Sunday 21 February 2016

By George!

The row over George Galloway's involvement in Grassroots Out certainly proves one thing: that George Galloway is the UK politician who most accurately deserves that favourite BBC adjective for politicians it disapproves of: 'divisive'. 

Beside the walkout at the GO! launch itself, I don't think I've seen the pro-Leave commentariat 'below the line' at certain anti-EU sites quite so divided for a while. Even the commentariat at Raheem Kassam's Breitbart London were split asunder by his abrupt change of heart over the Galloway move.

Whatever the merits of getting a powerful orator like GG on board, making his involvement the dramatic crowning moment of the launch of a movement which aims to unify the Leave campaign but which results in anger and fresh divisions can't have been entirely a good thing for their campaign, can it?

And the 'establishment' are loving it.

Here's an exchange from this morning's paper review on BBC Breakfast between Naga Munchetty and Professor Jon Tonge of Liverpool University (which you may read elsewhere!):
Naga: We focus a lot on the divisions within parties. But we should also look at the alliances across parties, and there are some reeeaaally unlikely bed fellows: George Galloway and Nigel Farage!
Jon Tonge: Yeah, the ultimate unholy alliance in some ways. 
And here's an exchange from the mid-morning paper review on the BBC News Channel between Gavin Esler and Bronwyn Curtis from the Society of Business Economists:
Gavin: So who scares you most?
Bronwyn Curtis: Well, George Galloway probably!
          (General laughter)
And here's Janet Daley on this week's Dateline London:
It is true that this kind of charade with Farage and Galloway is seriously damaging to the image of the Leave campaign. People ask themselves when they vote 'What does this say about me?' and this could have a significant negative effect on the potential Leave vote.
And Andrew Marr and Nick Robinson were chuckling about them this morning on the Marr paper review, and then Andrew Marr really went to town with Nigel Farage over it later.



  1. Self inflicted wounds tend to be superficial. Let's hope so.

  2. I haven't watched Marr yet, will get to it later this evening. But embracing Galloway is an own goal, period. The only remotely reasonable reason I can think of is that Farage figured it would be taken as proof that he's not a racist and Leave isn't just about preventing Mohammedans with brown skin from entering Britain, as playing the Champion and Defender of All Muslims is what Galloway is all about these days when he's not getting an easy ride on the BBC about Labour or Scotland. I don't see it working unless it's spelled out explicitly for the media.

  3. Watching Marr now. Nick Robinson showed how out of touch he is when he said nobody except politicians and expert insiders like himself ever brings up the word 'sovereignty'. Wee Jimmie Krankie was at it again, threatening that Scotland would demand independence if the UK voted Out. Marr gave her a set-up question, and then added to her argument by pointing out that there would have to be a hard border between Scotland and England. Scaremongering.

    Sturgeon and the BBC better be careful how much they make of that threat, though, as it is a double-edged sword. Scots may very well see that as a good reason to Vote Out.

    Farage batted away everything Marr threw at him. I lost count of how many times Farage replied that whatever Marr said wasn't true, and backed it up most of the time. As for Galloway, I guess Farage is just resigned to using him to pander to Muslims. Couldn't they have found someone else?

    Marr was fairly tough on Cameron, to his credit. But he didn't call out Cameron on any of the lies, so deduct more points than earned. For example, Cameron twice acted as if being out of the Euro was part of his accomplishment. He also put forward a false scenario where the UK gets out, then after negotiating its way back into the trade and defense alliances, is ironically unable to do anything about reducing immigrant child benefits like he has done from within the EU. It was pretty brazen in its stupidity, and Marr let him carry on. Unless I missed it, he also failed to point out the possibility that the EU could reject everything anyway, and Cameron couldn't actually guarantee any of it.

    Variations on "safer" and "keep us safe" appeared more than any other talking point, except maybe "get things done", I think. Scaremongering is all he has, and he knows it. Marr didn't point that out, either.

  4. I think that the remainiacs need to start providing evidence to support their assertions. Show us how the EU has made us stronger, safer and better off. That's what the bbc should be doing but given they've taken the EU shilling; to the tune of 22 million pounds or so; it's no wonder they don't. In reality no evidence will be shown because there's none to show.

    1. Good point. All they can do is claim the status quo is great and that Cameron is in the process of reforming it, and abandon hope all ye who Brexit. They have to make it personal as well, to avoid the issues. Farage, Galloway, now Boris Johnson. No such snarking about cynical maneuvering for personal gain when they mention Corbyn or Teresa May siding with Remain.

  5. Galloway hit Coburn clean out of the ground on the Politics Show earlier.
    Do watch how he took her apart-poor thick Jo clearly needs a male guardian like Andrew Neil if she`s going to insist on knowing more about us than does George.
    Galloway is a nasty anti-Semitic Jew baiter at his worst...but on the EU he is correct,and calls it right-as he did up in Scotland 18 months back.
    And he is by far a better friend of the UK than anybody who takes the BBCs euros or rials.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.