David likes Shami!
Andy Burnham's comments on David Davis and Shami Chakrabarti in the oxymoronic Progress magazine are a typical resort to the kind of smearing and innuendo which comes when an individual has nothing left to resort to than insults and shit-stirring.It's quite clear that Burnham knew exactly what he was doing with his less than subtle remarks on how civil liberties campaigners had been "seduced" by Davis, despite his support for capital punishment, and that Davis had been involved in "late-night heart-melting" phone calls, despite his spokesman claiming that he'd been misintrepreted. Burnham was simply picking up on rumours and grumblings from some Tories that Davis had had "his head turned" by Chakrabarti, and extending them even further by putting them directly into the public domain. Labour can't win the argument, doesn't want to even fight the argument, but they're more than happy to return to the days when the prime minister's spokesman suggested that Dr David Kelly was a "Walter Mitty" type character.
As pathetic as Burnham's remarks were however, it's an overreaction by Shami to threaten legal action, even if it's only if he continues, something he's obviously not going to do now. That said, when both Davis and Chakrabarti are happily married, such insinuations are intended to embarrass and cause casual suspicion, even if the suggestion is laughable.
Worth dealing with at the same time is this squeamishness, verging on blatant partisanship which is the refusal of many who consider themselves defenders of civil liberties to support David Davis, or that there should be someone who should stand to the left of Davis on a fully libertarian ticket. If this was a general election, I would completely agree. It isn't however; this is a stand by one man who along with many others considered 42 days to be the line in the sand that if crossed meant enough was enough. As such, this means we ought to hold our noses, ensure that Davis gets as large a majority as possible, and at the same time ensure that a debate on civil liberties, as all encompassing as possible, takes place. Burnham's remarks were also designed to be a distraction from this, as his party and leader cower in the darkness, too afraid to mention Davis in an abject speech on liberty and to stand a candidate against him, but not enough to pass off old Tory mumurings as new slurs. Conor Foley has said it best:
You can wring their hands on this, but that is the reality. A vote for DD on this occasion is a vote against 42 days.
It's not difficult; that's all there is to it.
Labels: Andy Burnham, civil liberties, David Davis, Liberty, Shami Chakrabarti, smearing
| Permalink
Oh, it makes every sense to sue. Because he'd have to either cave, or explain where he gets his information. Burnham has form for claiming to know the content of other people's phone calls.
Posted by
Alex |
Friday, June 20, 2008 2:12:00 pm
Post a Comment