Jon Cruddas: an apology
I had been under the impression that Jon Cruddas was a human being with a sense of humour who enjoyed a bit of political banter.
I need to publicly apologise because his fan club have now made it clear to me in comments on posts below that he is in fact:
a) infallible
b) a superhuman campaigner who has achieved miraculous feats like introducing canvassing to Dagenham CLP some 90 years after Herbert Morrison got the rest of the London Labour Party doing it
c) above outdated concepts such as left and right, and supported by a broad cross-section from all planets of the solar system
d) possessed of a unique insight into the aspirations of the British working class, not least their desire to live on council estates
e) personally channelling Tony Woodley's every utterance
f) the front-runner in the Iowa primary, but prepared to settle for Chairman of the DNC
g) the inventor of the internet
h) anointed by Ken Livingstone, who is also above reproach and never, ever, stood in an election against any Labour Party candidate, particularly not one of Jon's other parliamentary nominators
I do apologise, and will buy Jon, Tom and the rest of his campaign team a pint during the lunch break at the Compass Robin Cook Memorial Conference, if they promise not to heckle my speech at the CND fringe.
posted by Luke Akehurst at 4:24 pm
13 Comments:
@luke: 'anointed by Ken Livingstone, who is also above reproach and never, ever, stood in an election against any Labour Party candidate, particularly not one of Jon's other parliamentary nominators'
Luke, the fact that Frank Dobson and Ken Livingstone are united in their support for Jon Cruddas shows that whilst you are intent on opening old wounds, others like Frank and Ken are intent on having a serious debate about how the party moves forward in a united way.
Frank and Ken are showing much more seriousness and a much greater instinct for unity than you are.
Can you now answer the question on the previous thread - are you calling Ken Livingstone a 'flat-earther'?
4:43 pm, May 30, 2007
I can't believe you're still intent on carrying on the very public, online political suicide mission you have started today. When you're in a hole, Luke...
4:47 pm, May 30, 2007
Blimey! this blog is turning into "reasons not to vote NuLabour 101" class!
4:51 pm, May 30, 2007
vkProbably Luke is traumatised by seeing Jon pull so far ahead of Hazel in the CLP nominations!
Either that, or Jon's team paid him - they couldn't have wished for better publicity on the web!
5:09 pm, May 30, 2007
Luke in another post: "What's uncomradely about highlighting that his commitment to east London doesn't extend to his own domestic and educational arrangements? Is he ashamed of the facts?"
So now you're willing to use the smear stories of the Tory tabloids to attack a Labour comrade? You're going pretty low. Let's try to keep this comradely and focused on policies. What's Hazel's policy idea for saving the party? Sending working-class folk to the theatre. Marvellous.
p.s You're turning into a right-wing version of Grimupnorth! Her blog is just full of stories attacking Labour moderates, whilst your blog is just full of stories attacking anyone not as right-wing as you!
p.p.s Cruddas isn't perfect because he likes faith schools which are bollocks.
5:15 pm, May 30, 2007
Interesting that by his silence Luke is standing by his description of Ken Livingstone as a 'flat earther.' Difficult to see how he can say he's a Labour loyalist and bandy around such things about the Labour mayor of London on a public website.
5:18 pm, May 30, 2007
My view is that Ken is at heart an ultraleftist who has spent his entire career giving leadership to a London "Broad Left" that extends into the Trotskyist fringe. His coup against Andrew McIntosh was a disgrace, his leadership of the GLC lost many votes for Labour in the 1980s in General Elections, and his action in running against the Labour Party candidate for Mayor of London was unforgiveable.
I didn't want him back in the party. That was a very public position.
However, he has done a good job as Mayor (when not developing a foreign policy and insulting journalists), and I always - unlike Ken - campaign for any duly selected Labour candidate.
Even flat-earthers.
I'm glad to see there is now a thought police patrolling the blogosphere.
5:45 pm, May 30, 2007
No Luke, no thought police yet, but I'm sure Hazel will support their introduction as a thoroughly reasonable step to face the insecurities of a changing world...
5:58 pm, May 30, 2007
ANY CRITICISM OF THE GREAT LEADER WILL NOT BE TOLERATED
ANY PERCEIVED SLIGHT AGAINST CRUDDAS ON A BLOG WILL BE PUNISHED WITH THOUSANDS OF HOSTILE COMMENTS FROM HIS CAMPAIGN WORKERS WITHIN A MATTER OF SECONDS
WE WILL NOT ENGAGE IN RATIONAL DEBATE WITH ANY OF OUR CRITICS. NO CRITICISM OF CRUDDAS CAN HAVE ANY SOLID FOUNDATION
ALL CRITICS OF CRUDDAS ARE ULTRA-BLAIRITES AND ULTRA-LEFTISTS.
EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!
6:41 pm, May 30, 2007
Me and Luke Akehurst, twins separated at birth! Don't know whether to laugh or cry.....
I would never vote for Hazel in one million years, but what you see is what you get....which is more than I can say for JC. OK, Amy, Jo, off you go.......
8:33 pm, May 30, 2007
James, so you're saying that you can attack Jon as much as you like, but none of us activists up and down the country who support him, who've helped him get to second place in CLP nominations, aren't allowed to defend him?
I don't work for Jon's campaign but I genuinely believe him to be the best candidate, and will say so wherever I please!
10:33 pm, May 30, 2007
'His coup against Andrew McIntosh was a disgrace'
You seem to be saying that the incoming Labour group in 1981 should have persisted with a leader who by a majority they didn't want. That's crazy. Livingstone's 'coup' was in fact the democratic decision of the Labour group, and his support was by no means confined to the hard left.
'his leadership of the GLC lost many votes for Labour in the 1980s in General Elections'
The reality is that Londoners' positive memories of the policies pursued under Livingstone were a major reason for their support for him becoming the Labour candidate for mayor in 2000.
'his action in running against the Labour Party candidate for Mayor of London was unforgiveable.'
You could just as equally argue that what was unforgiveable was the stitch up against him. There's a very strong case to be made that if he hadn't stood as an independent then Norris would have won.
Certainly the damage done to the party by trying to stop Ken becoming the candidate when all the polls showed Londoners wanted him to be the Labour candidate (and indeed the mayor) was considerable.
However what's striking is that unlike Luke the two people at the centre of all this - Tony Blair and Ken Livingstone - have not adopted the approach that what each of them did was 'unforgiveable'. Instead they've shown a great deal of leadership in seeking to heal the wounds of that period.
Both of them have acted in the interests of the party and London, whereas by comparison Luke seems stuck in a timewarp.
11:51 am, May 31, 2007
b) a superhuman campaigner who has achieved miraculous feats like introducing canvassing to Dagenham CLP some 90 years after Herbert Morrison got the rest of the London Labour Party doing it
If he's managed this, he must have helped recruit some members. When I was a member of Dagenham CLP, my branch party did regular canvassing, local newsletters 4 times a year, delivered by members to every single home in the ward, and at election times we also canvassed the entire ward.
Needless to say this was the only branch in the CLP with active members, monthly branch meetings, with political discussions and outside speakers. I know that since then (1994-1999) the branch is no longer in the best of shape, which has something to do with the policies of central government.
So where has Cruddas got the people to do his canvassing from? Are they all Amicus full-timers, bussed in from Croydon, or what?
10:52 pm, May 31, 2007
Post a Comment
<< Home