watch As I Use My Amazing Truth-Beams To Destroy The Evil Politisses act is anything other than yet another pile of rancid propaganda.

Guido has some serious political beliefs alright, and I’m sure they do involve fragging 90% of the political establishment. I strongly suspect there’s one particular tranche of politicians he’d very much like to see succeed, and they’re roughly the kind that Charles Dickens would’ve been familiar with.

And that’s the guy the newspapers are cuddling up with today, in pursuit of a shower of degenerate Labour Party liars. It’s a clusterfuck of epic proportions, but it’s an excellent demonstration of the bright future a news media in which yer Derek Drapers and Paul Staines are movers and shakers offers.

17. the a&e charge nurse

[14] The Labour party – high standards: an oxymoron, surely ?

When I think of the Labour nowadays I associate them with porn films.
Other commentators (elsewhere) have already drawn attention to the fact this party endorses the right to pry into OUR e-mails (or internet use) – an irony that must have dawned on McBride & Draper after they had devised their, aherm, strategy ?

Flying Rodent, good point regarding Paul. I tend to assume that as we age, so we mellow in our attitudes. Thinking about it though, the Paul Staines I remember from the 80’s is like the proverbial leopard. It wasn’t that long ago he was calling for some honour for David Hart.

“Guido’s keen to tout his conversion from hard right-wing suck-up to loonies, to his current I-totally-heart-democratic-politics-me stance. ”

Yes, and of course it has nothing to do with the fact that the Tory party looks certain to win the next election.

It is the classic Right wing ploy when in opposition, to pretend to be a (I hate them all , so lets pull the whole system down ) libertarian. It allows him to do all the dirty work, while at the same time keeping a distance from the Tory party. Just in case he goes to far and the Tories can say “nothing to do with me guv.”

The Republicans in the US use a similar system, where raging attack dogs are let loose on Liberals and Democrats, while all the time keeping a distance from the mainstream of the Republican party. So it is quite fine for Ann Coulter to say “we should execute Liberals to intimidate them” and all the Republicans nod and smirk while publically pretending it is nothing to do with them.

But when the Right gets into power the same pretend libertarians, who want to destroy the whole system, suddenly spin 180 degrees and a start frantically propping up the establishment.

[17] The Labour Party isn’t New Labour, though the mistake is understandable. New Labour was always about power for its own sake, as a quick glance at the diverse paths followed by its leading lights would show. The architects of New Labour were making their presence felt back in 1992, though it was John Smith’s death in 1994 which truly opened the door wide. We’ll never know how different things might have turned out under Smith or even a Kinnock government in 1992, but for many of us, New Labour’s victory in 1997 was an opportunity squandered by people whose raison d’etre was power itself. Maybe we were naively optimistic to think otherwise.

“The reason the same doesn’t happen to the Graun and the leftie blogs is that right-wingers just don’t give a toss what anyone who disagrees with them thinks, and care much less about engaging properly with their opponents. So they don’t talk about us or link to us to anything like the same degree.”

Really? What about all the right wingers on CIF? And what about me on here!

Side issue:

I think you are overdoing the whataboutery. Of all those stories mentioned in the Hopi quote, 1 had its origin in a Lab briefing war, and most of the others were MSM pickups.

Main point:

It seems to me that the New Lab political culture is the Titanic, the current elite are the 1st Class Passengers, the Steerage lot have already gone under, and the Iceberg is the organisational stuff created to build New Lab on.

The long term reform project for Labour is perhaps to melt the iceberg (while keepig some good bits?). I have no idea how or what will come next.

The short term problem – for us in the East Midlands at least – is what is going to happen in the Euro Elections to a) the disillusioned Lab vote b) the UKIP / Orangeman (we have Kilroy as an MEP) vote if they melt down. We are in a transition from Old Labour to whatever comes next , and in local politics the leaders are Lib Dem/Independent.

Rodent, Clive, good comments.

24. Charlieman

Flying Rodent and others are correct to question *who* Paul Staines is.

