Thursday, January 26, 2006

Scraping the bottom (of the barrel)

Yet more Lib Dem fun, with Simon Hughes admitting that he likes bottoms of the front and back variety (sorry, Doc)*.
The 54-year-old MP said in Thursday's Sun that in the past he had had relationships with both women and men.

He said he had considered pulling out of the leadership contest but did not think the issue should disqualify him from playing a part in public life.

Many others have said it, but quite so. It really isn't our business what our politicians get up to (although it's always amusing to find out), as long as they can't be blackmailed**. I think that I would rather that MPs admitted their proclivities rather than let some sinister fucker get a hold over them. However, the following is pretty priceless.
He apologised if he had misled people when he recently denied being gay - saying he had not intended to do so.

Really? Look, you lied, Simon. And you just did it again: and you've just told a lie about a lie. You intended to lie, you intended to conceal the fact that you weren't the "straight option". We're not surprised either about the fact that you swing both ways, or that you lied. Why not just admit it.
Asked by the Independent whether he was gay, he replied: "No, I'm not. But it absolutely should not matter if I was."

You see the lie there, chaps? Yup, it was a lie. A definite lie there, Simon. You meant to mislead people. Full stop. That's what lying is. OK? 'Kay.

Right, now what other exciting Lib Dem stories are waiting in the wings? That Chris Huhne once attended an orgy but didn't inhale? That Menzies Campbell—whilst simultaneously buggering a goat and jerking off his long-lost brother, the veteran journalist Bill Deedes—repeatedly called on Satan to appear and tell him the secrets of the universe? That any Lib Dem said something interesting once?

What more is to come? I can hardly wait...


* You can tell by the lack of swearing in this post, that I really couldn't give two shits about the whole thing. I merely record it for posterity. And I wanted to write the sentence about Menzies Campbell.

** Talk Politics wonders if The Sun could, in fact, be accused of blackmail. Can we try? That would be fucking hilarious...

9 comments:

Dr John Crippen said...

Now I don't know it that is altogether fair. He has not actually admitted to being gay. As I have said to Guido:

I feel a medical opinion may be necessary. But first I am advised by medical collegues to take a secular opinion from a man of the world, a man who knows about politics. First stop, Guido.

And second stop the DK.

What exactly is the differernce between "I admit that I have had some gay relationships" and "I am gay."

Hughes seems to take a distinction here.

Personally, I don't care if he shags goldfish but it just seems that he is yet another graduate of the same school that that nice Mr Portillo attended, viz: I used to be gay but I have...er...been cured.

Does the DK think that Simon is hoping for a cure? If so can I help?

Sam said...

The next wave of graduates from the Bill Clinton School of Shagging.

Semantics, eh? And not the stuff you get on your clothes.

Katy Newton said...

I don't really know anything about Hughes, to be honest, but I do know that a man who says to a newspaper "No, I am not gay" and expects to get away with explaining that answer as "unintentionally giving the wrong impression" is an ass.

Katy Newton said...

As in public school argot for donkey, not bottom... oh dear. Apparently I am an ass too.

Ordinary activist said...

What's a "long-long" brother? I thought I knew most of the weird practices around but this is a new one.

MatGB said...

He's not gay. He's bisexual. Gay in context is a synonym for homosexual, he is not homosexual, he states he has had relationships with both genders.

I've got several close friends who are bi, what's so hard to understand? Obfuscatory, yes, but not lying.

Doesn't change my opinion of him one jot, 3rd place out of 3 candidates.

Katy Newton said...

Hi Mat - I don't care about other people's sexual preferences, except that it's a bit depressing when someone you fancy turns out to be gay. But the point is that I don't think that Hughes' preferences are anyone's business. He would have been more than entitled either to answer the question properly or not answer it at all - I mean, it isn't really anyone's business. I just think he's made a bit of an idiot of himself by trying to pretend that he wasn't trying to make people think that he was straight. He would have won massive points with me if he had said, "I wanted to make people think I was straight because I was worried about what they would think of me/my party but now I've realised it's nothing to be ashamed of." Or something along those lines.

Martin said...

DK,

It's the zinc in the muesli that responsible.

MatGB said...

Pretty much agree Katy, especially on the disappointment when you fancy someone, been there far too often.

He was, essentially, trying to deny it, given the fuss at the time he was elected understandable, but 20 years on?

Ah well; didn't want him to win before, opinion hasn't really changed except confirming my belief his presentation and media skill just aren't up to the job.

Moonbat still loony

It's always delightful to dip into George Moonbat's nutty articles ... We cannot rely on market forces and corporate goodwill to de...