Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Kennedy faces fresh calls to quit

Should Charles Kennedy continue as Lib Dem leader?


  • Total voters
    52
softened as a Tory by constant contact with Diane Abbot, Michael Portillo defects to the LibDems. he rises to the rank of leader within weeks :eek:
 
Next?

blair_02.jpg
 
Poor bloke had honesty, integrity and a lot of bollocks. You never get on in politics like that.
 
Teepee said:
Poor bloke had honesty, integrity and a lot of bollocks. You never get on in politics like that.

Him lying for over two years about his drink problem was an example of honesty? :confused:
 
No obviously, admitting it was. He admitted something that he knew would damage him when he didn't have to. And I know a lot of alcoholics who claim they don't have a problem, it's not really a new thing. They say stuff like 'Yeah I drink a lot but it's not a problem, I can control it.' etc. I'm not claiming to know if he was in denial or lying. All I was saying was that what he did was a very brave thing.
 
Bring Back Pantsdown Ashdown

Teepee said:
Poor bloke had honesty, integrity and a lot of bollocks. You never get on in politics like that.

Kennedy opposed admitting women as members to Glasgow University Union in his student days (although he now denies this).

Former Deputy Chairman of the Federal Liberal Democrat Party, Donnachadh McCarthy, resigned from the Party citing the party's shift to the right of the political spectrum under Kennedy in pursuit of Conservative votes.

Under the party's rules, a leader has to stand for re-election within a year of a general election. Kennedy handed out the ballot papers to the parliamentary party within days of the 2005 election, leaving no time for anyone to mount a challenge, and allowing him to be re-elected unopposed.

As recently as the Jonathan Dimbleby programme on ITV1 on December 18, 2005 when asked "Has it been a battle to stay off the booze, have you had to have medical support in any way at all?" Kennedy replied "No, no, no, that is not the case, it is a matter on all fronts - if there's something my doctor really wants me to do over this holiday period as a matter of fact, is give up smoking and I think he's right". BBC journalist Jeremy Paxman apologised to Kennedy in 2002 after asking in a televised interview if he drank privately "by yourself, a bottle of whisky late at night?". "No I do not," Kennedy replied. In 2004, The Times published a "clarification" over a report it had made stating Kennedy had not taken part in that year's budget debate due to excessive drinking.

During the manifesto launch on his first day back on the campaign trail after the birth of his child, Kennedy struggled to remember the details of a key policy (replacing the Council Tax with a Local Income Tax) at an early morning press conference, which he later blamed on a lack of sleep due to his new child.

The real Charles Kennedy is somewhat different to the "honesty, integrity and a lot of bollocks" you attribute to him.

<edit to add the "lot of bollocks" is about right.>
 
Teepee said:
No obviously, admitting it was. He admitted something that he knew would damage him when he didn't have to.

Not true. He admitted it because he had to (a journalist from ITN showed his camp a dossier with proof that he'd had treatment which proved the problem) then tried to play the sympathy angle to cling onto his job. No honest or integrity in those actions imo.
 
MC5 said:
Kennedy opposed admitting women as members to Glasgow University Union in his student days (although he now denies this).

Maybe he's embarrassed about it now. I'm embarrassed by some views I held when I was a student and that was only 7 years ago.

Under the party's rules, a leader has to stand for re-election within a year of a general election. Kennedy handed out the ballot papers to the parliamentary party within days of the 2005 election, leaving no time for anyone to mount a challenge, and allowing him to be re-elected unopposed.

If those are the rules, surely any potential challenger knows them as well and can plan accordingly. He's stuck to the party's rules and this is a bad thing? :confused:

As recently as the Jonathan Dimbleby programme on ITV1 on December 18, 2005 when asked "Has it been a battle to stay off the booze, have you had to have medical support in any way at all?" Kennedy replied "No, no, no, that is not the case, it is a matter on all fronts - if there's something my doctor really wants me to do over this holiday period as a matter of fact, is give up smoking and I think he's right". BBC journalist Jeremy Paxman apologised to Kennedy in 2002 after asking in a televised interview if he drank privately "by yourself, a bottle of whisky late at night?". "No I do not," Kennedy replied. In 2004, The Times published a "clarification" over a report it had made stating Kennedy had not taken part in that year's budget debate due to excessive drinking.

Perhaps he was in denial of his problem in 2002, lots of alcoholics are.

During the manifesto launch on his first day back on the campaign trail after the birth of his child, Kennedy struggled to remember the details of a key policy (replacing the Council Tax with a Local Income Tax) at an early morning press conference, which he later blamed on a lack of sleep due to his new child.

For fuck's sake, if I'd just become a father and had to face the press very early the next morning I'd be incoherent too. Where's your evidence this was down to drinking?

Fucking pathetic points, get down out of your ivory tower and see things from the point of view of how real human beings behave.
 
JTG said:
Perhaps he was in denial of his problem in 2002, lots of alcoholics are.