Paul Staines 1: PS1 was active in the libertarian wing of the Federation of Conservative Students in the early/mid 1980s. The libertarian wing formed alliances with the traditional right (eg Monday Clubbers) to overpower the moderate, reformist tendency amongst conservative students. In the end, the libertarian wing became so strong that it could dominate FCS without need for alliances, and was looking towards the Young Conservatives for expansion of its activities. It all ended when the Conservative Party dissolved FCS which was becoming an embarrassment. The Conservative Party also put strict controls on associate groups to prevent the entryism that was prevalent in the Labour Party.

PS1 ventured into business at this time, selling T shirts with political slogans. Money and politics are a consistent Paul Staines theme.

There are two unusual incidents during the PS1 student politics phase. One is the alleged proposal for a tactical alliance with the BNP. The other is Staines’ membership of the Social Democratic Party when he was a self claimed libertarian after reading Karl Popper at the age of thirteen.

Paul Staines 2: After leaving Higher education, PS2 evolved as a bag carrier for David Hart, the right wing eccentric beloved of Margaret Thatcher for his strike breaking activities during the 1984/1985 NUM dispute. PS2 emerged too late to have any involvement when Hart was most active, but he fronted the right wing briefings that Hart and associates published and funded. PS2 travelled the right wing globe a bit, firing guns and hanging out with UNITA in Angola and the Contras in Nicaragua. However his UK based activities are still interesting even though he was stuck at home writing and editing (all of the “offices” for the organisations for which PS2 worked were accommodation bureaux or letter drops).

Hart’s most prominent “organisation” was the Committee for a Free Britain which published newspaper adverts in support of conservative causes. Here’s a quote from _New Right discourse on race and sexuality_ by Anna Marie Smith:

“The Conservative Party released the advertisement which listed four book titles, including Young, Gay and Proud during the General Election. In addition to this official campaign, the Committee for a Free Britain launched a series of unofficial advertisements featuring Betty Sheridan, a member of Haringey’s Parents Rights Group. Sheridan stated, ‘I live in Haringey, I’m married with two children. And I’m scared. If you vote LABOUR they’ll go on teaching my kids about GAYS & LESBIANS instead of giving them proper lessons.’

Section 28 should therefore be regarded as the product of a concerted effort on the part of extra-parliamentary right-wing groups and Conservative Party members to homosexualize leftist local governments.”

As a “foreign policy analyst” for the Committee for a Free Britain, it is implausible that PS2 was unaware of this campaign, whether or not it was conducted during his period of office.

PS2 also worked for British Briefing, a smear journal against left wing MPs and trades unionists, provided to large companies on subscription. British Briefing was founded by people with close connections to the US and British secret services, but the paper was in decline when PS2 was employed there. PS2 is very glib about the experience: “The only scary thing about those publications was the mailing list – people like George Bush – and the fact that Hart would talk to the head of British Intelligence for an hour. I used to think it was us having a laugh, putting some loony right-wing sell in, and that somebody somewhere was taking it seriously.” I don’t consider the destruction of careers and relationships to be a joke.

Those briefings and journals were intentional propaganda, funded by multinational companies and right wing nutters, but who provided the information?

Recent newspaper reports have stated that Paul Staines has no formal training as a journalist. Idiots. He informally learned to write by experts.

Paul Staines 2.5: Drugs and dance finished off PS2’s previous career.

Paul Staines 3: Globe trotting financial dealer (how, what qualifications?) and occasional outspoken writer on ethics: “I speak as a former broker. I would like to say that I worked tirelessly in pursuit of my client’s best interest, but in reality I worked tirelessy in pursuit of brokerage.”

PS3 missed out on his career in accountancy: “If as a Libertarian you take the view that the State enslaves and steals from you via taxes, you won’t have any qualms about protecting your property from tax-thieves. Silent Banking, a controlled circulation publication from Scope International used for the training of law enforcement agents to counter money laundering, gives useful tips on how to do it. Offshore credit cards are a good method, untraceable earnings are paid offshore into an account linked to a Visa card!”

PS3 goes bankrupt, but at least he gives a clue to the money to his bankers.

Notice how the man cannot keep his gob shut.

