the dirty side of politics

[mobeyone]

Dare say we would probably never have known about this had he not run for leader of LD....

Is this right? surely a challenge of leadership should not warrant looking into the lifestyles of our would be leaders?

 

[Alfie]

Dare say we would probably never have known about this had he not run for leader of LD....

Is this right? surely a challenge of leadership should not warrant looking into the lifestyles of our would be leaders?

Looks like the LibDems are imploding as a party. What with this and Charles Kennedy's situation I think they have lost any hope of increasing their seat count in the medium future.

 

[C43AMG]

Once you are up there, you get fired at. Thats the real world i'm afraid.

 

[jeremytaylor]

I think we have a right to know the backgrounds of the people in the running to lead the country, as much as their ideas, principles, skills, abilities, etc. and then we can make our own fully informed decisions as to whom we should vote for.

 

[Benzowner]

The problem is not just about his personal life, but what any potetntial blackmailers could do if he would have been elected leader of the Lib Dems I don't agree with the way it was done, but thats just newspapers for you.

 

[Satch]

Money well spent

http://shop.libdemblogs.co.uk/oaten/

 

[mobeyone]

I think we have a right to know the backgrounds of the people in the running to lead the country, as much as their ideas, principles, skills, abilities, etc. and then we can make our own fully informed decisions as to whom we should vote for.

Totally agree.

My point is that (and I am sure of this) his colleugues/peers would all have known about his habit long before any thought were made about a possible bid for leadership.

Now, if he was considered to be the next big thing, do you think we would have heard/read about this? and if he was supported by his party?

Dont think so, my main concern is, how many of them are thier leading the country today. Just goes to show how corrupt our leaders are today imo of course.

 

[996jimbo]

Dont think so, my main concern is, how many of them are thier leading the country today. Just goes to show how corrupt our leaders are today imo of course.

Bit harsh isn't it?

It's a seedy story and will be rather difficult on his wife and kids (I assume) but not corrupt - none of the reports suggest anything illegal took place.

 

[gary350]

Lets have a raffle to quess the party of the next misguided MP and there will be one, its about time a cabinet minister fell on his sword, lets hope its 2jags.
Georgeous George is doing his best to look a right richard, the leader of the disrespect party.

gary

 

[mobeyone]

Bit harsh isn't it?

Sorry, what i was trying to say is that 'they' all claim to be whiter than white until exposed.

Yes, he did nothing illegal except cheat on his wife with probably some 20 year old smackhead. Im sorry, the excuses dont wash with me, how sorry he is to his family and how sorry he is for the embarrasment caused.

He knew what he was doing and what the consequences would be if caught.

A list perhaps on all those who have been named and shamed in the last 20 years?

 

[mobeyone]

I don't agree with the way it was done, but thats just newspapers for you.

yep, and this i feel is the crux of the problem.

The media has way too much influence today, why cant we see this type of journalisim outside of leadership bids? or during an election?

 

[Satch]

yep, and this i feel is the crux of the problem.

The media has way too much influence today, why cant we see this type of journalisim outside of leadership bids? or during an election?

Oaten (who very few people outside the Lib.Dems had ever heard of) quit the LD leadership race on 19 January:

Oaten blames dirty tricks as he quits Lib Dem raceBy Brendan Carlin Political Correspondent
(Filed: 20/01/2006)

The Liberal Democrat leadership contest has descended into allegations of dirty tricks as Mark Oaten quit the race after leaked e-mails killed off his campaign.

Yesterday Mr Oaten, the party's home affairs spokesman, withdrew after calling in the police over the alleged theft of an e-mail showing Charles Kennedy, the party's former leader, had at one stage canvassed on his behalf.

The leak provoked aides of Mr Kennedy into a damaging rejection of Mr Oaten's campaign. It had already been virtually devoid of support from fellow MPs and the disclosure effectively forced him to pull out.

Declaring "that's not the sort of campaign I want to be involved in", Mr Oaten - who revealed that his wallet had gone missing - said he was "very upset that private conversations I had been having with Charles ended up in the press".

Most people did not even notice and even if they did would not have cared. But then as if by magic on Saturday evening has to resign as antics with a rent boy find their way into the gutter press.

You would almost think somebody had fed them the story.

Ah yes "Liberal Democrat" at times really is something of an oxymoron!

 

[imadoofus]

I think we have a right to know the backgrounds of the people in the running to lead the country, as much as their ideas, principles, skills, abilities, etc. and then we can make our own fully informed decisions as to whom we should vote for.

Except we don't "make our own fully informed decisions as to whom we should vote for", because they're not there to be voted for anymore.

If we are to have the right to know candidates' backgounds and so on, then they should continue to stand, warts and all, for us to choose them if we so wish.

I don't agree with the other sentiment that our MPs should be whiter-than-white, with no skeletons in their grace-and-favour cupboards; because I want our politicians to be real people who understand, and indeed live in, the real world.

It's this that riles me about the Mark Oaten situation, and also about Charles Kennedy (as I said in the relevant thread), and indeed many others: Transgressions that are not relevant to the job should not result in the loss thereof.

How unfair would you consider it if your boss found out that the girl you snogged when you were 19 later became a prostitute, and he sacked you as a result?

I know this could lead to a debate about whether any transgressions are indeed irrelevant to a politician's job, and that's not my intention. My point is just that, like it or not, some people have different sexual proclivities (for instance) to the majority. It's not reasonable to assume therefore that they can't be a good diplomat, deal-maker, speaker or representative of their constituents or their party.

If we put our politicians on a pedestal, they will never fail to let us down. That's human nature.

[/RANT]

PJ