Posts
Glenrothes By-Election: Salmond Losing His Grip
Political Betting appears to have a rival in the Political betting game, that's Odd Politics. Following the Glenrothes odds closely and betting on a Labour victory as the odds on that shorten. 
Alex Salmond's expert market shorting activity is still keeping the "Tory equivalents" as Odd Politics calls them to the fore. The Lib Dems are nowhere.
Though it must be said their Willie Rennie, the cluster bomb maker's friend (above), was nowhere until he passed the post first.
Meanwhile Big Brother winner John Loughton (left), separated at birth from the Cluster Bomb enthusiast (left, above) thought to be a Liberal- Democrat-Nationalist-Socialist is to stand as an independent in an Edinburgh Council By-Election.
8 comments:
If the Lib MP had taken money from the firm and then voted in favour of cluster bombs then you just might have had a story. He didn’t, you don’t.
Here’s a template for what would be a worthwhile story. A Labour Prime Minister takes money for his party from, say, a billionaire with a monetary interest in ensuring a continued source of advertising from, for instance, tobacco companies. The Labour Party then reverses its original policy and allows such advertising. The said Prime Minister is later found out, through official papers, to have lied about this policy switch. Now that would be a story worth publishing.
No, Rennie took money from the firm for a long long time as a part owner and paid puffer of a PR firming doing their puffing.
Then, on election, he visited their factory to help them in a stunt. Yet he was also about to campaign against their product. Having sold the assets built up by puffing their activities and having helped them with a photo call.
It's a different story. But it certainly a story.
Ecclestone story? Donation accepted, donation returned. Clumsy as hell, yes. U-turn on tobacco adverts in interests of UK? Possibly. Blair told the odd fib? Possibly. Though close textual analysis might find him mostly weaseling very carefully.
Unlike Rennie's Cluster Bombs - value amassed and cashed in, opportunistic change of tune, still sitting on cluster bomb enabled value. And yes, still visiting death ray factory to help out.
Clearly a story.
Clearly not a story as 80% of the internet hits about it are directly or indiretly from yourself.
To have backed the interests of a company having previouly been paid by them would be a story. He didn't.
Ecclestone donation not returned, according to Ecclestone.
Blair didn't merely tell the odd fib. Acording to the official Civil Service notes that have just been released he lied to the press and to Parliament.
"U turn on tobacco adverts in interest of UK". I must remember that one.
Rennie is a complete hypocrite. Particularly in visiting the Raytheon factory - NOT in his constituency by the way - soon after his election.
Donation not returned?
I don't suppose you can produce any CS notes saying Blair lied?
He is a weasel. You have to factor in the translation of weaselish.
You have missed the question mark on the U-turn question. Showing what a low life you are - whatever you call yourself.
Quite right, Chris. He should have said, ""U turn on tobacco adverts in interest of UK?", I must remember that."
Still not sure what it means, though.
And while I'm here, are we talking about the same Raytheon that donates to the Labour Party or is it a different one?
Or am I telling you something you don't know?
I take it from your total non-answer that the answer to my question is yes. The company you berate a Lib MP for visiting is a financial backer of the Labour Party.
So, it will also be the same company that sponsors Adam Smith College, whose Chancellor is Gordon Brown.
When it comes to dodgy defence companies donating to Labour, Raytheon are minor league.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4926737.ece
"Tony Blair personally ordered an exemption for motor racing from a tobacco sponsorship ban after Labour received a secret £1m donation from Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula One boss.
"New documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show he demanded a change of policy within hours of a meeting with Ecclestone on October 16, 1997, and his aides went on to blur the truth."
Post a Comment