Paul Staines 4: PS4 founds the Guido blog. It is all hush, hush, but he published phone numbers that are traceable by a ten second web search to Paul Staines. Guido never discloses sources, but any allegation without an indication of origin is just smear. Guido proclaims that he is untouchable under UK libel law because his server is located overseas and likewise his publishing company. Please don’t take legal advice from Guido. Similarly, don’t take advice on libel from the mates of him who have sent “take down” notices to Guido’s critics.

***

So who is Paul Staines? He considers himself to be a libertarian, but he is willing to ally himself with authoritarian right wingers for strategic reasons. No doubt he is an affable character who is open to a variety of social company, including lefties.

There is a lot that stinks about the guy. During the PS2 era, Staines hung out with unpleasant people, and thus we have to question his current (undisclosed) sources. Where did the Red Rag leak originate? A few possibilities:

1. A co-recipient of the messages sent them to Guido. Highly unlikely, because that would expose the co-recipient immediately.
2. Somebody hacked into an email account. This happens all of the time in fiction, but not in reality. If somebody hacked Derek Draper’s email account, there would be other interesting stories too.
3. A co-worker of one of the conspirators was so affronted by records on a computer, s/he forwarded them to Guido. Why send them to Guido? Why not the Times or Guardian, which actually have investigative reporters to track the story? However, this is the most likely source of the leak.
4. GCHQ and loads of spooks on the job. Nope.

Staines is nonetheless a “useful idiot” who continues to serve the oppressive right.

I think there are some exceptionally reasoned answers in this thread as to what, and why New Labour isn’t Labour – and all that started in 94 as has been said, Oh for the wish that John Smith had not died.

Many points on here show that the liberal-left do have something to say and do it in such a way that right-wingers could not conceive, but as always there is one thing that is patently obvious that most simply ignore it or miss it.

The sex sells part of advertising – and it does. Whether a car crash or sex, people will rubber neck and will also turn around and go have another look to see if they saw it right the first time – that is all Tory blogs do, and it works!

Should there be a central blog where the liberal-left all join up and stick with the message – HELL NO!

That is precisely what Draper was trying to do in his own egotistical way – get everyone reading his blog.

You also, and have said this until blue in the face, remember that the right-wing blogs have MSM free advertising – all over the place, we don’t! You cannot get a message out unless people read what you have to say. And left-wing/liberal blogs are not sexy enough for people to get ‘into’.

While New Labour is seen as the left and liberal party we will be ignored – we have to move away from them, abandon them to sink as they should.

New Labour are neither liberal nor left-wing, and as long as people keep saying/believing that they are our message will be dead in the water!

The left certainly does not need a “Red Guido”. The example we should be following is the one recently set in the US: that of David Axelrod and his use of the internet to help get Barack Obama elected. Instead of smearing the opposition, the whole range of Web 2.0 capabilities was used, and in an honest way. In the US, the right has the same dominance over the blogosphere, and the right also has more use of the MSM too, but the left’s use of the internet was focussed, and not just based on crazy smears that Obama is some crazy, Muslim, Atheist, Socialist, Communist, Marxist, foreign Anti-Christ. We need more Obama Girls, and less Guido Fawkes I feel.

Oh, and New Labour stopped representing the left a long time ago. If McBride and Draper had succeeded, all we would’ve had is two Guido Fawkes, both illiberal, and both smearing.

Oh and I forgot to put “Fascist” in amongst all those names Obama’s been called. Yes the American right really are that dumb.

Actually “we on the liberal left” here in Wales think that Draper is a God send.

Mainly because Plaid Cymru is the home of the liberal left in Wales, not Labour.

29. dreamingspire

Since politics is about governing a country, I find it so disappointing that there is so little discussion about that. The 2004/5 watershed was mentioned in this thread, but why did it happen? Studies for reforming public administration were under way from 97 to end of 04 – and then it all stopped. Spin (and blogging) took over.
Now we see Brown’s govt letting changes happen only when a crack opens up, rather than being able to design them. There are 3 groups in this marriage: Labour, Tory, and public administrators – and (which seems to be forgotten) excellent people in all 3.

Derek Draper only does his master’s bidding.

Gordon Brown is poisonous for the Labour Party.

cjcjc,

Gordon Brown is poisonous for the Labour Party.

