Nigel “Thirsty” Farage, flush from his perceived success in the two debates with Nick Clegg, then submitted himself to more questioning on Friday: “Ukip leader Nigel Farage will be doing a live phone-in for Telegraph readers at 1pm tomorrow (Friday). You can watch Phone Farage live on our website” told Damian Thompson. His pal Tim Stanley would moderate.
I can't smear anyone, cos I'm on telly!
This was open to anyone who wanted to take part: no-one was barred because of their political affiliation or status within any party. But one caller attracted an unhealthy amount of attention from the odious flannelled fool Henry Cole, tame gofer to the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines at the Guido Fawkes blog, and unpleasantly hostile attention at that. The reason may not have been immediately obvious.
Cole took exception to the appearance in the roster of callers of one Linda Jack, and immediately went in to smear mode: “So [Linda Jack], a Lib Dem candidate at the last election is calling in to Farage phone in. Claiming to be mere ‘voter’” he asserted. One wonders if his knowledge of losing Lib Dem candidates is universal. One then concludes that it is not, and something smells distinctly off.
Ms Jack, meanwhile, corrected the buffoon Cole: “I don’t determine how I am introduced! And does being a candidate preclude you from an opinion?” to which the answer is that, no it doesn’t. But what she did not know was that the flannelled fool was performing one of his favourite smear tactics: the behind the back manoeuvre, designed to damage without letting the target know what’s going on.
Addressing moderator Tim Stanley directly – and tagging Farage into the bargain, in case he was watching his feed – he prompted “You should ask Linda Jack how she is an ‘ordinary worker’ when she is a failed Lib Dem PPC”, (see HERE a similar smear from February 2012) without engaging brain. Someone who has not been elected, unless they are unemployed, will by definition be an “ordinary worker”.
In the meantime, Ms Jack responded to Cole’s suggestion that “you should declare your interest rather than pretending to be an ‘ordinary worker’” by once again correcting his smear: “I did declare my interest as a Lib Dem – which I was introduced as”. So it seems Cole has been dishonest as well as downright nasty. Why would he go after someone he doesn’t know in this way?
Ah well. There is a perfectly straightforward explanation: Linda Jack’s candidacy in 2010 was in Mid Bedfordshire against (yes, it’s her again) Nadine Dorries. And Cole is Nadine’s little helper. So in he jumps to smear anyone who has had the audacity to challenge his bestest friend among Tory MPs. Except that this time he got rumbled. Linda Jack did nothing improper – unlike him.
But the flannelled fool will score some brownie points, so that’s all right, then.
But she didn't declare her interest as a *candidate* so Cole is correct.
She isnt a candidate. SHe is a former candidate, and is now presumably doing a different job?
Linda Jack is a foster carer at present.
Linda jack is chair of Liberal Left and is a member of the Lib Dems Federal Policy Committee. To say she is "just a voter" is a bit disingenuous. She is a foster carer but that certainly isn't her "main career." She has fingers in several pies.
I actually voted for Linda Jack at the last election but I do think she hasn't been transparent here.
Post a Comment