Birthdays tend to be enjoyable affairs and I have to say my 30th yesterday was that and more. Caron was kind enough to put up a short post dedicated to it and Stephen Glenn and Malc took the time to send me a message, much to my appreciation.
The Scottish Labour party however marked my 30th by sending out a press release trying to paint me as "sickening" (shown below).
In trying to add weight to the story, the Labour party laughably suggested that I advised the SNP on its internet strategy, a joke that is wearing a bit thin now. I don't know if there's scope for an email to the Press Complaints Commission over a press release that contains a glaring factual error but I'll probably leave it for now.
The Daily Express seems to be the only publication that picked the story up today. I'm not sure if that goes down as a success for Labour but so be it, one for the scrapbook nonetheless and we'll see what tomorrow brings as I'm sure it'll be open season on the Deputy First Minister in the Scotland on Sunday and the Sunday Herald. Maybe this non-story will be deemed to make the grade there too, I really don't know how low the quality control has sunk with the Scottish Press these days.
I can't say it made a dent in my day though. I still stand by the comment that Margaret Curran finds so reprehensible and I am pretty sure that 'random person, who happens to be an SNP member, thinks x' really isn't much of a story. I may be in the minority with such liberal views and I may be just plain wrong, but I can't say either will make any difference to the vast majority of peoples' days.
So there we go. I just didn't want the minor episode to pass by unmentioned.
(With thanks to Indy who cautioned me on it last night and particularly to the Labour party member who first gave me the heads up on and thinks that the sending out of the press release was "f*cking stupid")
NEWS FROM SCOTTISH LABOUR
Immediate Release – 12 February 2010
Salmond challenged as cybernats make extraordinary claim in fraudgate
- Blog post spells out meaning of Salmond's position- Salmond asked to apologise for bizarre interpretation of rules
A generally respected SNP blogger has today claimed that a politician has a duty to represent a "mass-murdering, child molesting, drug pusher" if that person is a constituent.
The comments were made by the author if the SNP Tactical Voting blog, who has previously been asked by the SNP to advise them on their internet strategy.
His explaination stems from bizarre claims by the First Minister that MSPs have a duty to take up the case of all constituents, no matter how wrong they may be.
Margaret Curran has challenged the First Minister to distance himself from these sickening claims.
Labour MSP for Glasgow Baillieston Margaret Curran said:
"These comments are sickening and will enrage parents across Scotland.
"This horror is the logical consequence of the First Minister’s desperate defence of his deputy.
"Yesterday he claimed that every politician should take up every case from every constituent.
"This is where that error leads and shows just how wrong he is.
"In defending a gross error of judgement from his deputy, he has given the green light to stomach-churning madness.
"Politicians exercise judgement every day in deciding what they do. It is clear that the judgement of Salmond and Sturgeon is flawed.
"The First Minister should stop digging, admit he was wrong and distance himself from these offensive comments."
ENDS
1. Author of SNP Tactical voting:“There is a world of difference and I would agree with the SNP spokesperson that there is a duty to act regardless of the crime. I think there is more of a danger if politicians start to decide which constituents need their help and which don't. You're there to serve the entire area. Taking it to the extreme, I would genuinely like to think that even a mass-murdering, child molesting, drug pusher would have their MP on their side to a certain extent. I don't mean holding placards up outside the court begging them to be freed but serving them in whatever capacity they realistically can is surely an appropriate role for the country we wish to live in. As I say, in my view MPs (or MSPs) are more priests than policemen but, with so much in life, we may well see that differently.
Source – this is a comment from the blog author on his own post (fourth comment):https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5457608463947849320&postID=3855159620803517159
2. Jeff Breslin’s links with the SNP are described here:
THE SNP has invited one of Scotland's leading bloggers to host talks on how to get a grip on its increasingly negative profile on the web, The Scotsman has learned. Jeff Breslin, author of the SNP Tactical Voting website and a contributor to The Scotsman's Steamie, has revealed that he is to meet members of the party's media team this week to discuss blogging.
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Blogged-down-in-scandal-SNP.5871028.jp
He subsequently denied the story saying it was “100% not true”:
http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2009/12/maddox-gets-his-facts-wrong.html
But then reconfirmed it had been true…
“First of all, a (perhaps unexpected) apology. In relation to today's article I think I owe David Maddox an apology given my bleary-eyed, early morning, knee-jerk post so rather than bury it somewhere deep in this post I'll put it front and centre. The man is a journalist, I rolled a pass to him along the 6-yard line. What else should I have expected him to do but ram it into the back of the net?”
http://www.snptacticalvoting.com/2009/12/night-of-hard-drives.html
Salmond vs Trump
24 minutes ago
30 comments:
New lows from Scottish Labour and the Scottish media (although they're basically one and the same now).
I, genuinely, fear for the future of this country.
Don't let it get you down, Jeff!
http://politics.caledonianmercury.com/2010/02/11/nicola-sturgeon-to-make-%E2%80%98emergency%E2%80%99-statement-to-parliament/comment-page-1/#comment-1680
Belated happy birthday Jeff.