The problem dates back to 1992 when, in the wake of Kinnock’s resignation following the election defeat, Brown decided not to stand against John Smith for leader of the Labour Party. There are undoubtedly numerous reasons why he didn’t, from concerns about more than one leadership candidate being Scottish to loyalty to his mentor John Smith.

I don’t know what promises were made or expectations were set, but during the period until John Smith’s death, Brown considered himself to be next in line. The Party choosing Blair ahead of him in the wake of Smith’s death was, I suspect, a fundamental blow to Brown, one which would go on to have a profound impact on Brown’s approach in Government.

His anointment as Prime Minister in 2007 without facing a leadership election just compounded matters. He didn’t fight in 1992, backed off again in 1994 and had to do nothing in 2007. Draw your own conclusions.

What a whole load of complete cock. Have you seriously read your own piece?

Guido is not working for a political party, let alone a civil servant. Guido is not tribal in his politics, he has political views which he sticks to, and criticises opposing views whether from Labour or Conservatives. Those views are closer to Conservative politics than Labour, but that is not the same as being a tribal Conservative. Likewise he criticises those who would run the country for their dishonesty or incompetence. His own past is irrelevant because Guido does not seek to run the country. The fact that he called wrong on whether Levy would be tried is irrelevant, no-one can foresee the future. Many guilty men as well as many innocent ones never get the trial they deserved, either to condemn them or to clear their names.

Guido might post nasty things about Brown, but he does so openly with his reasons for believing those things and has good reasons for publishing them. Brown does show signs of mental instability and symptoms of autism. Either is relevant to Brown’s current job, which he took despite the voters having been told categorically that he would not be offered it (remember Blairs promise to serve a full parliament?), and despite his only voters being fools of Fyfe who would vote for a rat in a red rosette.

McBride and Draper are tribal, Labour right or wrong. The allegations involved in this affair have no apparent basis in fact. Many of them have no relevance to fitness of the victims to govern. Two of the victims have no desire to enter public office. Most telling of all this whole RedRag blog was to be a lie, an apparently independent site actually run by Gordon Brown’s man. The content was to have been all entirely fiction.

There is no hypocrisy. If you can’t see the difference between Guido and McBride and Draper then you have not understood what McBride and Draper tried to do.

Random,

Brown does show signs of mental instability and symptoms of autism.

Qualifications please?

Either is relevant to Brown’s current job, which he took despite the voters having been told categorically that he would not be offered it (remember Blairs promise to serve a full parliament?), and despite his only voters being fools of Fyfe who would vote for a rat in a red rosette.

John Major, succeeded Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister on 28th November 1990. Fought his first General Election as party leader in April 1992. Until then his only voters outside of the Conservative Party were the hicks of Huntingdon who’d vote for a bull in a blue rosette.

See, works both ways.

McBride and Draper are tribal, Labour right or wrong. The allegations involved in this affair have no apparent basis in fact. Many of them have no relevance to fitness of the victims to govern. Two of the victims have no desire to enter public office.

I bet Sarah Brown, Kate Garraway and other innocents are well chuffed when they hear of the abuse, venom and bile thrown at them on Paul’s blog. And he makes it so clear, on so many occasions that it’s his blog and his rules, that the only conclusion is that he condones their opinions. Either that or he is so obsessed with traffic figures that he’ll let anything go.

There is no hypocrisy.

Bzzzt! Wrong answer. The trouble with having an idol with feet of clay is that eventually you notice that they’ve ruined the carpet. By then it’s usually too late.

Wrong and disgraceful as these e mails were, the Tory party hardly has a track record of decency and compassion.
That party clapped and cheered as the right wing thugs called for Nelson Mandela to be hanged and through the 80s their then leader backed Pinochet. Genocide is a bigger issue than a few unseemly e mails! What happened to The Monday Club by the way? Have they tucked it away until they get to power in their attempt to dupe the public that they are now cuddly and nice?
The Tory leader and many of his MPs support chasing wild animals to exhaustion before tearing them apart for kicks, signs of a very disturbed mindset of cruelty and sadism. So they paint themselves as cuddly but many of us wont buy that EVER.

>chasing wild animals to exhaustion before tearing them apart for kicks

Uh oh. Teh evil sadistic sub-human hunters. I’m outa here.

