‘But they can still be expected to outspend us by as much as three to one, while David Cameron is promising to dust down the playbook of smear and fear from 1992, knowing that large sections of the press can be relied upon to help him.’
Who can be complaining so plaintively about smears, budgets and media bias?
Why, it’s Douglas Alexander in the Observer, referring of course to the British general election but with eerie echoes of the referendum campaign.
It’s just not fair, is it, that the Press will side with the other team against you? As you know, Douglas never stops moaning that the Scottish Press is prejudiced against independence. I’m sure I heard him demand that the Scotsman begins immediately to be more balanced in order to aid democracy.
And all those fears and smears…where did that come from? Do Tories go in for stuff like that, do they? Douglas would never engage nor condone such behaviour which has not been the hallmark of the No campaign, has it? Please, if you find any hints at fears or smears about Yes or Mr Salmond, do send them to Douglas at his constituency office so he can tell them off.
Shocking, Douglas. It’s not as if Labour in Scotland tied to liken Salmond to Putin, is it? Or is that an entirely different type of comparison?
Read too how radical Labour will be (in Britain). He refers to ‘clarity of strategy, effective rebuttal, and superior field organisation with our network of community organisers.’ Any of those in Scotland, do you think? Clarity of strategy…mmmh. I suppose Vote Naw counts as strategy but I didn’t think Johann understood her own policy when she last appeared in interview. Rebuttal and organization…well presumably that’s where Frank Roy comes in.
It all points to two agendas, one for the big vote in the south and one for us. I’m not sure many Labour voters in Scotland recognize Douglas’s categorizing of Labour as the hard-done-to, smart, radical party.
But I think in the Herald today David Torrance was doing a wee bit of Douglas’s work for him, inadvertently, by suggesting Salmond just say sorry. For what? Are we really saying he should say sorry for saying what he believed to be true? Or sorry for causing a flutter among the media and the politicos? This is exactly why people are sick of politics, because an MSP can’t say what he thinks without howls of fake protest. You can almost hear the groans if Salmond said: OK, I meant it but if it’s caused offence, sorry everybody.
The equation with the CBI is ludicrous. They said sorry because the manifestly cocked it up by not consulting members, claiming a junior was at fault, withdrawing their registration, causing the abandonment of their association by 20 members and looking like prats. Sorry is hardly enough in their case. Sorry from Salmond simply lets everyone down and would be used by the same moaners in future as a sign you cant trust him. Stand up and speak up, would be a fine motto for today’s peely wally, media obsessed pygmy politicans, if only they actually stood for something and could articulate it.
Perhaps they should do us all a favour and apologise for getting elected in the first place.