Leave him there!

paddickST310506_228x318.jpgI’m no great lover of reality tv programmes, and I find some of the things the ‘z’ list celebrities do with insects, bugs, and worms etc, on I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here to be truly revolting (and actually, most of the ‘celebrities too). But having caught some bits of the programme last week and again this evening, you do have to wonder about the Liberal Democrats.
Was Brian Paddick, a complete idiot of a man, really the best candidate the third biggest political party in this country could come up with for an election for London Mayor? He almost succeeds in making Boris Johnson look sensible. Not living in London and therefore not having seen much of him, I genuinely hadn’t realised what a total fool he is. How on earth do the poor Lib Dems who took his campaign seriously and knocked doors for him feel now when they watch him making a spectacle of himself. I suppose followers of George ‘the cat’ Galloway in Respect know only too well how it feels.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Leave him there!

  1. yozza says:

    Surely he’s typical of Lib Dem candidates up and down the country.How many swivel eyed maniacs have you seen at public meetings or bombarding the local letters pages talking drivel who sooner or later emerge as Lib Dem candidates? I can think of dozens over the past twenty years.I wouldn’t trust them to run a car boot stall let alone a council or city.

  2. Paddick was always a joke of a candidate. If that’s the best the Lib Dems have got, say hello again to two-party politics.
    And thanks for your charming remark on my blog this morning. Glad to see you put the effort into really getting to grips with my arguments!

  3. AdamB says:

    His mayoral campaign was a gift to the other candidates. It was so useless that even his own party gave up on him. I saw him speak at a few of the hustings and I can only assume that those people who voted for him didn’t.

  4. Bob says:

    It wasn’t your ‘arguments’ I was taking issue with, but the tone of spite and vindictiveness I found surprising, given that you are normally not like that.
    As for the argument itself, I do have some sympathy for Hilton. Our libel laws allow those with significant wealth, or none at all, to embroil people in litigation which can prove very costly to those accused, whether they are guilty or not. He withdrew the item instantly, allowed the offended person an opportunity to refute, the damage to reputation was negligible and under those circumstances I see little prospect of the action succeeding.