DAVE? WHAT ARE YOU DOING DAVE?

Dave on the Today programme was unnerving. I listened on the website, rewound and listened again. I heard the excruciating moment where he 'fessed up to being as childish as everyone else at PMQs. Buttock clenching it was too.

I listened to his commitment to, er, try to improve the finances if he won an election, without making any promises - apparently the Tories have a 'philosophical' belief in tax cutting. I have a philosophical belief in my prowess as a lover but I imagine this might not quite marry with the reality experienced by the 'significantly fewer than 30' women involved. (Ahem, I'm far better...No, really.)

I heard his commitment to, er, do nothing much with tax credits which he even championed as something the Tories invented. I listened and listened and listened but nothing came out of the interview.

Nothing at all.

On reflection listening to Dave is kind of like Boris without the humour. He's a nice guy, he clearly cares about his party and his job and I can personally vouch for the fact that he is a good constituency MP. Unfortunately, there seems to be nothing beyond this nice, aspirational persona, which may not be an ideal basis for wanting to run the country.

Two words leap to mind: John Major. Imagine if he'd been got at by Trinny and Susannah...

WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE POLITICAL WORLD?

Nickersoff told John Humphrys that he was happy with our place in the polls yesterday and now it seems we’re up to 20% according to the latst one published in the Independent. With Labour on a disastrous - but for us, tantalising - 26% it would be nice for some of the commentators to raise themselves off their haunches, set aside their tired two party paradigms, take a long look at the information in front of them and surmise that we might actually matter after alll.

This is especially relevant given the fluid nature of the political system at the moment.

When he first got elected as leader I put £1 on Dave never fighting an election as leader and I still think that’s a good bet. I can’t quite bring myself to write off Gordon Brown as he is clearly a very able politician. It seems to me that his problem is a lack of vision, not a lack of ability. If I were a Labour MP clinging on the the cliff face my survival strategy would be to get behind Brown and sit it out, to allow the Tories to keep coming in with their attacks. The fact that the Tories lack any substance at all behind their cheap jibes will tell eventually. George Osbourne against Vince Cable? It’s like a rabbit against a lion, almost too cruel to watch.

Here’s a prediction – hey, I know no more or less than any of the ‘experts’ , so why not? I reckon the Liar will win the London Mayoralty on Thursday relatively comfortably. I also reckon Boris will crash and burn, just like the Tory candidate did in Ealing last year. As to Brian Paddick, it seems he could pick up a lot of support at the last minute as people are faced with the other two uninspiring prospects. I’d love to think that would propel him to a second place and who knows?

You’re not a proper Lib Dem if you’re not an optimist!

A NEW SLOGAN FOR LONDON

‘Cripes, it’s rather jolly really.’

What a prospect for London on Friday if Boris Johnson is elected. Either he will be like the young king, appearing in ceremony but being kept as far from power as possible by a Tory machine petrified of people cottoning on to the fact that they haven’t changed a bit, regardless of what Dave tries to tell us.

Or it’ll be buns for breakfast, routemaster buses for all, crombie hats for the men and curlers for the – working class – women as they belt out cockerny songs while hanging out the washing, surrounded by jolly urchins playing. I imagine that's the kind of London Boris has in his febrile and devastatingly old-fashioned mind.

Having watched the campaign and seem him stumble, trip and eventually fall, it is so obvious that there is no secret Boris, there is no mystique. He is a bumbling upper class twit (polite phrase) who has built up an image as such and who doesn’t even live in London. He speaks proper (sic.) so people listen to him. He spouts nonsense so people laugh at him. He looks like the outcome of a secret liaison between Shrek and a labrador. He is no more qualified to run London than I am to fly the space shuttle.

On Friday he could be mayor of London. I pray to the Gods that Londoners think really, really hard about this.

AMERICA THE BELLIGERENT

Hillary Clinton has said: “If I'm the president, we will attack Iran... we would be able to totally obliterate them. That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that, because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,"

I actually quite liked Hillary Clinton right up to this point but you have to stare in awe at supposedly intelligent Americans when they come out with such unbridled, ignorant cojones.

I know she is addressing an American audience – God sends Americans to war so they can learn geography, it is said – but these comments are astonishingly, mind-bogglingly dim.

Read them and weep - real tears as we stare once more into the abyss our closest allies are digging for us all...

REASONS TO SUPPORT BRIAN PADDICK, No.1

Because he said this in the Times: “I just don’t trust Ken Livingstone”.

This will probably be leapt upon as evidence that Paddick actually supports Boris ‘Cripes!’ Johnston but it should really be seen as a straight condemnation of the spineless, conniving, nasty London mayor by someone even his critics seem to have a lot of respect for.

Paddick continues to be a revelation. Should we dare to dream?

MR GRIMSDALE, THE GLOBAL FINANCE SYSTEM APPEARS TO BE STEAMING...

If, like me, you struggle with financial information and find the whole current money markets business impossible to decipher, the attached link is an astonishingly simple explanation of why the Bank of England lent banks £50m yesterday. I actually came away enlightened, so full credit to Hamish McRae of the Independent

http://tinyurl.com/6cxjp2 (I tried to make this 'live' but my computer skills clearly aren't up to it...)