I am a virgin here and must say it makes very interesting reading but what puzzles me is why you guys in general have so much faith the Labour Party anyway. As far as I am a concerned and I speak here as a “former” life long Labour Supporter after the Iraq invasion the present Labour Party completely lost its soul. The current bunch of so called leaders and their acolytes are totally morally bankrupt and only a complete fool would believe even a tiny fraction of what any of them say. Naturally which fraction is open to debate – which I guess is what the politics is about nowadays.

Of course the Tories would have been just as enthusiastic to hang on Bush’s coat tails in the rush to invade Iraq and in the process destroy Hundreds of Thousands of innocent peoples lives but I believe that they would have been a tad more honest about the whole nasty affair. I am not convinced about this of course but find it hard to believe that anyone could lie as much as Blalr and Brown did to us and Parliament.

I have often wondered could i ever bring myself to vote for the Tories and the answer is I really don’t know as much as i HATE Brown, Blair et al I still know that the underneath the smooth exterior the Tories are still as nasty as they were back in the 70s and 80s. However, there is very little difference now between the two main parties and i firmly believe that the best we can hope for is a leader like Obama (from either party), who it seems has principles and charisma in abundance but is surrounded by bureaucrats and careerists. Either way I for one will NEVER put my faith in one party again!

Btw I would love someone on here to convince me otherwise about the LP as you can tell the Iraq issue is still gaping wound for me. Thanks for listening to my rant.

I have no faith whatsoever in the Labour party – I’m a Lib Dem.

Ah yes – Jennie the Lib Dems I voted for them in the locals and was left with an empty feeling in my gut because I very much doubt they would end up any better than New Labour. I believe that C Kennedy had the opportunity back then to really make LDs the main opposition party to Labour by screaming from the mountain tops that Blalr was a LIAR and maybe even a war criminal along with the rest of the Cabinet. They would have been a real alternative to the millions of disillusioned former Labour supporters who had nowhere else to go. He and LDs didn’t and would never because they are basically were being opportunistic and not acting out of any deep seated principles. Maybe I am wrong here and the LibDems were genuine in their opposition but why did they not go the whole hog and make hay, it’s a real mystery to me.

As far as I can see we are the only party that has any deep-seated principles at all, but of course, I might be biased.

Of course, our deep-seated principles are based on Liberalism, rather than the sort of thing that disillusioned Labour supporters might be looking for – is this what you have an issue with, perhaps?

No I have no issues with “Liberalism”- and don’t see a huge difference between than that and the mainstream Labour party in essence.

For me it is a question of Leadership or a lack of that is the real problem. All 3 parties have weak, uninspiring leaders who are basically all part of an outdated political system that allows politicians to lie, cheat, waste our money and get away scot free! And yes i include the Liberals in on this mess. Global capitalism requires a new type of governance and I don’t see it anywhere in the UK right now.

With McBride gone, and Draper on the way out, it’s an excellent start to returning to issues-based politics.

Now if we can just lose Tom Watson, Gordon Brown, Hazel Blears, Jacqui Smith, Ed Balls and David Millibland, we might be getting somewhere.

Still, this weekend’s news has put a song in my cynical, embittered heart.

Dungeekin


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    New post: Derek Draper is poisonous for the Labour party http://tinyurl.com/dz6wze

  2. Liberal Conspiracy

    New post: Derek Draper is poisonous for the Labour party http://tinyurl.com/dz6wze

  3. sunny hundal

    RT @libcon: New post: Derek Draper is poisonous for the Labour party http://tinyurl.com/dz6wze

  4. Somewhat puzzled | Anonymong

    […] Guido is condemned for being “anti politics” as well as “pro-conservative” which is quite a […]

  5. On Draper/Staines/McBride Of Satan… « Back Towards The Locus

    […] Claude and Sunny instead. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Knifed, bricked and burned with cigs 0 […]

  6. » The Establishment Though Cowards Flinch: “We all know what happens to those who stand in the middle of the road — they get run down.” - Aneurin Bevan

    […] Meanwhile, the blogosphere has fallen upon this set-piece with glee. Sunny had declaimed how poisonous Draper is to Labour (and he is totally right). Tom Miller has come forward to attack the […]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.