I can honestly empathise at the situation you find yourself in.
The way the smallest things are picked up and then driven to a point of hysteria has gone beyond the pale.
Keep your chin up. As you say, it's a non story.
Best
Jim
In some ways you have left yourself open to this. The links between you and David Maddox were blurry at best following the exchange of emails around 1st Dec, or at least blurry for political parties and spin doctors to make it look bad.
You do have a public profile. And as such any support for Nicola Sturgeon in this case makes you worthwhile collateral damage for any attack.
I think I understand the gist of what you were saying in that MPs/MSPs should put aside a certain moral queasy-ness when dealing with criminals in the course of their jobs.
There is a difference between that though and what Nicola Sturgeon did which is, at best, to seek to ensure that the court was mindful of information it already had (i.e. reports about family and health are always available prior to sentencing) or at worst expressing a hope in which way the court might pass sentence.
You might think that either one of these is actions is acceptable but the first interpretation shows little respect for what already happens and the second is probably unlawful.
The question is why did she do it? Duty has been the answer but no evidence has been shown to support that all MSPs have to do what she did. If she was doing it from a certain moral standpoint then she should have been in the media espousing her beliefs and let her electors decide if they support her moral position.
You do know on the interpretation given by the SNP, all MSPS would have had to write a similar letter on behalf of Harold Shipman? If I were an MSP in that situation I would rather stand down.
Thanks Sean. The one a few months ago got me down a wee bit. This one is just funny.
You're right though, media in this country is on a precipice.
Labour has a problem with free speech
Douglas, thanks for your thoughts, I can't say I agree with much of what you say though.
A public profile? Perhaps I suppose, but as someone who has not even held a branch position within the SNP and pays £1 a month in membership, I don't think I'm much of a target for these type of stories. The blog's going well, I'm really chuffed about that, but it doesn't make me any more of a representative than the next person on the very outer ring of the party.
Conflating my extreme theoretical argument with Nicola Sturgeon's specific position was just childish of the press release but I do agree that it has to be sorted out once and for all what an MSPs' duty actually is. And I wasn't talking about writing a character reference in the imagined example of a mass-murdering child-molester (or what have you), I was talking (rather hazily) about an MSP/MP "serving them in whatever capacity they realistically can". A character reference isn't always "realistic". For example, Harold Shipman.
So no, I don't agree that by the SNP's reckoning a character reference would need to be written for H Shipman. Nicola had valid reasons for suggesting this man is better out of jail. I am struggling to think of similar valid reasons for Mr Shipman.
Illegitimi non carborundum!
Certain irony here in that the Labour party where the ones who appointed Derek Draper in an attempt to control their own blogosphere. Of course that apointment failed, not least because the controlling emails came out in the open.
They think that just because they do it every other party tries to control everything that their bloggers write. However, this makes me think if the rumour, which similarly didn't get very far, that I work for the Scottish party on internet strategy came from the same source.
Personal attacks on you to the side (and as a concerned parent Jeff, I don't want my offspring exposed to the danger of Margaret Curran) I really think the Labour party have gone bonkers here.
This is a case which is with the court. Sentence hasn't been pronounced. Matters are still sub judice, how on earth is the sherrif supposed to give a ruling with this hysteria in the background? And now Labour have upped the ante on top of all their other mistakes.
Still apparently you are mad, bad, and dangerous to know, always the best compliment you can pay a man, happy birthday.
Thanks Jim.
And Observer, I thought you were saying (Darth Vader style?) you were my father! Re-read it again and realised my mistake...
As you say though, respect for a live court case has gone out the window and bonkers politics lives on.
Maybe the world is bonkers. I'm watching Total Wipeout at the moment which is not a great advert for Planet Earth. Damn funny though.
"These comments are sickening and will enrage parents across Scotland. "This horror is the logical consequence of the First Minister’s desperate defence of his deputy. "Yesterday he claimed that every politician should take up every case from every constituent. "This is where that error leads and shows just how wrong he is. "In defending a gross error of judgement from his deputy, he has given the green light to stomach-churning madness.
It's like something out of Viz or the Daily Mash isn't it?
Maybe they could headline it:
SNP Commitment Abomination!!
The scottish media are looking more and more ridiculous with their continual labour bias. The GE should be interesting though because they cannot manipulate the entire UK media.
It really is sickening what is happening particularly with the BBC and Herald.
Nevertheless, more people are seeing through this crap.
And the SNP has more strength in depth than ever before with MP's, MSP's, councillors, MEP's and prominent people in all walks of life. If the SNP get say 22-24% in the GE they (scottish media) will spin it as a bad result.
They know in the long term the SNP will prevail.
Don't let them put you off and keep up the good work.
I've sent Margaret Curran a friend request on my SNP Tactical Voting Facebook account.
Hopefully I can assume the hatchet is buried if the offer is accepted... ;)
The SNP managed for 3 years since elected to avoid any pitfalls but recently have fallen into a few engineered by Labour and their media acolytes.