I am increasingly coming to the view that the whole world of finance is unnecessarily jargon-laden and that there is little behind the whole system beyond a massive steaming pile of bulls*** which financiers around the globe add to in spadefuls every day...

Why British TV is sooooo much better than American TV

In a link from another article I have just found out that Colm Meaney, the excellent Irish actor who played Jimmy Rabbit’s Elvis loving dad in The Commitments - still the most entertaining film I have ever seen - as well as appearing in Star Trek, is to play the Gene Hunt role in the US version of Life on Mars. The trouble is, he’s just too nice. I suppose the Americans would have a collective coronary if the peerless Philip Glenister appeared on their screens in his magnificant portrayal of the most unreconstructed copper since Dirty Harry.

Of course the cries of derision will come back and I will be urged to watch the West Wing or the Sopranos to see just how good American TV is for the characterisation and the scripts. But that’s the problem. Life on Mars had a rough edge which US dramas just don’t come near. Middle class, muti-ethnic angst, - with lots of shouty sceens and jumpy camera shots, natch - may sit well with Americans’ view of themselves but it is about as true to life as the Magic Roundabout. By contrast, Life on Mars showed how dismal and bigoted life was in the 1970s and how thoroughly entertaining it was as a result. It was essentially a 16 week prayer of thanks that we all survived it and it was true.

There is still nothing to come close to the best of British drama, which Life on Mars most resoundingly was. It was a brilliant idea, thoroughly entertaining, gripping and it had the supreme ‘bastard’, the Gene Genie, to rock us all in our armchairs.

Gene Hunt vs. Tony Soprano? No contest. “Raymondo, hold my coat while I deal with this pasta eating poof!”

[NB: please don’t send any comments about any perceived offence to any groups. None are intended, this is meant to be light hearted tribute, not serious political comment.]

Okay, so it's a cliche but...

How many Tories does it take to change a lightbulb?

The Tories have no proposals for changing the lightbulb but they will hold the government to account over the current crisis with the lightbulb and in particular Gordon Brown’s failure during his 11 years as chancellor to change the lightbulb, instead waiting for it to fail before he did anything.

UP STEPS THE PADSTER!

The Newsnight London Mayoral debate has not long ended and Brian Paddick was a revelation. I doubt I was alone in having some concerns over the strait-laced copper holding his own against slimy Ken and Bumbling Boris, both of whom are consumate politicians whatever their myriad faults.

Paddick started falteringly with his brief presentation, which he fluffed a bit but he made up for it in spades with his bravura performance once the real debate began - Paddick made the first interjection of the discussion and it was a good one. Paxman even seemed to defer to him to some extent, perhaps welcoming the serious answers from Paddick which the oafish and laughably dithering Boris couldn't give.

Boris had clearly been primed to bluster for England but he was so easily thrown off by the others that he fulfilled his normal role of clown with aplomb. The guy should leave politics and head for the stage; he is a natural.

Credit must go to the Liar for his confidence and honesty - which makes a change. He also said without hesitation that he would give his second preference to Paddick, if he hadn't already sold it dearly to the Greens.

It would be wrong to say that Paddick won the contest - I don't think any of them did - but he showed confidence, knowledge and conviction and that kind of display might start to tell.

More public appearances with the others please and full marks to Paddick's team.

EVAN DAVIES, THE THINKING PERSON’S RADIO 4 PRESENTER

Due to managerial intrigues I have been getting to work earlier and thus I have been able to sample the delights of the Today programme once more, something I gave up as being bad for my health, since I frequently found myself in traffic screaming at the radio to try to communicate to Dim Naughtie that he was a complete idiot who couldn’t shut up if his life depended on it, or simply ridiculing John Humphrys’ attempts to be a bastard so that he could fit in with the gang, while committing the same sin they all do of simply not listening to the people they are talking to.

Well, imagine the delight of hearing new boy Evan Davies, who is clever, courteous and considered in his interviews but who nevertheless has infinitely more intelligence than Dim and Humphreys and whose interviewees have a healthy respect for him in consequence.

To say he is a breath of fresh air is something of an understatement. Rather, to continue the theme, it is like stepping from an uncleaned outback latrine into a fragrant bathroom recently vacated by a freshly scrubbed and perfumed Billie Piper.

‘EXPERIENCE’, THE LAST REFUGE OF A SCOUNDREL?

Liar Livingstone is quoted in the Independent thus:

‘Livingstone is seldom far away from a dig at his Conservative opponent, who proved such an unexpected challenge. "Where else except Britain," he demands in his famous Lambeth whine, "do people get to run something as big as London without any administrative experience? Go to Germany, people have to work their way up through city councils and beyond. Tony Blair spent his first term as PM learning how to do the job. That's a luxury you don't have in this city." ‘

Which pretty much reads as him saying (nasal whines at the ready please) that no one can run London except this nasty piece of work who has spent over three decades fighting his way up through the corridors of power in London. I believe his mate Fidel from Havana used to believe similar ideas as well.

