Damian McBride and the Dark Side

John Rentoul

sidious 300x226 Damian McBride and the Dark SideI promised my fellow Blairite Zombie Hodges a point-by-point rebuttal of his blog post yesterday, in which he used the old Pilger-Chomsky moral-equivalence argument to suggest that the Blairites were just as bad as Damian McBride.

But I can’t be bothered. Suffice to say that Padawan Hodges has his relapses, and it is not helpful if those of us trying to rehabilitate him as a useful member of the reality-based community harp on about his past as a Brownite.

Anyway, Alastair Campbell does a fine line in righteous anger on his own behalf – and on behalf of the good things done by the New Labour government, which McBride and his Sith Lord Gordon Brown did so much to undermine.

One minor point and one major one. The whip who grabbed the young Jack Straw’s testicles as a warning was Walter Harrison, who stood down as an MP in 1987.

The major point is that disagreeing with the Iraq war is not evidence that Alastair Campbell did anything wrong. And I know it is hopeless to resist the mythology about the death of David Kelly, but let us just say that it doesn’t reflect well on anyone who mentions it in this context.

But don’t listen to Campbell or to me. Take it from Polly Toynbee on the Today programme on Friday (at 1′44″). She accepted that the Brownites behaved worse.

Tagged in: ,
  • JohnPReid

    We can meet, I’m going on holiday to Ireland next Week 4 my 40th

  • Hill244

    My relatives are flying in from America.

  • JohnPReid

    Don’t show them the pictures of me in my soviet soldier 1947 reenactment uniform

  • Hill244

    Which part of Ireland are you going to?

  • Pingback: Psychological Flaws | John Rentoul | Independent Eagle Eye Blogs

  • Mike Power

    You clearly don’t understand relativism. You are referring to “relativity”. A very different thing entirely. As for not knowing what “apologetics” means, I suggest using Google to find out.

  • Pacificweather

    Actually, I was referring to relativism. I was saying (I thought rather clearly) that there is only one constant known to science so it you are critical of relativism (moral or otherwise) you had better know what Constantivism is. if you don’t then you need to define your terms. I guess you can tell me what it is so I can compare it to its opposite relativism. I did not want to know what Google thinks apologetics is I wanted to know what Mightymark thinks it is as he is applying it to me. Was he, for instance, comparing me to Turtullian?

  • porkfright

    Perceptive intervention? Ha! Ha! Ha!

Most viewed



Property search
Browse by area

Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter