I was intending to write a post in the near future about how well Willie Rennie was doing as Scottish Lib Dem leader. I may yet as he has raised some important points about devolved Scotland and the independence referendum while also being quietly effective at FMQ, marked improvement on Tavish Scott’s loud ineffectiveness. He is also shortlisted for being Holyrood’s Newcomer of the Year.
However, then I saw the photo below from the Scottish Lib Dems, my heart sank and thought it best to go negative on them once more before I go positive. Let me be clear, this photo wasn’t on a Lib Dem blogger’s website, it was (and still is for all I know) on the main Scottish Lib Dem Twitter feed and appears to be some sort of leaflet that may be doing the rounds:
Where to begin with how offensive the picture above is?
‘Blacking up’ the First Minister? The suggestion that Qatar is full of sand and camels and nothing else? Implying that an independent Scotland would take on all laws and rules that Qatar have? Painting the SNP as homophobic when they look set to lead the UK on gay rights legislation? Even the “Mr Salmond” is needlessly disrespectful.
It is a terrible statement that the Lib Dems are making, for barely any gain given the cack-handed, amateurish visuals that they have employed.
Qatar is a small oil-rich nation and Scotland is a small oil-rich nation, there is a comparison there that is a valid one to make and at least deserves being contested in good faith.
I don’t know if Willie Rennie personally sanctioned this attack advert above but, either way, he should sack the person(s) who put it together and/or released it online and then have a long hard think about what party he wants to lead and where he wants to place that party in the coming independence debate.
UPDATE: Thanks to Anndra Moireach in the comments, it has been pointed out that Willie Rennie put the ad up on his own Facebook profile. Willie was happy to debate with me on Twitter when I agreed with him about what a Yes-Yes result in the referendum means; time will tell whether he’ll be as keen to respond to my challenge that he should take the link off his page unless he can defend it…
UPDATE 2: It’s worth noting that the emir of Qatar seemed perfectly welcome by the Tory/Lib Dem coalition in a UK state visit this time last year, receiving “special favour” from the Queen. I wonder how Nick Clegg will be taking Willie Rennie’s line of attack…
UPDATE 3: The headline says it all: Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg meets Qatari Deputy Prime Minister
Update 4: From Willie Rennie’s Facebook page – “I apologise for the offence that has been clearly caused by our cartoon on the First Minister’s remarks in Qatar. Although I did not approve its publication I accept responsibility for it. It has been interpreted in ways that were not intended. It has now been withdrawn. I apologise.”
#1 by David Gunn on October 31, 2011 - 8:13 pm
Willie Rennie put it up on his Facebook page as well.
#2 by Anndra Moireach on October 31, 2011 - 8:14 pm
It’s ALSO on Willie Rennies FB page, and has been put up BY HIM!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Willie-Rennie/154822001250798
#3 by Douglas McLellan on October 31, 2011 - 8:17 pm
This thing angered me greatly when it arrived in my twitter stream. It’s a total shocker and frankly calls into question the ability of sons at Scot Lib Dems HQ. It’s so vexing that after a good week where we were leading the scrutiny of the details of the referendum the next week begins with this.
I look at my party membership card and wonder if it would just be better to leave them until after the referendum as these epically stupid ineffective arrogant and totally dire attacks on Salmond might have ended and our campaigning is more positive.
#4 by Jeff on October 31, 2011 - 8:21 pm
Well said Douglas. Any party can have a blip, which this may well be, but when the party leader himself puts the advert on his Facebook page, you do have to wonder what is coming down the line.
#5 by Duncan Hothersall (@dhothersall) on October 31, 2011 - 8:19 pm
It is an absolute shocker. Lib Dems with their heads in their hands all over Scotland.
That said I don’t think they’ve blacked him up, I think it’s just a really bad piece of cropping and pasting. And a really bad idea to try to do it, obviously.
Dearie me.
#6 by James on October 31, 2011 - 8:20 pm
I’m not getting why “Mr Salmond” is offensive. Also, cosying up to Qatar is a mistake. Other than that, I’m with you.
#7 by Jeff on October 31, 2011 - 8:31 pm
For me, it needlessly disrespects the office that the First Minister holds. Why not even just put ‘Salmond’? Why suggest the man is just any other Joe when he patently isn’t?
Not the biggest sin on the advert but still adding towards the poor effort of the entirety of it.
