Posts
2007 Weblog Awards: Anti-War Left Crush Dale and Co
Lovely to see an anti-war, anti-neo-con blog putting the right wing tosh and/or swearblogs of Dale, Fawkes, Referendum and Devil's Kitchen to the sword in the 2007 Blog Awards, UK Category. Guardian columnist Neil Clark offers thanks and praise but it has all gone quiet over there.
Mr Dale pimped the poll like a good 'un but slumped from an early lead to fourth with Fawkes and Devil's Kitchen fifth and sixth. EU Referendum just headed Kickette for second. But Neil Clark had 60% more votes than either of these and more than double Dale's tally.
Graphic from 2007 Weblog Awards where it animates joyously and links to the other four starters. Hat tip to The Exile, our Manc in Mexico. An unusual swearblog of the left. Parental Guidance.
15 comments:
I should read a bit about Clarks views before you praise him Chris.
Start with Srebrenica.
Well Tim, it is quite possible of course that I am more aware of the detail of Dale's and Fawke's views - which I often don't much like - than I am of Clark's which I do not adopt as my own or universally endorse.
Nonetheless I am pleased that a writer on the left who has been anti-war and anti-neocon has triumphed in these awards over such bumptious and reactionary forces.
Dale pimped the poll and he lost very badly. That is no bad thing. At times he is a bit big for his boots is he not?
Tim and anonymous: OK you've made your point. You do not like Clark and you are able to give some examples of things that I too may not like.
Seems to me that neither Srebrenica denial nor Wikipedia disputes mean that I should not welcome a win for blog forces other than the ubiquitous Dale and Co.
Who would you have wished to have won? And what did you actually do about it?
I did not myself vote for or pimp Clark in any way. At the moment I don't have a link to him and I never have had one. I do link to Dale and Fawkes. In fact my only vote was a notional one for Dale by way of apology for answering some flakey points he made and aggressive and nasty comments thereon on a day on which he had personal commitments that saw him feeling vulnerable.
My post is not an endorsement it is a short comment on the result of a blog poll.
Chris Paul,
Lemme explain what's going on. Neil Clark was commissioned by the Telegraph to write a review of some drivel by Gimlet Kamm. Gimlet did not like the review so any number of sock puppets - like these two tossers here - were created or turned loose to repeat smears about Neil.
Now, Neil won fair and square. He was the only socialist candidate and he is entitled to the congratulations of the other British left blogs.
Clark also wrote the disgusting recent CiF piece calling for the "quisling" Iraqi translators to be denied asylum. Nice to see someone other than the usual suspects win, but he's not much better.
Ah, the Iraqi scabs, nice to see that one trotted out. I started the campaign to keep those creatures out, but I accept that had Neil not got involved various types would today be consoling themselves with the thought that they lost Iraq, but saved the Harkis.
Look, Iraq has dominated the political debate for over five years. Frankly, I am sick of it. How does helping capitalism control Iraq lead to revenge for the past 30 years of shit in the UK? How does it enable us to take control of the economy and ensure full employment with no lip from management filth?
Try as I might I really cannot understand the mugs who call themselves socialists, but who follow policies that have bollock all to do with socialism.
What does capitalism have to do with the lives of men being hunted down by death squads? If your version of socialism involves abandoning those who helped us in Iraq, regardless of whether you supported the war or not, which I didn't, then you can keep it.
Tut, tut Chris. Backed the wrong horse again. You must do more research before you leap on the bandwagon.
And all this to indulge your petty little spat with the Tory bloggers who outwit you on a daily basis? Have you ever thought of taking up another hobby? Preferably one that does not involve you writing in the style of a Daily Mirror filler writer?
By the way, did you get your free laptop?
What does capitalism have to do with the hunting down of capitalism's scum? Nothing directly, but it is important that those who supported the war - which was aimed at exporting capitalism to Iraq - do not have the face saver that would have come had they saved the creatures' lives.
As for the comment above this, I'm not quite sure I follow it. I would have thought that Chris backed the right horse, since Neil Clark won.
He won becasue more people voted for him. Mither all you want - he's not the sad-arsed loser, is he?
the exile said (01.26am) said:
"As for the comment above this, I'm not quite sure I follow it. I would have thought that Chris backed the right horse, since Neil Clark won.
He won becasue (sic) more people voted for him. Mither all you want - he's not the sad-arsed loser, is he?"
Well, Mr Exile, mither all you like yourself but Clark won this spurious award because he has an anti-Iraq war stance - in America! (Oh, and by the way, did you get your free laptop?)
My main point is that Chris Paul is the sad-arsed loser because of his serial record of backing lost causes (eg Flying Lion) and his obsession with certain bloggers.
Eh??? This makes no sense:
"Clark won this spurious award because he has an anti-Iraq war stance - in America!"
Are you suggesting that Neil lives in the USA? Or are you suggesting that most of his votes came from that country? Neither is true, but it would be nice to know.
I know nothing about free laptops or flying lions.
Calm down, calm down, calm down!
For the moment comments on this post are closed.
Post a Comment