Wings Over Scotland

John Crace, the Guardian, 14 Jan 2014:

“Is it conceivable that [Sherlock] Holmes might have been a Labour voter now? Possibly. New Labour changed the rules of political engagement. What the Daily Mail still doesn’t quite get is that voting Labour is no longer a challenge to the establishment, it’s a part of it. There is no major redistribution of wealth and power for the right to fear.”

British politics: elementary.

(Now to questions typed by someone with a rudimentary command of written English.)

Because as we know “Better Together” will have quite a lot of trouble coming up with any coherent replies, we’ve had a bash ourselves while we wait for them to get started.

Read the rest of this entry →

“Herald View”, the Sunday Herald, 12 Jan 2014:

“The Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, is to be commended for refusing to participate in the victimisation of the ‘undeserving poor’. She promises to scrap the bedroom tax, keep housing benefits and reject the forthcoming Universal Credit, which amalgamates a whole range of benefits into one payment. The Nationalists say they will increase social security benefits and the minimum wage annually by the rate of inflation.

However, they cannot secure these protections under the current constitutional arrangements.”

Read the rest of this entry →

This is going to be tough. Alistair Carmichael’s list of the “top 20” reasons for staying in the UK, issued today, is a document so farcical it’s actually quite hard to analyse.

It’s difficult to react to it in a rational manner, because the rational response is a torrent of angry invective at having one’s intelligence so heinously and crassly insulted. And going for the satire angle isn’t easy either, because it’s quite tricky to think of anything more ridiculous or idiotic than some of the claims the Secretary of State for Portsmouth makes. Striving as ever for balance, then, this is the best we can do.

Read the rest of this entry →

Now here’s an explosive thing to drop at 10 o’clock on a Sunday night.

Click the image to read the full Financial Times story. Did the game just change?

Read the rest of this entry →

It’s a fortunate thing, viewers, that we have a strong will, hardened by years of dreich, endless 1970s Sundays in Scotland with only three channels on the telly (each of them showing programmes entirely about farming and God), everything outside shut except the rainclouds, and nothing to look forward to but school in the morning.

Because otherwise the frustrations of yesterday’s site problems, followed by waking up this morning to be faced with papers stuffed to the brim with miserable, bleating old Scottish Labour dinosaurs with torn coupons and long catalogues of whinges about you-know-who and you-know-what might just have pushed us over the edge.

Read the rest of this entry →

Hello again! We apologise for the recent 19-hour interruption to normal Wings Over Scotland service, which was almost certainly the result of a cyber-attack by the KGB.

Not really, of course. A combination of a badly-coded plugin, human error and the global curse of spam comments is most likely what actually took us offline for most of yesterday and this morning. But in the light of today’s Sunday Herald front-page scoop, it’s hard to be absolutely sure.

Read the rest of this entry →

Very many years ago, in a previous life, we wrote a short article about the widely misunderstood and endlessly-misapplied principle of “Godwin’s Law”. Regularly cited by idiots who claim that mentioning Hitler or the Nazis in an argument means you automatically lose, it actually says no such thing, and such usage is in fact a wildly irresponsible act consigning the most important lessons of history to the dustbin.

The dangers of arbitratily excluding the Third Reich from mankind’s collective memory in order to be a smartarse on the internet have been illustrated several times by the current UK government as it seeks for ideological reasons to portray whole swathes of British society as subhuman underclasses, but perhaps the most startlingly overt demonstration to date appeared in yesterday’s Independent.

Read the rest of this entry →

…they say, is timing. Alert readers may have noticed that Scottish Labour have spent all day on a cheap smear attempt against SNP Cowdenbeath by-election candidate Natalie McGarry, based on a couple of personal Twitter comments she made two years ago that were mildly critical of teachers, and which Labour had evidently rather creepily kept on file for all that time just in case she was ever selected to fight a seat.

“How DARE she attack our heroic, flawless and infinitely mighty educators?” had been the line since early this morning, issued alongside the uncompromisingly righteous hashtag #ContemptForTeachers. (Although all Ms McGarry had actually said was that teachers do a good job but liked to moan a bit, which isn’t terribly contemptuous.)

So there was a certain inevitability that the hapless, bumbling D-listers of Labour’s northern branch office would be swiftly humiliated by their UK masters yet again.

Read the rest of this entry →

Just a wee round-up.

“Plan for Ukip ‘vote swap’ with Tories to to keep Miliband out of No. 10

Writer and Conservative campaigner Toby Young plans to launch a website that will encourage Conservatives and Ukip supporters to pledge to swap votes in margnial constiuencies”

We’re going to assume they mean “marginal” and “constituencies” there. (Even the Telegraph can’t afford sub-editors now?) But hey, it’s a comforting thought, right?

Read the rest of this entry →

Just a quick one, folks. Here’s a story we touched on earlier today, that appeared in today’s Scotsman and Daily Record. (It even briefly showed up in the Herald, but was deleted faster than we could save it.) At first glance it appears to be identical in both papers, but it isn’t. In fact there’s a rather substantial difference. Can you spot it?

Yesterday saw one of the odder incidents to date in the Scottish media’s coverage of the independence debate. Both the Herald and Scotsman ran almost word-for-word-identical articles reporting the findings of a Glasgow University study into the nature of the debate on Twitter, which concluded (in line with previous research) that Yes campaigners were far more active on the social network than No ones, and that the Yes campaign was far more grassroots than its “top-down” opponent.

We were pleased to get a namecheck in both pieces, but the curious aspect was the length that the articles went to in order to provide a couple of examples of “unofficial” No advocates. It’s now over a year since we first observed the death of Unionist blogging, so it’s understandable that the study had trouble digging anything up, but the representatives they settled on boggled quite a few minds.

Read the rest of this entry →