#8 by Malc on October 31, 2011 - 8:23 pm
I think that’s the most blatantly shameful political poster I’ve ever seen. It’s chronic.
James – I think there’s a tone attached to the “Mr Salmond” comment. Like you only use it when you are trying to say “with all due respect”. Which you only say when you are trying to disrespect someone.
#9 by James on October 31, 2011 - 11:02 pm
I’d be happy to stick to the truly egregious parts of this. There’s plenty to choose from after all.
#10 by Daniel J on October 31, 2011 - 8:48 pm
What’s more is their head of communications is defending it on twitter!
#11 by AliMiller on October 31, 2011 - 8:59 pm
Iain Gray’s “Brave New World” innuendo at FMQs was also a bit distasteful, almost suggesting that the SNP doesnt care about providing for the disabled. I am concerned about the SNP leadership becoming too headstrong, so I think the opposition parties do have a valid critisicm to pursue, but the manner in which they are doing it is completely pathetic and therefore will be somewhat innefective. Which is bad news for us all.
#12 by Ben Achie on October 31, 2011 - 9:06 pm
Well, it all comes down to the fact that the Lib-Dems have absolutely nothing positive to say. Furthermore, they really are what they have always loudly protested they are not!
Best to start again and sack the lot, including Willie Rennie. Come 2015 their only mainland MP will be Charlie Kennedy, and he’s a Social-Democrat (couldn’t say the same about Danny Alexander though!)
#13 by Nikostratos on October 31, 2011 - 9:26 pm
Jeff
‘and thought it best to go negative on them once more’
Bet you didn’t struggle with that one eh?
#14 by Jeff on October 31, 2011 - 9:32 pm
Not really, no.
What can I say, if they keep setting them up…
#15 by Gaz on October 31, 2011 - 9:41 pm
The only surprise here is that Jeff is surprised.
The touchy-feely facade the LibDems like to portray is a million miles away from their STANDARD by-election tactics. (Distorted photos are typical fare – just ask Richard Lochhead).
I’m not in the least surprised to see this style enter the mainstream of their discourse because, to be frank, this is where Willie Rennie’s ‘contributions’ have been taking them since the first time he opened his mouth in the Holyrood chamber as their leader.
While I agree that Tavish was pretty negative he usually had a substantive point. Rennie seldom does and, in my view, is even more negative than Tavish ever was and on top of that he has displayed appalling judgement in his tone on numerous occasions.
As someone who had the benefit of his representation while he was an MP, I expected so much more of him. I am bitterly, bitterly disappointed in the way he has gone abour his business as leader.
Wille – for pity’s sake – whoever is advising you, get rid of them pronto!!!
And just in passing, for Ben Achie, I’m not sure Charlie will even be standing next time because he and Alexander will be fighting over the same seat and I’m not sure the LibDems will allow a cabinet minister to be effectively deselected.
#16 by Barbarian on October 31, 2011 - 10:00 pm
The Lib Dems are probably the worst party for negativity and dirty tricks – anyone who has read Private Eye will see that.
They are justified in criticising Salmond for his links to Qatar, if you look at their human rights history, but they have gone about it in totally the wrong fashion. The picture looks awful. It looks like some ten year old has made up something on powerpoint. The three bullet points are absolute nonsense.
Gaz – re Charlie Kennedy, what’s the betting he sets up a splinter LIb Dem party and beats Alexander!
#17 by Gaz on October 31, 2011 - 10:19 pm
Not sure Charlie will be able to resist the call of Ermine…
He must surely be about as scunnered as anyone can get at the minute.
#18 by Malc on October 31, 2011 - 10:16 pm
Salmond’s comment was taken completely out of its original context. He was talking about shared experiences with regards energy – moving from oil to new sources. But that translates as being pro-monarchy, pro-death penalty and homophobic? That’s the most utterly bizarre thing I’ve ever head.
#19 by M G on October 31, 2011 - 10:32 pm
My heart well and truly sank when I saw this. On any of these blogs we all probably have our own leanings (and possibly won’t be won over ) but I really hoped there could/would be a grown up,lively debate regarding the future /referendum. How wrong can you be ?
I am so disappointed by the constant churlish,infantile rhetoric being put forward as ‘opposition’
I can only assume Mr Rennie has been so short sighted ,he has not considered,after the referendum ,whatever the outcome he. will forever be linked to this poster.
Pingback: Silly Willie and the Lib Dems in poster sandstorm | Tory Hoose
#20 by Eddie Truman on October 31, 2011 - 10:52 pm
Photoshop is a loaded gun waiting to go off in the hands of fools.
It’s grim on so many levels but the Arabification of Salmond is the tin lid on it.
Eegits.
#21 by DougtheDug on October 31, 2011 - 11:01 pm
Someone pointed out this poster to me on Willie Rennie’s FB page and to be honest I had a strong suspicion that his page had been hacked because I couldn’t believe that someone who purports to be a party leader in Scotland would put this up.
However I’ve just looked at the scotlibdems twitter feed and as mentioned above they are defending it.
Alex Salmond said, “As nations, we both have considerable expertise in oil and gas production, but as we look to the future and a low-carbon economy, we must increasingly develop new technologies. We discussed the remarkable similarities between our respective nations. Although both Scotland and Qatar have common strengths in the oil and gas sector, we are both seeking to develop our low-carbon energy industries.”, and made no parallels beyond energy and education in his statement.
I think this poster is simply a confirmation that the Liberal Democrats (Scotland) simply don’t have any arguments they can use against independence and that their only hope is negative fear mongering.
Even as the leader of four MSP’s Willie Rennie is out of his managerial depth. Maybe he should consider running a major drinking session in a brewery. I am confident that he would make a go of it.
#22 by setindarkness on October 31, 2011 - 11:22 pm
I am guessing that Nick Clegg wasn’t discussing gay rights, control of the monarchy and the death penalty when he met Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani
http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Nick+Clegg+Qatari+State+Visit+UK+5Ctj4VdCKJXl.jpg
There is an issue’s to be raised with Qatar but at what point in a political parties existance do you decide that that best way to do that is photoshopped image of Alex Salmond and a camel.
If the Scottish Lib Dems do have issues with Qatar, shouldn’t these be raised directly?
Which is worse, saying “there are similarities between small, oil rich countries with a potential for renewable energies” or using the important issues of gay rights and the state killings to have a go at the SNP ?
#23 by DougtheDug on October 31, 2011 - 11:28 pm
One of the ways to work out how just how juvenile this is is to imagine Alex Salmond, Ed Milliband, Nick Clegg or David Cameron putting a picture like this up on their facebook pages. (If they have them).
The idea that they’d put something like this up is not credible. It’s something which some juvenile cyberlib would put up. A cyberlib who’s not that clever with photoshop either.
But I forgot. Willie has an excuse as he is not the leader of a party like the others but it’s still bad even for someone in the second tier of management.
#24 by Barbarian on November 1, 2011 - 12:17 am
Some highbrow analysis here of their statements:
“Absolute monarchy” – refers to the outright majority of the SNP. The difference is that the people in Scotland were able to vote. They could have easily voted for the Lib Dems.
“Gay rights suppressed” – refers to the ongoing debate about legalising gay marriage. But gay rights are not suppressed, it’s just that most religions, while tolerant of gay rights, do not feel obliged to allow a marriage ceremony in their buildings, which is not an issue.
“Crimes against the state” – refers to the “cybernats” who use language that is unacceptable in a mature debate. However, the SG’s cabinet do not use such language and distance themselves from those who do.
Even without the Cartoon Network style graphics the whole thing is shambolic, and typical of the Lib Dems. The good thing is that they are soon to be extinct.
#25 by Grendelsson on November 1, 2011 - 1:01 am
While some SNP supporters can go beyond the pale sometimes, it is a tiny proportion.
This comes from the centre, just as Tom Harris uses his “admin” persona to insult the FM
But if you want to see vitriol, read any thread on the Guardian’s Comment is Free on Scotland, and watch the insults head northwards
I would hope we can do better than that, and respect our political opponents. Unless they are actively evil, pointing no fingers at the swines attacking the NHS and welfare
that means we should also reprimand our own when they say or do the wrong things
#26 by Ross Colquhoun on November 1, 2011 - 12:38 am
It will be interesting to see if this disgrace enters the mainstream press.
#27 by Doug Daniel on November 1, 2011 - 9:01 am
Surprisingly so – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-15534156
“Mr Rennie told BBC Scotland’s Good Morning Scotland programme that the cartoon was published by staff onto the Scottish party’s Twitter and Facebook accounts while he was on a day off.”
On a day off, yes, of course.
#28 by Doug Daniel on November 1, 2011 - 12:42 am
Even ignoring the offensiveness of the picture, where the hell does Rennie get the idea for that third bullet point? Death penalty?
Absolutely shameful. If this is what the least ultra-Unionist party has to resort to in order to beat independence, then I don’t look forward to seeing what the rest come up with. Coupled with Ian Davidson seemingly being let off the hook completely for his threat to Eilidh Whiteford and Iain Gray making spurious allegations at the weekend, it seems we’re in for an ugly few years until the referendum.
#29 by rullko on November 2, 2011 - 2:40 am
Least ultra-unionist? The Lib Dems are surely the most anti-independence party, at least among their voter base.
#30 by Brian Nicholson on November 1, 2011 - 12:51 am
It is time for all reasonable Scots who are still LibDem members to leave this embarrassment of a party and join another or possibly do as some Tories suggest, form a new Scottish party.
There are many who would be comfortable in the SNP or in the GREENS if they could set aside their fears over independence and join those committed to an aspirational Scotland.
The first to move should be one of the remaining 4 in the Parliament.
#31 by Aidan Skinner on November 1, 2011 - 12:51 am
Whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttttttttt?
#32 by Anonymous on November 1, 2011 - 12:55 am
Not to mention Brian Monteith’s absurd article in The Scotsman today. The new Unionist line seems to be to try to insinuate that the SNP have what they might politely describe as anti-democratic impulses. In a sense it’s no surprise that its Willie Rennie who ended up in this situaton, he’s been making persistent asides about the supposedly sinister nature of nationalism since he became leader by default. Needless to say, what might politely be described as his intellectual limitations have led to him being cruelly exposed very quickly.
#33 by ianbeag on November 1, 2011 - 12:59 am
The comments here confirm the revulsion felt by Lib Dem supporters and activists in respect of Wee Wullie’s latest blunder. Has the party learnt nothing from the negativity of Labour before the May election and how it undermined any remaining credibility they had in the eyes of the electorate. With little credibility left at any level this shocking attack on Alex Salmond surely confirms the dearth of argument and talent now residing within the rump of a once great party – I wonder how Jo Grimmond would have responded to this
#34 by Mor on November 1, 2011 - 12:59 am
Who designed this???? Did a Lib Dem staffer actually come up with this?
#35 by John Böttcher on November 1, 2011 - 1:28 am
Oh mercy.
As Salmond observed at the Inverness conference Willie Rennie is a leader looking for a party.
And if that odious publicity is representative of the mentality of the Liberal Democrats (neither liberal nor democratic) he wants to gather, then the party must surely be in its death throws.
Shameful.
Regards,
JB
#36 by Subrosa on November 1, 2011 - 2:54 am
Disgraceful for Mr Rennie to stoop so low. I had thought he may inject a little more gravitas into the libdems but this only enhances the maturity of his predecessors.
Sadly it’s not even amusing if it was supposed to be satire.
#37 by Zoe Smith on November 1, 2011 - 6:15 am
Rennie’s apology on twitter this morning (6.09am, for those of you who aren’t nocturnal and may have missed it)
3 tweets-
“I apologise for the offence that has clearly been caused by our cartoon on the First Minister’s remarks in Qatar…”
“Cartoon continued: Although I did not approve its publication I accept responsibility for it”
“Cartoon continued: It has been interpreted in ways that were not intended. It has now been withdrawn. I apologise.”
So basically if you found it deeply offensive it was your own fault for misinterpreting it is Mr Rennie’s stance.
I’m not sure there was a “wrong” way to interpret the blacking-up of the FM, the spurious claims that an independent Scotland would become institutionally homophobic and re-introduce the death penalty.
I didn’t misinterpret the “cartoon” at all, I think I understood it completely, it speaks volumes about the level of “campaigning” we can expect from the Lib-Dems. Clearly actual politics is beyond their reach.
#38 by DougtheDug on November 1, 2011 - 8:11 am
This what he says on his Facebook page.
Willie Rennie
I apologise for the offence that has been clearly caused by our cartoon on the First Minister’s remarks in Qatar. Although I did not approve its publication I accept responsibility for it. It has been interpreted in ways that were not intended. It has now been withdrawn. I apologise.
So does that mean:
1. That people are sticking things up on his Facebook pages without his knowledge? and,
2. Why is is still up in his photos if it has been withdrawn? It’s still in the album, “Wall photos” at 08:00 this morning.
If this cartoon had been on the other foot and appeared on a nationalist blog having a go at Willie Rennie the howls of “cybernattery” would have been long and loud.
#39 by Zoe Smith on November 1, 2011 - 8:42 am
Again it’s the “misinterpretation” thing, he told me this morning on twitter he had accepted responsibility- I asked what for exactly- he’s yet to reply.
He needs to get someone more au fait with Facebook to pretend to be him.
#40 by DougtheDug on November 1, 2011 - 9:18 am
It’s not the apology of a statesman who understands why he has to apologise, it’s the apology of someone who’s trying to wriggle out of responsibility for the offence and someone who doesn’t actually understand why they have to apologise.
“Although I did not approve its publication I accept responsibility for it” = It wisnae me.
“It has been interpreted in ways that were not intended” = It’s your fault for not finding it funny.
If he’d come straight out and said something like:
“The offensive cartoon was published on my Facebook page without my prior approval. I unreservedly apologise for the content of the cartoon and for failing to ensure that offensive content was not placed on my Facebook pages and it has been removed.”
Then he’d at least come out of it looking like a statesman rather than a shifty little cyberlib.
#41 by Indy on November 1, 2011 - 11:58 am
I actually feel a bit sorry for Willie Rennie because I don’t believe he could possibly have agreed to that poster and he must be mortified especially as it has overshadowed what they wanted to be the main Lib Dem news story of the day.
Although I think saying that it has been misinterpreted is a bit rich cos I don’t see how it could be!
#42 by Ken on November 1, 2011 - 9:20 am
“That people are sticking things up on his Facebook pages without his knowledge? ”
Are you one of those people who people who thinks it’s actually Obama who run his own Facebook page….?
“If this cartoon had been on the other foot and appeared on a nationalist blog having a go at Willie Rennie the howls of “cybernattery†would have been long and loud.”
Nah, I think (and rightly so) they’d be decrying what a terrible, terrible job it was wondering where the skill levels of the staff had gone. Politics is a dirty business, but it’s embarrassing when it looks like an intern slapped it together with only basic graphic design or PS skills. That’s why I’d be embarrassed. Someone in their Comms / Press department is going to have a boot up them because of this.
#43 by DougtheDug on November 1, 2011 - 11:17 am
What? So not only does Pres. Obama have a Facebook page he doesn’t write it. My dreams of him as the saviour of the Western World lie in tatters.
Willie Rennie as the Leader of the Scottish section of the Lib-Dems has a Facebook page with his name all over it and he’s obviously got no mechanisms or control over what his interns, staff or family stick up there. If he can’t run a Facebook page then he shouldn’t criticise Alex Salmond for the way he runs a Government.
I take it that you don’t find the cartoon either offensive or juvenile but simply badly done and if the artwork was better it there would be no offense at all.
#44 by Ken on November 1, 2011 - 12:37 pm
I’m sure he does have ‘mechanisms’ – but that still doesn’t mean people don’t access and ghost post on politicians’ sites, twitter feeds, and social media sites. I’m not excusing this by way – just pointing out that’s a weak point to pick on out of the myriad of ones to seize on. [If a politician is in control, the other obvious critique is “oh well, you should spend less time on silly internet sites and more time trying to lead/govern/be elected/pay attention to real problems”.]
I find it juvenile, intellectually insulting, politically shortsighted and insular, negative, distasteful, bad on the eyes, graphically stupid, badly thought out and executed. But offensive? Not really – it’s so far in the realm of being too bloody awful to be offensive in my mind.
#45 by Indy on November 1, 2011 - 7:07 am
Somebody has clearly made a serious misjudgement putting out that cartoon.
I actually think it is fair enough to question Alex visiting the Middle East. I don’t think there is anything wrong with it myself but it is fair enough if people want to raise questions about it.
But it’s a silly cartoon. Apart from anything else it doesn’t make sense in terms of what it suggests. And I don’t want to use the R word but it is verging on it. You can raise human rights issues without stereotyping an entire people.
A bad misjudgement but clearly Willie Rennie has now realised that and has apologised.
#46 by Erchie on November 1, 2011 - 8:46 am
If I were a paranoid person, I would wonder why we had this, the Brian Menteith article and The @twodoctors tweet saying that the SNP are against abolition of the Monarchy all on the same day.
Since @twodoctors is a media advisor for the Green MSPs, as well as an active person here, I assume anything posted is not too detached from Green thought.
Except that’s not what the SNP think though is it. There are pro/anti/Dinna cares in the SNP on that issue, mostly anti amongst the ctivists
What they do have is the notion that the people of Scotland decide that issue. It’s a fairly well reported notion, I feel certain Jamrs should be aware of it. I note a lot of LibDems seized on it for RTing
So paranoid me would see this as part of a concerted effort to put the SNP on the defensive
I actually think its a coincidence, but each shows negativity, a negativity that actually requires selective editing, ignoring publicly available information and even downright nastiness that politics is in danger of sliding yet further down.
The ad would not be allowed on TV or a newspaper, I’d hope an interviewer would have challenged James’s assertion if he had made it in an interview
Only it’s only the “CyberNats” who are nasty apparently
#47 by James on November 1, 2011 - 12:05 pm
If you think there’s a conspiracy between me, the Lib Dems and Brian Monteith, of all people, then I’m afraid you may already be properly paranoid. And if you don’t see how Salmond’s ridden roughshod over SNP policy on the monarchy, I direct you again to Kate’s blogpost.
This is the sort of ad hominem comment we normally block, by the way, but I’m in a good mood and preferred on this occasion to give you enough rope.
#48 by Erchie on November 1, 2011 - 12:59 pm
You notice I actually separated my paranoia from what I actually thought, that this is a coincidence, though Lords Forysth, Strathclyde and McCormack aren’t helping any
Kate hasn’t provided any information save from a reference to a Kenny Farquaharson article. You click the link, that article is not found
Elsewhere I can find Alan Cochrane fulminating on the same
With all due respect, at the risk of seeming to go down the ad hominem route, neither is seen as the biggest fan of the SNP or of the FM.
So. before I’ll accept that the policy has changed from “Giving the Scottish People a vote after Independence” I think I’d need something more documentary
I reiterate, I think it’s a coincidence, but I do think the volume of vitriol is going to go up
#49 by Indy on November 1, 2011 - 1:32 pm
And I would direct you to my reply to Kate that the wording on the monarchy was agreed when Talking Independence was published in 2001/2002. Can’t remember the exact year but it’s nearly a decade ago anyway!
There is widespread agreement within the SNP that the monarchy as an issue could only serve as a distraction from the debate around independence. There may be people who support indepedence like you and possibly Kate who think it is central but that is not majority opinion in the SNP and no-one has really attempted to bring the matter back to National Council or Conference. It would be an easy enough thing to do if half a dozen or so branches put a resolution to SOAC but they haven’t.
Independence ain’t going to be won or lost on the issue of the monarchy because whether or not we have a monarch or president makes practically no difference to peoples lives.
It;s a bit like that great tweet the other day about changing the Act of Succession meaning that the government was finally engaging with issues that really matter to people living in the 17th century.
#50 by Ben on November 1, 2011 - 9:26 am
Lib Dems have form for dodgy racist publications of course. When Derek Beackon won the Tower Hamlets council by-election in 1993, for the BNP, Lib Dems were exposed as having circulated racist literature in a truly pathetic attempt to capitalise on what they perceived as a racist white working class vote.
I’ve hated the Lib Dems viscerally ever since. There is absolutely nothing they will not say or do to try and con votes out of folk, no lie they won’t tell, no bandwagon they won’t try and leap on as it speeds past, no depth which they will not plumb in a little yellow midget submarine.
It should be stated, in fairness that the party members in Tower Hamlets responsible for the racist leaflets were booted by Ashdown, if I recall correctly. I wonder if anyone at Lib Dem HQ in Scotland will be walking the plank for this catastrophic rag-week blunder? They certainly should be. Mind you, Willie Rennie seems to be doing a good enough job of embarrassing himself, without needing any help.
#51 by Mor on November 1, 2011 - 4:59 pm
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=215273991872265&set=pu.154822001250798&type=1&theater
This is another one they did earlier.
#52 by James on November 1, 2011 - 5:04 pm
Hilarious! Same handiwork, clearly.
#53 by Allan on November 1, 2011 - 7:11 pm
????
As Barbarian point’s out, there is a message to this flyer… somewhere… in among the badly worded points, the over saturated FM and the use of bad stereotypes not seen since… well this morning’s Daily Fail.
The leaflet makes good points – Salmonds closeness to a Middle Eastern dictatorship, possable issues surounding Salmond’s policy on our own Monarchy. These are drowned out by another example of the sneering arrogant attitude taken by the pro-Union parties.