Car Crash TV: Devil’s Kitchen gets ambushed on Daily Politics

Video via Mark Reckons blog.

Mark says:

I had hoped for a spirited and libertarian defence of his right to have an on-line persona that is close to the knuckle and still be involved in active politics. However he just seemed to cave in to what Neil was saying. Neil suggested that an apology to the Trades Union leader in question might be appropriate and Mounsey obliged. Neil also suggested that if he were a candidate in any other party he would have had to stand down to which Mounsey also assented. Then the interview was over.

Now my blogging style is nothing like that of Mounsey’s. However I think he has every right to blog in the way that he sees fit. Many of his supporters and party members will agree with what he is saying. Lots of libertarian bloggers have a strongly worded style and many of them also make very good points and are very funny too. Why should these people be barred from trying to seek political support for their views even if their styles are not to everyone’s tastes?

I’m sorry but who is barring Mounsey and his mates? There was an invitation to apologise and he could have easily refused it. There’s no law against swearing politicians is there?

However, as someone who’s been on the receiving end of smears by Chris Mounsey, the idea that what is said online doesn’t matter is naive. The issue here is whether people will judge you for what you say online. To think that you can go around calling for people’s deaths or smear others while being the leader of a party isn’t happening. The vast majority of Britons would find that content offensive. And that’s not the nature of politics – that is simply human nature. Libertarians may want to try and get closer to that a bit.

Of course that doesn’t mean he should be censored or stopped from writing the tinfoil-hat rubbish that he does. But it won’t get you elected because most people will think you’re a lunatic. Yes, let’s have more diversity of opinion in Parliament and in politics. But if I wanted to read sensible and intelligent libertarians I’d go for Alex Massie instead; he helps the libertarian cause more than Mounsey ever did.

Election sexism watch (episode 5)

Watch – Clegg launches Libdem manifesto

Tories attacked for not backing lobbyists register

Tory pledges to clean up lobbying are woefully inadequate, transparency campaigners claimed today. Despite the rhetoric, David Cameron’s promise to clean up the political system is not backed up with meaningful action.

Although both the other main parties have signed up to a statutory register of lobbyists, the Conservatives remain committed to self regulation.

David Miller, from the Alliance of Lobbying Transparency, said: “If [David Cameron] means what he says about giving power back to people he must confront those lobbyists tied to his party, and make disclosure of all clients compulsory, however uncomfortable this is for his lobbyist friends.”

Tories attacked from the right: ‘where are the spending cuts?’

The Institute of Economic Affairs today attacked the Conservative Party over the manifesto. A press release emailed over asks: ‘If the Conservatives’ commitment to devolution of power is real, where are the big spending cuts and tax breaks?’

Mark Littlewood, Director General of the Institute of Economic Affairs, said:

The Conservatives are rightly emphasising the urgent need to devolve power, but a real devolution of power must be matched by a sizeable reduction in Whitehall expenditure.

If the aim is to secure a large transfer of power from the centralised bureaucracy to individuals and local communities, then this needs to be reflected in substantial tax reductions.

Charles Kennedy joins new Libdem Electoral Reform group

Charles Kennedy, former Leader of the Liberal Democrats, today became the President of the new Lib Dem Group on Electoral Reform (LDER).

The new group has started a modern and an online campaign, which aims to re-engage young Liberal Democrats with the fight for a fairer voting system.

Charles Kennedy said: “Electoral and political reform is one of the key themes of the Liberal Democrat’s election campaign. This is exactly as it should be. We need a better, fairer, more representative system for electing our MPs and politicians, and this General Election is the time to be pushing this issue hard.”
From a press release

Oops! Cameron launch music backfires; they hate Tories

A faux-pas for the Tories today, who played music by Keane today at their manifesto launch.

Not long after, Richard Keane tweets:

told tories played keane at their manifesto launch. am horrified. to be clear -we were not asked. i will not vote for them

Ouch!

Could the ‘curse of Battersea power station‘ be striking early?

Greens launch election video, focus on non-environment issues

Election sexism watch (episode 4)

It looks like it’s not just the Mail and the rest of the tabloids that are having a problem with how to refer to Miriam González Durántez. Here’s what the Times has to say about her for example:

“She is the wife of a politician, emphatically not a politician’s wife.”

“Excellent”, you’re probably thinking, “that’s more like it.”

And indeed it would be, if only someone hadn’t decided to title the piece:

Winning the vote, Nick Clegg’s wife is getting on with working life

And if the writers of the above quote hadn’t gone on to say:

“She is the wife of a politician, emphatically not a politician’s wife. Miriam González Durántez — Mrs Nick Clegg — has proved to be a huge election asset to the Liberal Democrat leader, simply by staying away.”

continue reading… »

Will Labour’s “cancer policy” mailshot furore hurt them?

The Conservatives are understandably trying to give the impression they are super-outraged over Labour’s mailshot to people about cancer. At this point someone could set up a website to track how much faux-outrage takes place on all sides until the election.

Did they break data protection rules? Nope. Is it outrageous that cancer is being raised as an issue? Coming from a party with the misleading “death tax” poster specifically naming Gordon Brown – this is laughable.

But will it hurt them in the polls? Unlikely, I think, for various reasons:

1. The news cycle is moving too fast for it to last several days and get major traction.

2. I wonder how many people will listen to the story and wonder how much truth there is in Labour’s claims. I wonder if it isn’t in Labour’s favour to keep the story going because it allows them to repeat claims in the media that the Tories will indirectly kill people.

3. Allegra Statton says: “Parties could face a voter backlash over increasingly personalised campaign literature.”
What? That’s absurd. There’s no evidence of this at all and frankly campaign literature has become increasingly personalised in the US and there’s been little backlash there.

4. Andrew Lansley says: “It is shameful that the Labour party, knowing that we are the only party that is going to increase investment in the NHS, have decided to deliberately scare patients and misrepresent what we have said.” — which contradicts their claims that they are serious about reducing the deficit. Which can only hurt them in the polls.

The Conservatives were quite happy to let the “death tax” story run because it gave prominence to their claim. I suspect that this gives Labour the same opportunity.