Campbell challenges Dacre to debate

[amateur51]

So you're not totally ignorant and you actually believe in all that 'temptation' mumbo-jumbo. Flossie ... ? <thumbs-up>

Nurse! He's out of bed again!

[MrGongGong]

Nurse! He's out of bed again!

and he's got his pal with him ........

[Mr Pee]

Nurse! He's out of bed again!

You've used that line before, and it wasn't even funny the first time.

[amateur51]

An interesting piece in today's Guardian about the ramifications of Dacre-gate ...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/05/daily-mail-battle-labour-lord-rothermere

[Mr Pee]

An interesting piece in today's Guardian about the ramifications of Dacre-gate ...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...ord-rothermere

Dacre-gate......

[amateur51]

Dacre-gate......

Dacre-gate ... strange echo from the inside of Mr Pee's head

[Richard Barrett]

the ramifications of Dacre-gate...

On Mail Online one [Mail reader] wrote: "I seriously can't believe the DM still hasn't learned its lesson. You have single-handedly raised the public profile of Ed Miliband, trashed the Tory party conference and shown this paper to be a nasty vindictive gutter rag."

It's almost enough to make one believe in an occasionally beneficent deity, isn't it.

[amateur51]

On Mail Online one [Mail reader] wrote: "I seriously can't believe the DM still hasn't learned its lesson. You have single-handedly raised the public profile of Ed Miliband, trashed the Tory party conference and shown this paper to be a nasty vindictive gutter rag."

It's almost enough to make one believe in an occasionally beneficent deity, isn't it.

Steady now ;biggrin:

[scottycelt]

The Tory Party Conference was so inept and excruciatingly awful that the Daily Mail undoubtedly did the Tories a big favour by diverting attention from it.

As for Miliband, he has often brought his deceased dad into speeches as some sort of personal inspiration, so it's a bit rich for him to complain when a tabloid rag jumps at the chance to rubbish his memory, however distasteful that may seem to most of us.

Miliband and the Daily Mail probably deserve each other

[Richard Barrett]

Steady now

I don't know what came over me.

I don't really see what's remotely comparable about Ed Miliband citing his father as an inspiration and the Daily Mail publishing poisonous lies (twice!) about him. Not that I am a Miliband supporter by any means. But the Daily Mail is horrible bigoted trash (I know because my parents took it and my mother still does, and I took a good look at it when I visited her last week) and does its best to stifle informed democratic debate, replacing it with muckraking and smear tactics which (see above) not even its own readers think is reasonable.

[amateur51]

The Tory Party Conference was so inept and excruciatingly awful that the Daily Mail undoubtedly did the Tories a big favour by diverting attention from it.

A lot of people thought that the Tory party conference was a personal triumph for Dave because nobody mentioned E*r*p*, so you're a bit way off the mark there.

Richard Barrett's message 40 says all I would have wanted to but much more concisely :smiley:

[Mr Pee]

I don't know what came over me.

I don't really see what's remotely comparable about Ed Miliband citing his father as an inspiration and the Daily Mail publishing poisonous lies (twice!) about him. Not that I am a Miliband supporter by any means. But the Daily Mail is horrible bigoted trash (I know because my parents took it and my mother still does, and I took a good look at it when I visited her last week) and does its best to stifle informed democratic debate, replacing it with muckraking and smear tactics which (see above) not even its own readers think is reasonable.

Well, one reader thought it unreasonable (see above.)

None of which makes a difference to that fact that the Mail is the second most read newspaper in the UK. Which indicates yet again the vast gulf between the leftie fantasy land inhabited by so many in these forums and the real world in which most people have to live.

And as SC pointed out, it really is a bit rich for Millibland to drag his Dad into the public eye and then complain when a newspaper takes a rather closer look at him. As someone who aspires to be Prime Minister, I think his family background and influences are an area that need close examination.

[Richard Barrett]

Well, one reader thought it unreasonable

I quote the Sunday Times: "Our YouGov poll today shows 72% of the public think the newspaper's description of Ralph Miliband as "the man who hated Britain" was unacceptable and 69% believe the Mail should apologise. A majority of Mail readers, 57%, think it should apologise for its headline." (my emphasis)

The objection, of course, isn't to the Daily Mail "taking a closer look" at Ralph Miliband but to plastering lies about him - "the man who hated Britain" - over its pages, which, to use your words, is "a bit rich" coming from a paper which supported Oswald Mosley in the 1930s. But perhaps you would have too.

[Mr Pee]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100240034/mehdi-hasan-the-daily-mail-ralph-miliband-and-the-scary-moral-hypocrisy-of-the-left/

<Thumbs up>

He must have been reading this forum.....

[Richard Barrett]

He must have been reading this forum....

No, he just has the same blinkered attitude as some of its contributors, and directs his tedious ire at the same straw men. "The Left is outraged at this personal attack on a politician (shocker: apparently if you go into politics reporters will show interest in your private life)." No, people (and not just "the Left") are outraged that a paper publishes bare-faced ideologically-motivated lies about a relative of a politician; a paper, what's more, with some very nasty skeletons in its closet.