Nope, he said yesterday he chose to not make his problem public. It wasn't denial, it was a conscience choice to mislead.
 
JTG said:
Fucking pathetic points, get down out of your ivory tower and see things from the point of view of how real human beings behave.

I'm sorry but that's bollox. He's an elected official, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
 
Kid_Eternity said:
Get rid of the fucker I say!

Link
as ck's a politician i think he should be culled, though in a slightly less brutal way than i'd have blair or galloway off'd. but it's a bit off for his party of fuckwit mediocrities, and menzies campbell, to want him out for his slight overindulgences.
 
Pickman's model said:
as ck's a politician i think he should be culled, though in a slightly less brutal way than i'd have blair or galloway off'd. but it's a bit off for his party of fuckwit mediocrities, and menzies campbell, to want him out for his slight overindulgences.

That's something I've been thinking about, do those that knew or had serious suspicions have a responsbility to intervene and should they have earlier?
 
Kid_Eternity said:
That's something I've been thinking about, do those that knew or had serious suspicions have a responsbility to intervene and should they have earlier?
it's a bit of a shoddy way to treat someone, to be supportive while he's drinking to excess and then to try to evict him when he tries to do something about it.
 
Kid_Eternity said:
I'm sorry but that's bollox. He's an elected official, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

Crap. He's a human being and as imperfect as the rest of us.
 
Pickman's model said:
it's a bit of a shoddy way to treat someone, to be supportive while he's drinking to excess and then to try to evict him when he tries to do something about it.

True but what would have been the consequence if they'd outed him earlier?
 
JTG said:
Crap. He's a human being and as imperfect as the rest of us.

Not the point i'm afraid. In politics there's only so much you can get away with, he tried it and failed then played the sympathy angle (which seems to have gone down well on here) to cling on to his job.
 
Kid_Eternity said:
True but what would have been the consequence if they'd outed him earlier?
let's not deal in what if's.

he's outed himself, courageously imo, and if he's being honest about seeking help and not having had a drink for 2 months, then he's doing well.

otoh, it would be a laugh to see the lib dems destroy themselves in some internecine feud. :) let's not forget the split in the irish nationalists after parnell as a precedent.
 
Kid_Eternity said:
Nope, he said yesterday he chose to not make his problem public. It wasn't denial, it was a conscience choice to mislead.

Do you know at what point he admitted to himself he had a problem? My point is that he may have consciously misled the public last year but perhaps he didn't in 2002.

You're full of holier than thou bullshit in my opinion
 
Kid_Eternity said:
Not the point i'm afraid. In politics there's only so much you can get away with, he tried it and failed then played the sympathy angle (which seems to have gone down well on here) to cling on to his job.

He played the sympathy angle by admitting it when he didn't need to do so? What was his motive for coming out in the first place?
 
Pickman's model said:
let's not deal in what if's.

he's outed himself, courageously imo, and if he's being honest about seeking help and not having had a drink for 2 months, then he's doing well.

otoh, it would be a laugh to see the lib dems destroy themselves in some internecine feud. :) let's not forget the split in the irish nationalists after parnell as a precedent.

Thing is I think it's relevant to forming an opinion on those that moved on him over the last few days and weeks. Were they cold hearted cunts or just people that had had enough of CKs bullshit?

But anyway, moving on. Yeah if this is not handled properly this could split the party in half. The Tories must be loving this (and Labour shitting it so much that Blair said twice this week he likes the idea of Brown taking over!)...
 
Kid_Eternity said:
Not the point i'm afraid. In politics there's only so much you can get away with, he tried it and failed then played the sympathy angle (which seems to have gone down well on here) to cling on to his job.

Bollocks, it is the point. Politicians cannot be expected to be any better than the rest of us in these matters (like being tired when you've just become a father) yet they get crucified for having problems and dealing with them out of the public gaze.

I'd rather have someone who faces up to his issues in power than someone who can't see there's anything wrong with him.
 
JTG said:
Do you know at what point he admitted to himself he had a problem? My point is that he may have consciously misled the public last year but perhaps he didn't in 2002.

You're full of holier than thou bullshit in my opinion

I couldn't point out the exact moment but I know it's been known about for atleast three years.
 
Kid_Eternity said:
I couldn't point out the exact moment but I know it's been known about for atleast three years.

By whom? Kennedy or those around him?
 
JTG said:
Bollocks, it is the point. Politicians cannot be expected to be any better than the rest of us in these matters (like being tired when you've just become a father) yet they get crucified for having problems and dealing with them out of the public gaze.

I'd rather have someone who faces up to his issues in power than someone who can't see there's anything wrong with him.

I don't think they can be but the reality is pretty clear (other party members, parties and media's games) so a politician needs to be a bit clearer in their thinking rather than just expecting to lie about something than try and gain sympathy when the lie is about to be exposed.
 
Back
Top Bottom