Kennedy making personal statement (LibDem leader, on alcohol allegations)

Would someone mind updating this when the statement is made?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4582930.stm

Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy is due to make a personal statement within the next hour.

The statement will pre-empt media allegations about his alleged alcohol problems - it will not be a resignation statement, the BBC understands.

He has said he will make the statement at Lib Dem headquarters at 1745 GMT.

Mr Kennedy has faced repeated calls to hold a vote of confidence to end talk about his future - but has insisted this would be a distraction.

nt

This is painful, and it isn't good for the Lib Dems.

and from all the signs, he's been doing just that lately.

If you can be president and be a drunk, how come you can't be senator and be a drunk?

And what about S.D. Rep. BILL JANKLOW, who just got his law license back, after having gotten a mere 2 years PROBATION for killing a man?? I don't see that anything Kennedy has done is any worse than that.

Seriously, this is hilarious. I'm a total idiot!(Yeah, I have to state the obvious!!):blush: :blush: :blush:

keep us updated

But a drunk Kennedy is still better than a sober war criminal like Tony Blair any day of the week.

"Whilsh I may be a drunk (hic) I am not a warmonger. Also... Gordon Brown... ish eh perverh. We all know this is true, but somebody (hic) had to have the guts (hic) to drink seven pints and come out and say it."

I did that once or twice, when I lived there. And learned my lesson.

:shrug:

what war crimes has he committed?

Do a Google on the invasion of Iraq.

:shrug:

war criminals nonetheless.

Simply saying that someone is guilty of something doesn't make it so.

been indicted for war crimes either. Heads of state, given their power, are rarely are, no matter what crimes they commit.

The worst war criminals of the last Century, including Franco, Stalin, and Hitler, were never indicted.

With any luck Blair and Bush will be similarly lucky, no matter how many thousands they kill.

The invasion of Iraq was a war crime, and although Blair and Britain's contribution was far less than it was portrayed to be for propaganda purposes, it was a war crime nonetheless.

Or haven't you thought about it?

the Plastic Curtain.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html

and he has sanctioned the invasion of Iraq, as well as works for the Carlyle group - a corporate profiteer.

Oh wait neither one has been convicted of anything, yet we call Mr Hussein a war criminal. At least I do. :shrug:

An old (informal) campaign slogan of John A MacDonald, Canada's first prime minister.

drunk non-warmonger is better than a drunk warmonger. So Kennedy's better than Bush. (Duh!)

nt

As others have pointed out, it's a vote by the members in the Lib Dems, and he's probably more popular with the members than his MPs. It's starting now.

Calling a leadership election.

Has battled drink problem for 18 months, but says he hasn't touched a drink in 2 months.

This could be worth watching :popcorn:

...I'd probably have a drinking problem, too. It's like herding cats, I'd guess.

Seriously, I just skimmed it, and have been trying to figure out how I had missed Teddy Kennedy being called out for alcohol problems. :rofl:

Glad I was mistaken, but you can understand how it happened, right? :)

On the phone on BBC News 24 right now.

So, who will? Any bets?

Although now you mention it, get a load of this Steve Bell toon from before Christmas:

I think Sky mentioned tonight that he wasn't going to stand...

with Stalin and Hitler is distasteful and ludicrous.

where Tony and Dubyah are still working on tens of thousands, decidedly in the bush (no pun intended) leagues when it comes to killing. Thousands of times worse than say a Charles Manson; but not nearly up to the totals necessary to join the likes of Stalin and Hitler.

Because Hitler was just as bad and dangerous a person when he was just getting started and hadn't yet killed millions. Too bad he wasn't stopped before he ran up such a high score.

I couldn't agree more. And there is more to morality than a numbers game.

and that is the charge Blair seems most clearly guilty of (for instance, Kofi Annan has called the invasion of Iraq illegal). For instance, Karl Dönitz was found guilty of planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression, and his sentence was just 10 years, at the Nuremburg trials.

for the deaths of mere civilians. They are God's anointed, after all. Or at least such has been said of many, including George Walker Bush.

Ten years for Blair, thirty for Bush.

was about his drinking, and how it was affecting his job performance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4582930.stm

There has been a lot of criticism that he wasn't doing his job well over the past few months - it now seems that it's always been connected to his drinking, though the connection wasn't always made in public. It seems he cancelled appearances in the past few months because of it (not just that party conference appearance over a year ago - I don't know if that is now being admitted as due to drinking, or if they're still claiming it was genuine illnesss).

I'm beginning to think it might be best for him to stand down as leader - while going public about it may be 'brave', it was forced on him by an imminent news story. I hope he does stay sober, but I'm not convinced that it's good to risk the party leadership on it - and being in the public eye wouldn't help him, I'd have thought. And for some time, it'll be the first thing people think about him, and want to know.

has a problem and has confronted it bravely...

He's the only hope for England right now... Blair dictatorship is very sad...

He isn't going ANYWHERE...

God Bless him for fighting this corruption...

It only shows how the powers to be are frightened of him...

they should be...

I have always believed he was going to be the next prime minister after Blair...

Iraq war and civil liberties, but if he does not stand down, I don't see how the party can survive. If he does go, what credible replacement do they have???

I have no doubt that Campbell and Oaten want to stand, just not against Kennedy. Instead they will try and get him to withdraw altogether.

The lib dems are the main obstacle between "son of Blair" and number 10. They have now been dealt a very serious blow helping to clear Cameron's path.... its almost like he's been anointed...

I posted this a couple of weeks ago:

"I have a long drive to work and back and listen to Radio 4's Today programme in the morning then PM and the News in the evening.

I've said to a few friends recently that it has been literally months since I last heard Kennedy on any of those shows, either as a guest or because he's said/done something noteworthy.

Given the problems that Bliar/Labour have been having it seems absurd that he hasn't tried to make a bit of political advantage recently.

I like Kennedy a lot, but he can't afford to stay out of the media like this."

I still stand by this. He really hasn't had any material impact in the media for a while and he's lost a lot of credibility - after all, he's been publicly denying a drink problem for years. Not a crime in itself, but misleading the public and operating as party leader despite a drink problem seems like poor judgement IMHO.

It even looks like he only made this announcement because ITN were going to do an exclusive story about how he'd been getting help for his alcohol problem and warned him before they put it on air.

Maybe it is time for a new leader - but God knows who it should be....