UK Politics III

[mormont]

So... where to start with the affair dreadfully and inevitably named 'Bullygate'?

For the foreigners, or UK residents who've been under a rock for the last couple of days, a summary: well-respected political journo has book out, serialised in Labour-supporting newspaper. In it he claims 'an impeccable source' has told him that the most senior civil servant in the land had to have a word with Gordon Brown after he allegedly grabbed staff by the lapels, shoved them aside and shouted at them. (Fairly junior staff, it is important to note, are allegedly included in this treatment.)

Number 10 denies that any inquiry was held or formal warning given and rubbishes the story in general, though not specifically denying the allegations. It is admitted that Mr Brown has a temper, thereby blowing the biggest Westminster secret since the shocking news that Peter Mandelson is gay. :P

The head of a national anti-bullying charity then comes out and declares that its confidential helpline has had calls from staff at Number 10. Some people ask if she ever told No 10 this: she says she did not, to preserve confidentiality. People then (not unreasonably) point out that talking about it on a national news program is a funny way to preserve confidentiality. The lady involved harrumphs that she was simply overcome by outrage at Number 10's denial. Even more weirdly, she also admits that the calls involved didn't name Mr Brown personally.

Lord Mandelson now suggests that the whole thing is a 'political operation' (i.e., stitch-up) while carefully not denying anything specifically. David Cameron also wades in, more in sorrow than in anger, suggesting that he is sure No. 10 will want to hold a full inquiry into claims that Brown is a bully, not that he is suggesting Brown is a bully of course but we must rule out the possibility that Brown is a bully in case people think Brown is a bully. Oh, and doesn't all this demonstrate the need for a change?

If this is indeed a 'political operation', as Mandelson claims, it's a fairly slick one. If the Tories are capable of mounting something like this, they really have changed. ;)

Overall, though, I can't help feeling that it's become almost too big a deal: that it's already reached the stage where people are saying 'I can't be bothered to figure all this out'. Nick Robinson suggests that Labour might even have decided to egg the issue on for exactly that reason.

[Usotsuki]

Reluctant as I am to defend the Dearly Beloved Leader under any circumstances, some of the allegations seemed so desperately over-hyped that, for me, they undermined the entire story:

In an insane rage, to the horror of all present, he repeatedly and violently stabbed ... (continued on page 34)

... the back seat of his car with a magic marker making a noticeable dent.

[Maltaran]

The head of a national anti-bullying charity then comes out and declares that its confidential helpline has had calls from staff at Number 10. Some people ask if she ever told No 10 this: she says she did not, to preserve confidentiality. People then (not unreasonably) point out that talking about it on a national news program is a funny way to preserve confidentiality. The lady involved harrumphs that she was simply overcome by outrage at Number 10's denial. Even more weirdly, she also admits that the calls involved didn't name Mr Brown personally.

You forgot to mention that one of the patrons of the anti-bullying charity has now resigned in protest at this breach of confidentiality.

[Teabag]

These 3 blog articles make for enlightening reading:

My link

My link

My link

It doesn't take a genius to see what was going on here.

[Maltaran]

I will take the reporting of a blog called "Tory Troll" with a large grain of salt.

[Teabag]

WIll you take the reporting of the non-political Bullying Helpline without a grain of salt?

[Daeric]

Is this despite the fact that its be shown in the previous links up thread that while its supposed to be non-political the owners affiliations and actions have sure made it look like its leaning towards hte Tories

[Teabag]

Check out the video at the top of this blog. It's pretty painful to watch.

My link

This scandal is gonna hurt some people badly and it won't be Brown and the Labour Party.

The Tory's are already distancing themselves from the charity and I would be very surprised if some more dirt on this "charity" wasn't dug up. With the Conservative lead looking less secure by the day we're in for an interesting few months.

[VarysTheSpider]

I love that John Prescott has been all over the media today cheerleading Brown. Yeah, let's all listen to what the guy who slept with his secretary and punched a voter has to say about inappropriate professional behaviour. Maybe we can also hear what he has to say about Rawnsley's attempts to drum up publicity to coincide with having a book being published, since he's the guy who chose the precise moment when he had a book coming out to reveal his "bolemia" under the pretence of encouraging others to come forward with their own illness. Isn't he due a heart attack soon?

To turn to the subject at hand, anecdotes are interesting but disputes into whether this or that happened misses the larger point, I think.

