.
So long, and thanks for all the seats - Grin with cat attached
Previous Entry Next Entry
So long, and thanks for all the seats Jan. 8th, 2006 12:17 am
We lost a fine, strong leader in Kennedy today; his parting email to the party reflected the dignity, political drive and consideration that he continues to stand for. I am disappointed that he had to go like this and feel that it reflects badly on many of his colleagues, and will consider my vote in the upcoming leadership election (that being my understanding of the Lib Dem's internal system) as probably the most important yet cast; one that will help determine whether our democracy becomes a truly multi-party system or reverts to its previous tennis-match status.

But for now, Charles, thank you for your remarkable and ongoing contribution to both party and country.

(PS: and particular thanks for Not Being George Galloway)

From: sashajwolf
Date: January 8th, 2006 - 09:27 am (Link)
I think I'm going to have to write to Lembit Opik and urge him to stand, because if the choice is going to be Menzies Campbell, Simon Hughes and Mark Oaten or some sub-set thereof, I'm going to be looking for the RON option as my first choice. I really don't want to vote for anyone who's in any way contributed to Kennedy's going.
From: reddragdiva
Date: January 8th, 2006 - 10:11 am (Link)
Lembit is a great guy and if he were my MP I'd be most pleased to vote for him. However, his chances of becoming leader at this point are about those of Boris Johnson leading the Tories. Check the voting record — despite being a vocal fan of Kennedy, Öpik counts as a LibDem rebel, voting against them about 2/3 of the time; he concentrates very much on being a constituency MP, which is how he gets 60% of the vote (and gets away with voting against them 2/3 of the time).
From: sashajwolf
Date: January 9th, 2006 - 12:09 pm (Link)
He seems to be putting his weight behind Mark Oaten now, which is irritating given that Oaten seems to have been guilty of a lot of the behaviour he was ranting against just the other day in getting rid of Kennedy. I really want to be able to vote for someone who has either supported Kennedy or at least remained neutral.
From: valkyriekaren
Date: January 8th, 2006 - 02:15 pm (Link)
I don't know whether Lembit would want to take it on at the moment - he had a rough year last year, with his brother dying and all.
From: sashajwolf
Date: January 9th, 2006 - 12:09 pm (Link)
*nod* That did occur to me when I was discussing it with djm4 the other day.
From: thecesspit
Date: January 8th, 2006 - 11:35 am (Link)
I think two mistakes have been made:

1) Someone not giving an honest run off against Charles K.
2) Charles K not resigning in the first place for health reasons (sorry, but I don't think politically and personally, an active alcoholic, with or without medical help should be trying to get elected as the leader of the country, Churchill not withstanding).

I have a lot of respect from Charles and his stance. He can now hand the banner on to someone to run without. I suspect it won't be Simon Hughes, but Menzies Campbell.

Interesting times, as the party can use this as an oppurtunity to really sell itself and what it stands for, just as the Tories has with their election run off.

(no subject) - (Anonymous)
From: fellcat
Date: January 9th, 2006 - 01:01 am (Link)
IAWTC.

TBH, I'm not even so convinced that he had to resign. OK, so when he wasn't dry it did affect his leadership, but if he's dry now then surely he should be OK to continue?
From: softfruit
Date: January 9th, 2006 - 09:03 am (Link)
Staying dry will probably be easier for Charles without the stress of leading the party -- and having made it public, now he'd be being watched every move by the media for an opportunity to make the story his drinking rather than an alternative to the NooBluLabCon set. We know he's been off and on the wagon in the last 18 months at least.

It also undermines the credibility of the other LD spokespersons; if we know you may be / have been lying to us about Charles' alcoholism, are you also being economical with the truth about this or that policy proposal.