Welcome to the arena, Mr Scott

One day in, and the Lib Dems are a flip-flopping. Am I suprised? Not a jot!

Am I worried that this new era for the Lib Dems will have any effect on my life? Nope. Not a jot!

But come on Tavish, you are either deliberately trying to make the Lib Dems 'the big story' in the press, which isn't a good idea when your first move of note, as leader of the nineteenth most popular party in Scotland, is one that has to be clarified, but still leaves us with a...

"So what does he want to do?" feeling.

Silly, silly Tavish.

But maybe, just maybe, there's a glimmer of hope on the horizon, because he's not come out the blocks saying "We will be a major force in Scottish politics" or any fantastical nonsense about taking power in the next election. No, his first move of note, hinted at cooperation with the biggest party, cooperation on a referendum issue, to give people a choice on ALL the options.

They may not say it publicly, but we all know that Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems are pretty embarrassed by their unashamedly childish 'limits' to the scope of the Calman Commission. It's not a referendum if we haven't got all the main options, it's more of a toss of the coin than a democratic decision-making process.

So, although it's muddled, and was tied in with a rather predictable attack on Salmond, who you don't like personally, I'm glad to see that somewhere in your Northern head, there is enough space, consideration and professional maturity to have thoughts of cooperation in running our country.

Because the Scottish Parliament runs our country, Tavish, remember that, not the SNP. The Scottish Government has a numerical head-start, sure, but the Parliament is where you are, and not through parties, not through the Government, but through cooperation, working together, for Scotland and doing what we all pay you to do, is where progress can be made.

But please, please get a clear message, a communications strategy. It's so hard to attack you guys if even you don't know what you're talking about.

Dear Tom Harris MP...

...yes, the Labour Governments have, undoubtedly, done some truly excellent things and anyone who claims they have not is full of blind political tribalism.

You mention the minimum wage, which at the time I was extremely sceptical about? YUP! Cracking piece of legislation. And that's not the only thing you guys have done, not by a long way and on those things I applauded you well, and I am certainly not a Labour fan.

But your post is just ridiculous, it embodies what the Labour party, New or old, left or centre, has become. You cannot deny that Labour is 'not what it once was', but when the Labour Party's only campaign and argument is "Remember how bad the Tories were?", then you're really running out of juice.

Labour are the party that had the slogan "Forward not back", yet all Labour party does is either say "Look what we did 7 years ago" or "Look what the Tories did 20 years ago", and what a shite argument these have both been.

"Forward not back"? Your whole post focuses on a "Remember the..." mantra! Well unfortunately for you guys, you've been in office long enough to have your own "Remember the..." comedy of errors.

Here's just some of them

Remember the...
fucking up of the housing market
2p tax screw up which hit the poor
renewables announcements followed by plans to increase nuclear which was subsequently followed by announcements on new COAL fired power stations
doubling of inflation on Labour's watch
Home Office that wasn't fit for purpose
keeping of Sir Ian Blair after Jean Charles de Menezes
mess surrounding Northern Rock
high flying oil price
election we were all ready for but someone's leader didn't have the stones
time when the country came to a standstill in the fuel protests

FUCKING IRAQ WAR...

...in which some soldiers died SOLELY because of underfunding leading to lack of proper equipment
Government that converted politics into a media spun circus
introduction of PPP into our state education system
whitewashed the Hutton report
Millennium Dome...

...?

So when you talk about "all the things what those Tories 'ave dun", then answer all of these questions before you open your mouths, or shut the fuck up, talk about the future, what you plan to do and impress us that way.

You cannot rest on past successes when you are asking us to vote on how you should run this country in the future. So yes, you've done some great stuff IN THE PAST, but you've also fucked up, royally, in the past.

Nottingham Forest no longer consider themselves to be part of football's European Elite, but under your rationale, because on May 30, 1979 they lifted the European Cup, we should all be calling them powerhouses of the beautiful game. Following your under-used "Forward not back" idea though, you might just realise that they are washed up, not as good as they once were, with a crap man leading the line.

Sound familiar?

So look forward and just fucking do something (and if you can try make it something good, that'd be a start).

(I've spent 45 mins trying to resize that font and it just isn't happening so my apologies)

The flag

Well here's one for the CyberNats to go over-the-top on...

China has banned the flying of the Saltire (along with many other world flags, ie Tibet).

The Nats will have a field day, but to be honest, why?

If a competitor is taking part representing Britain, he/she is obviously not disgusted at being a British representative, so should have no NEED to fly the Saltire, desire maybe, but need, no.

And if they are so afronted by not being able to fly the Saltire while participating as a British competitor, then just fly home now. I'm Scottish and proud. But like it or lump, we are also British, and that is what you are when you are at the Olympics.

I look forward to the childish tantrum that will inevitably ensue from our SNP bloggers, so that I can pity them. Soon enough, we'll have independence anyway, and then, and only then, will we be able to fly the flag, and thenm, and only then, will the Nats stop moaning about stuff that really doesn't matter.

fight, fight, fight, fight

Funny guy, that Miliband.

He may not be making a pitch for the leadership, "he's just a very naughty boy".

In every class, in every school, there was that one kid, the really geeky one, who was too intelligent to picked on, but too intelligent to be your friend. Think of that kid in your school.

Now imagine him saying to the teacher...

"Oi, you! Come and have a go if one thinks one's hard enough!"

Miliband, out of nowhere, has found big man's bollocks, strapped them on and decided what he wants. I feel sorry for Brown, I really do, but when you are this much of the problem, regardless of what you say, do, or in this case, don't say, then it's time to do the decent thing and give us a better headline than

"Embattled Brown faces union/cabinet/banks/by-election showdown talks."