The image of a Nokia spinning through the air to crash next to some poor bastard's head doesn't have to be true to ring true because it fits pretty neatly into the character of the prime minister. It's pretty damn visible in his love of authoritarian policies (and his irritatingly religious puritannical hatred of fun and risk), his personal entourage of such impeccable chaps as Alastair Campbell, Charlie Whelan, Tom Watson, Derek Draper, Damian McBride, and Peter Mandelson, his outright dishonesty (yes, I accept that as a politician you have to lie. Fine. Just spare me all the bollocks about your father's ghost and your moral compass), the way every single goddamn one of his policies as prime minister and as chancellor has been about short-term political calculation at the expense of the national interest, and the way he even became prime minister in the first place!

Perhaps 'bully' conjours up too many memories of the playground to be appropriate; mayhaps 'cunt' is a better word. Doesn't have quite the alliterative possibilities, but hey, at least no one has to see bruise marks to know it's true.

Teabag - it is quite amazing how little investigative journalism goes on in the British media at the moment. I pointed out a couple of weeks ago; when the government announced that unshatterable glasses in pubs was The Right Thing To Do because 87,000 alcohol-related glass attacks happen each year, the BBC and the all the papers printed the statistic without question. Nonsense, unsurprisingly. Sure, they have to be quick these days, but how long do a couple of phone calls take?

Fortuntely, the Charities Commission is at hand to investigate any shenanigans. The Commission is headed up by Dame Suzie Leather, a paid up member of the Labour party. Phew. Glad we got party politics out of this one.

[mormont]

These 3 blog articles make for enlightening reading:

My link

My link

My link

It doesn't take a genius to see what was going on here.

Just as well, because clearly Link 1 is not written by a genius. He's indignantly telling us that the BBC failed to report things that they have, in fact, been reporting all day. That's not what I'd call 'enlightening reading', except inasmuch as it enlightened me about what a twit the writer is.

To turn to the subject at hand, anecdotes are interesting but disputes into whether this or that happened misses the larger point, I think.

The image of a Nokia spinning through the air to crash next to some poor bastard's head doesn't have to be true to ring true because it fits pretty neatly into the character of the prime minister. It's pretty damn visible in his love of authoritarian policies (and his irritatingly religious puritannical hatred of fun and risk), his personal entourage of such impeccable chaps as Alastair Campbell, Charlie Whelan, Tom Watson, Derek Draper, Damian McBride, and Peter Mandelson, his outright dishonesty (yes, I accept that as a politician you have to lie. Fine. Just spare me all the bollocks about your father's ghost and your moral compass), the way every single goddamn one of his policies as prime minister and as chancellor has been about short-term political calculation at the expense of the national interest, and the way he even became prime minister in the first place!

His bad temper is evident in his every other flaw? Methinks you do protest too much. ;) Linking Brown's temper tantrums to his policies is simplistic reductionist nonsense. Politicians' policies do not neatly link to their character flaws: much as people like to pretend life is that simple, it's really not.

[Daeric]

If it was true, just imagine what Charles Kennedies policies would have being like if he got into power

[Teabag]

I love that John Prescott has been all over the media today cheerleading Brown. Yeah, let's all listen to what the guy who slept with his secretary and punched a voter has to say about inappropriate professional behaviour. Maybe we can also hear what he has to say about Rawnsley's attempts to drum up publicity to coincide with having a book being published, since he's the guy who chose the precise moment when he had a book coming out to reveal his "bolemia" under the pretence of encouraging others to come forward with their own illness. Isn't he due a heart attack soon?

To turn to the subject at hand, anecdotes are interesting but disputes into whether this or that happened misses the larger point, I think.

The image of a Nokia spinning through the air to crash next to some poor bastard's head doesn't have to be true to ring true because it fits pretty neatly into the character of the prime minister. It's pretty damn visible in his love of authoritarian policies (and his irritatingly religious puritannical hatred of fun and risk), his personal entourage of such impeccable chaps as Alastair Campbell, Charlie Whelan, Tom Watson, Derek Draper, Damian McBride, and Peter Mandelson, his outright dishonesty (yes, I accept that as a politician you have to lie. Fine. Just spare me all the bollocks about your father's ghost and your moral compass), the way every single goddamn one of his policies as prime minister and as chancellor has been about short-term political calculation at the expense of the national interest, and the way he even became prime minister in the first place!

Perhaps 'bully' conjours up too many memories of the playground to be appropriate; mayhaps 'cunt' is a better word. Doesn't have quite the alliterative possibilities, but hey, at least no one has to see bruise marks to know it's true.

Teabag - it is quite amazing how little investigative journalism goes on in the British media at the moment. I pointed out a couple of weeks ago; when the government announced that unshatterable glasses in pubs was The Right Thing To Do because 87,000 alcohol-related glass attacks happen each year, the BBC and the all the papers printed the statistic without question. Nonsense, unsurprisingly. Sure, they have to be quick these days, but how long do a couple of phone calls take?

Fortuntely, the Charities Commission is at hand to investigate any shenanigans. The Commission is headed up by Dame Suzie Leather, a paid up member of the Labour party. Phew. Glad we got party politics out of this one.

Not to mention the double standards of the Guardian, who are pushing this story to its limits and also happen to be printing extracts from Rawnsley's book in their newly relaunched Observer. We've got double standards all over the shop, and to add to that entourage of scumbags there's convicted bully Andy Coulson advising Cameron every step of the way in his search for justice.

My favourite recent Media Whitewash was the Daily Mail Jan Moir/Stephen Gately article acquittal which was okayed by the PCC and one of its Chairmen Paul Dacre, the Editor of the Daily Mail <_<

I'm gonna reserve judgment on Brown for the time being, though I suspect the allegations have at least a grain of truth in them. For the time being I will simply sit back and watch the web of self interest both of the major parties and it's toadies have created unravel.

[Teabag]

Just as well, because clearly Link 1 is not written by a genius. He's indignantly telling us that the BBC failed to report things that they have, in fact, been reporting all day. That's not what I'd call 'enlightening reading', except inasmuch as it enlightened me about what a twit the writer is.

Well that article was published on Sunday, so by that point the BBC wouldn't have covered the inconsistencies yet.

[VarysTheSpider]

His bad temper is evident in his every other flaw? Methinks you do protest too much. Linking Brown's temper tantrums to his policies is simplistic reductionist nonsense. Politicians' policies do not neatly link to their character flaws: much as people like to pretend life is that simple, it's really not.

Yes yes, Odin, life is real complicated. But Brown is not.

And his policies were just two of six things I mentioned, but speaking of simplistic nonsense... who protests too much again?

[Ratty]

I have very mixed feelings about this whole situation actually. On the one hand I actually believe that Gordon Brown is most probably an abusive bully, but on the other I condemm the confidentiality breaking by that chartiy woman. For instance if its true that staff have indeed gone to her charity and Brown in the vindictive bullying sort she claims he is, he and his cronies will probably persecute those who may have tattled even more.

I was and likely still am going to vote tory in the next election, but Cameron is losing approval with me daily. His calling for an enquiry into bullying is laughable and so oppurtunisticly conniving that I really really want to punch him in the face, frankly both the Tories and Labour could do with getting rid of their leaders, they are both snakes.

[mormont]

Yes yes, Odin, life is real complicated. But Brown is not.

And his policies were just two of six things I mentioned, but speaking of simplistic nonsense... who protests too much again?

Well, Hera, I do sincerely apologise for not expanding my post to the point of redundancy. :dunno:

Well that article was published on Sunday, so by that point the BBC wouldn't have covered the inconsistencies yet.

Sunday, you say?

As you can see, the Beeb had indeed reported most of those points on Sunday.

[Paddy]

I guess these are going to be a fixture of any big news event from now on.

I know they're really bad taste, but they're so poorly done and so absurd that it does seem to cross over into funny bad taste.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/feb/23/gordon-brown-bullying

:lol:

ETA: the bit where he throws the secretary to the floor just to take her computer is just priceless :lol:

[mormont]

I thought for a sec you were going to be linking to one of these. :P

[Anya, Vengeance Demon]

So... where to start with the affair dreadfully and inevitably named 'Bullygate'?

I'm a little depressed to see that that naming convention has crossed the Atlantic. How long has "-gate" been used for British scandals?

Overall, though, I can't help feeling that it's become almost too big a deal: that it's already reached the stage where people are saying 'I can't be bothered to figure all this out'. Nick Robinson suggests that Labour might even have decided to egg the issue on for exactly that reason.

Is this likely to have an effect on the election? In an American context, I'm pretty sure I know how this would sort out: the ones who follow the story would be partisans whose votes have already been determined, while swing voters would read virtually nothing about it or any other political story. But British politics is not something that I read about regularly.

[ljkeane]

Is this likely to have an effect on the election? In an American context, I'm pretty sure I know how this would sort out: the ones who follow the story would be partisans whose votes have already been determined, while swing voters would read virtually nothing about it or any other political story. But British politics is not something that I read about regularly.

Brown's already massively unpopular anyway so I'm doubtful that this will have a huge impact on that, at this stage something like this isn't going to discourage anyone who would still be voting Labour.