Or, in othEr words, that's socialism, mate...

John Walsh in the Independent says that the Liar is damaged recent scandals and his insistence on trying to tell people how to live their lives and that Boris Johnson is hopelessly out of his depth. He dismisses Brian Paddick in a line, saying he's got no chance, which seems odd given how poor the other two main candidates are.

DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE, OR WHY THE PRESS SHOULD LEAVE LIAR LIVINGSTONE ALONE

I hate Ken Livingstone. I think he’s a lying, devious scumbag who will say and do anything to keep his position and he represents the worst of 1980s old Labour politics synthesised with a new Labour spin machine that has somehow managed to keep alive the lie that he knows what he is doing.

What I don’t have any interest in at all is how many kids he has, whether he sends them birthday cards, whether he still visits his mother or anything to do with his family. It doesn't matter and it is not relevant to his job as Chief Commissar of London

It’s a bad day for the press when even the Independent is covering this story. Grow up, guys and attack the snivelling wretch for his abysmal record, his corrupt practices and for his nasal twang.

It will take months of flagellation to cure me of the knowledge that I have defended that man...

THE PARTY OF LAW AND ORDURE STRIKES AGAIN

In this little corner of the world our small but noisy opposition is led by a woman of substance and forthright views who speaks up against injustice and supports the officers in anything they say. She often rails against the scurrilous administration at Council meetings and elsewhere and is not afraid to tailor her comments to suit the audience – any audience.

Unfortunately, she is a nicotine addict and this has been the cause of red faces of late, for the upstanding opposition leader, in a rare failure of her impeccable character, was seen discarding the remnants of her latest fix in the bushes outside the Council building.

An officer was summoned and the culprit was apprehended. After an appropriate dressing down the chastened Tory agreed to dispose of her butt in a more appropriate manner and the offending article was removed. For this first offence, no penalty was imposed but she was given a stiff warning not to be so daft as to dispose of her rubbish outside the office window…

Unfortunately for our hero, the local press was alerted and a newshound was dispatched to write up the story. Local LDs were asked to comment but when the truth is laid bare for all to see, nothing further needs to be said. We simply all smiled broadly...

HE MADE ME DO IT, YOUR HONOUR!

Having decided on this blog to refer to our esteemed leader as ‘Nickers’ I now find that real life has caught up with me as the Lib Dem Lothario's reputation enters the stratosphere.

If I combine my proposed nickname, our Dear Leader’s burgeoning reputation for wooing the laydeez and his partial Russian heritage, it strikes me that I should now refer to him as ‘Nickersoff’.

Have I been blacklisted yet?

MUGABE-EN AND GONE?

So Mugabe might finally be going. Three roistering cheers for that news but what is perhaps far more heartening is that the deal for his departure is said to have been arranged by the South African president.

This is much more encouraging than the usual announcement that a clutch of European, American or Russian diplomats are flying in to get involved - with the best of intentions, I freely accept.

Fingers, toes, and everything else crossed...

LUELLA, GET THE POPCORN IN...

Harriet Harperson is going to deputise for Gordon Brown at PMQs tomorrow. And this just days after she wore body armour to, er, visit her constituency.

This is one of those situations where you don't know whether to look or cover your eyes.

LEFT WING, MOI?

Another LD blog (the charmingly named and always entertaining ‘Gavin’s Gaily Gigest’) discusses the Economist’s finding that we are apparently a left wing party. I’ve commented there that this is tosh but it brought to mind an idea from way back when I was at college. A rather useless lecturer in politics nevertheless came up with what he called his ‘syndicated blickoscope’, named after him, natch, which basically had two axes.

The left to right axis, representing the approach to the market of political parties, was there along with a ‘freedom-oppression’ axis from top to bottom. This allowed you to place parties in 2 dimensions and thus to far better reflect their approach to the world. I imagine this would place the LDs very close to the top of the freedom axis and probably close to the middle of the ‘left-right’ axis –somewhere over to the right, since we support the market but with the state getting involved where necessary. Don’t we?

The Tories seem to want to preserve the status quo, with rich folk staying rich and with anyone who doesn’t play golf getting locked up but they’re not quite the old Apartheid regime in South Africa so they would be just above the middle of the freedom-oppression axis, in my opinion. They would of course be quite far to the right on the original ‘left-right’ axis.

As for Labour, I doubt they know themselves. They might be below the freedom-oppression halfway point, since they are riding roughshod over civil liberties and democracy. They would probably be perhaps two thirds to the right of the other axis since they seem to have abandoned any notion that the public sector can be made to work and that only PFI can save us.

If parties were looked at like this, we would not have to be shoe-horned into beling left wing which we clearly are not. I’m sure this idea is not new but it does not seem to be in current use, which is a shame. Until such time as it is, even good papers like the Economist will continue to spout meaningless twaddle.

And the moral of all this? We need a good old fashioned bunch of socialists out there on the left and below the freedom line to talk b*ll*cks and to give every one a laugh. Come back Alex Drake and bring some of the loons with you!