All of Brown's policy ideas are focused on his survival. Cameron v Miliband would create new ideas, for the benefit of the country, and Labour know it, the Tories know it, the public know it, christ even the Lib Dems know it, and they know nothing. Labour, old or New, know Brown isn't the one for them, isn't going to win, and is going to cost a lot of them their jobs, so it's only a matter of time.

The future's bright, the future's Orange, Brown David.

The State of the Union(s)

Who is really in charge? Not wanting to start some paranoid conspiracy theory, but I'm starting to worry about the unions' power over Labour and our embattled PM.

Since the Grangemouth oil refinery strikes, staged courtesy of mega-militant, mega-memberous Unite, this particular union has seemingly not been out of the press, threatening strikes over anything that it can organise a strike for. And more recently, the GMB has noticed something going on over at Unite and decided they want a slice of militancy.

Let's face it, there is very little more politically crushing for a beleaguered Prime Minister, than strikes, never mind a series of strikes, across pretty much every sector.

So when the unions fund the Labour Party and the unions threaten strikes, and the unions are making demands on policy, and Gordon Brown can't risk pissing these folks off, in fear of these two factors, then it's got to worry you who's really making the decisions.

The general secretary of the GMB has said that Gordon Brown's leadership should be challenged, whereas the joint leader of Unite has said changing the leader was "not the solution". If they want to get what they want, then all these two men need to do, two of the most powerful trade unionists in the land, is get together, agree a strategy, bend Gordon Brown over a barrel and fist him til all their trade union fantasies come true. It'd be a fucking coup! It's not happened on the topic of GB's leadership, but on all policy matters, were they to get together, they genuinely could control our PM cos they can control an army of staff across the board.

Do we want someone who's main concern is not pissing off the unions because the party might lose money? A conflict of interest? The non-stop threatening of strike action from these large unions can only put the shits up Gordon Brown, and although they may have rejected unions' demands for less restrictive strike laws, my point is they know that they have that power.

It's cash for laws! It's a scandal! And these unions are making DEMANDS on the Labour Party, and remember The Labour Party = The Government. When Bernie Ecclestone gave Labour £1million and then the tobacco advertising laws revealed F1 got an exception, it was a massive, massive scandal.

So 'Private Interest A' gave Labour money, policy went in 'Private Interest A''s favour...BIG SCANDAL.

But 'Private Interest B' gave Labour money, policy went in 'Private Interest B''s favour... NO SCANDAL.

With GB bending over sideways and the unions rubbering up, we've got to be worried.
Quick, bring back Thatcher before she dies.

Barack Obama - Top of the Pops?

Like when push-pops first came into the world, I got very, very excited. The concept - a lollipop that wasn't on a stick? This new idea really took a hold of me, dreams were dreamt, tears were shed when mum said "no".

But then, when the dream became reality and I finally had one, the taste was nothing really that special. Ok, so it had sugar in it, lots, which meant I was never going to not like it, but it was a massive let down. But in spite of this, even though there were things I liked a lot more, I persevered for weeks, wasting my pocket money chasing a dream, a dream that never reached the hype. Eventually, I realised that I had to let go and go back to stuff I knew was what I wanted. The packaging, the hype, the talk... I had been bought over by an idea.

Barack Obama, is a bit like a push-pop (there's a sentence you won't have heard before!).

I've bought the hype, been taken in by the packaging, and liked how Mr Obama was presented as a package. But I'm now in that stage where I'm persevering, trying it over and over again, waiting for that magical flavour that sets him apart. But so far, I'm yet to be impressed.

Yes, he's a cracking orator, and if I had to change my voice, it'd be a toss-up between him and Alan Rickman. I like him, but is he any good, what are his big ideas and policies and how will he do things differently? Aside from talking to Iran, I'm yet to hear anything special from him, any new ideas which have been laid out in detail for me to understand. He's done a European tour, but what have we, and more importantly the American people, learned? Well, apart from the fact that he can draw a crowd, not much. And fair enough, maybe he's saving the big stuff (and even the medium and smallish stuff) for his American audience, but whether it's Europe, America or speaking to the world as "a citizen of the world", he's going to have to come up with some push for his pop stardom.

Those of you familiar with The West Wing will recognise the phrase 'it's the fortune cookie candidacy' and so far I'm seeing it as a bit like that.

"Mr Obama said co-operation with the UK was crucial over climate change, terrorism and the economy" (BBC), but you tell me any other US President or presidential wannabe or even just a basic official who has said anything to the contrary in the modern era? You tell me any other 'ally' country he's going to go to where he's not going to say exactly the same? And that was really it. Even back in America, or wherever he goes, I'm yet to hear much more than the basic bullet-point skeleton of a domestic policy, foreign policy or world-vision.

Hundreds and thousands may make an ice-cream look pretty, but it's the ice cream that must be good, and unfortunately, worryingly, the coolest candidate's gloss is beginning to melt.

Curran, Curran, Curran, Curran, Currans everywhere

Labour call a recount fearing a Curran mix-up.

People may have doubted me (and Mark McDonald at Granite City) when I said Labour had found a new excuse for losing but my smugness now knows no bounds. I called this as soon as I knew about it and pretty much everyone I spoke to said something along the lines of "don't be stupid".

Well, I ain't stupid, and not just cos my mum says so, but according to Labour, the voters of Glasgow East are obviously too stupid to read.

Me (and Mark McDonald) 1 (each)
Labour 0
Frances Curran + 254 accidental votes (or whatever Labour will undoubtedly claim)
Residents of Glasgow East -4