It is abundantly clear that what Labour are engaged in is a classic attempt to divert attention away from themselves and de-stabilise the SNP government into the bargain.
What does this tell us?
It shows firstly that the Labour party has decided not to fight the SNP on policy grounds for they know that they would lose.
Secondly it shows that Labour has no intention of letting their record be debated for they know that they would lose the debate too.
So why is it then that the SNP aren't turning the tables on Labour by hammering them mercilessly and relentlessly on their policies (or absence of policies) and their abysmal record in government at UK level?
Is the SNP leadership not seeing the wood for the trees?
M,
The problem with hammering Labour on the lack of policy is that our party have passed very little legislation in the last 3 years. If we start using those kinds of arguments, it's far too easy for Labour to trot out statistics to use against us.
The SNP really can't afford to get bogged down in electioneering too early either. If we wait until people are sick fed up of Labour and the Tories, they are going to start looking for something different.
Jeff In the minds of Labour there is no such thing as a reasonable nat blogger.
They make no allowance for the fact that you have gone out of your way to be fair at times and to see the unionist point of view.
Hard lesson but sadly if you're in ANY way sympathetic to the SNP, Labour will shaft you first chance thay get, as they have done here.
Hard to take at the time but now you at least know what you're dealing with.
My advice is don't get mad, get even.
'The problem with hammering Labour on the lack of policy is that our party have passed very little legislation in the last 3 years. If we start using those kinds of arguments, it's far too easy for Labour to trot out statistics to use against us. '
that is because we only have 47 seats out of 129 - nearly everything opposed by the opposition - that should be made clear also. Do you want a coalition government?
A belated happy birthday to you- don't let it get under your skin - a late friend years ago - 'everything I write or say will be twisted, distorted then and thrown back at me by Labour' nothing changed since 1968 it seems.
Thanks Marcia, nice to know it's ever been thus.
I can't remember where I read it but someone found a document on the need to sort out problem drinking dated back in the 1700s. Doesn't fill me with confidence that minimum pricing will get pushed through parliament by next year!
And not sure about getting mad or getting even Anon. I find neither make for great objectives. Business as usual will do for me for now but you're right that there's little allowance for sometimes seeing it Labour's way. They did call me "generally respected" I guess which was nice ;)
How much longer before they threaten your employer with their smear campaign?
BTW, Jeff...given Curran's wading into the campaign against you, any chance of you popping over to the east end of Glasgow during the GE Campaign to keep her out of Westminster and keep John Mason in? ;)
Incredible stuff - no barrel Labour won't scrape these days.
Hope this nonsense didn't spoil your birthday, many belated happy returns!
Anon,
Of course I want a coalition government (without sacrificing the referendum). Imagine the legislative program we could have had if we'd gotten the Lib Dems on board - we've have had local income tax, probably better action on transport, probably more local authority and student funding reform.
Not only that, but Labour would now be looking even more pathetic.
Hi Jeff
I meant your public profile stems from the success of the blog as opposed to high-profile links with the SNP.
Given what Alex Salmond said in the chamber on Thurs it is clear that he thinks that H Shipman should have got the same level of support because what Nicola Sturgeon was doing was not a personal act but an actual duty.
If was a personal act, then it becomes a moral choice which should be easily explained and voters, at the next election, would be allowed to judge that moral position.
By saying it was a duty is, in effect, trying to hide from that moral decision that she has made.
BTW, happy belated returns for your birthday.
In particular, check out the references to their news release.... it's obvious that Scottish labour is now keeping a file on pro-independence bloggers.
The questions, who is doing the ratting?
Reeks of John McTernan
The thing that is most depressing about this is the dumbing down aspect. You prefaced the statement by saying "taking it to the extreme".
Either Margaret Curran is completely stupid or she is pretending to be completely stupid.
I'm not sure which is worse but it does rather make you despair when politicians start competing about who can be the most dense.
Jeff, I'm really sorry that some clown has used your reply to my comment for this. We had a good debate on twitter after your reply (which I'd not read at the time).
Lest this appear too supportive, for the avoidance of doubt I still think the exercise of her judgment was wrong and there was no definitely no duty (but then that's where we'd left it on twitter) ;-)
Don't let them get you down.
Thanks Scott but really no need to worry at all. As I say, genuinely non-plussed and it's already over in something of a flash.
I guess it can be easy to forget that what seems a harmless back and forth online can be watched by anyone and used in any way they wish.
As for my choice of point to make, I come from a Maths background where to prove your point you let 'n' tend to infinity. I guess with Politics that's more foolish than it is with Algebra!
I still think what I think but happy to accept I'm probably in the minority.
And as I say, "duty" is a difficult word to pin down. Duty doesn't necessarily mean you 100% have to do something but can mean you personally feel you have to do something and there is judgement involved, be it correct or incorrect. I don't know if there's a legal definition but that's how I see it.
Who knows, I'm kind of done with the topic now anyway to be honest. Hopefully the papers are too!
Happy Birthday.
I love "generally respected" as a translation of "we hate this b*****d but we can't find enough to bury him completely" :-).
I shall save that one for the future.
Post a Comment