Nick Clegg: Still Less Odious Than Ed Miliband

Here's an interesting interview with Nick Clegg. Well, when I say it is interesting, what I mean is it tries to do more than make him out to be the greatest traitor since Judas. While at times clearly just trying to find fault, the interviewer does seem to understand that, at least on some levels, that politics - particularly at the top, rather than sniping from the sidelines - requires compromise.

And - before we go on - let's just pause for a moment and reflect on Nick Clegg's year. This time last year, he looked like yet another failed Lib Dem leader. Quite frankly, he didn't have a voice. Then came the debates, and Cleggmania. Suddenly he was, in the eyes of some, a British version of JFK (despite the fact that all he did was not be shit at debating with a vacuous ex-marketing man and an arrogant, dour drip of a man). Then his party did poorly at the General Election - all Cleggmania meant was they were, more or less, able to maintain their 2001 level of popularity (in vote percentage terms, even if not in terms of Commons seats maintained). Despite this, less than a week after that result, Nick Clegg was the Deputy Prime Minister, and enjoying a level of power that no member of the Liberal Democrats has ever enjoyed before. Of course, that must be of little comfort on occasion when faced with the rage of the Shy Labour Lib Dems, who really wanted the Labour government to continue but who couldn't quite bring themselves to put their shaky "X" in the box of their local Labour candidate on their ballot papers. In short, quite a year for Nick Clegg - from non-entity to Second Coming to real political power and then to hatred. The whole of the Tony Blair experience in about 12 months.

But anyway, let's get to the point. I can, if I really force myself, understand why some people feel frustrated with Nick Clegg. And there is something faintly pathetic about Nick Clegg. He looks and sounds compromised most of the time. But I genuinely think he was placed in an impossible situation, and he is making the best of it. So when I read an interview with Clegg, I might feel a bit of pity for him. Whereas when I read an interview with Ed Miliband, I can't help but feel a certain level of anger and, well, hate.

The reason is this - there is a certain level of humility to Nick Clegg. He's not a stupid man; he must have understood what his deal with the Tories must have meant for his career in the long-term, but he still went for the deal with the Tories. A deal that was, given his limited choices, the best option on offer. Whereas with Ed Miliband, you get the same feeling of the pathetic that you do with Clegg (particularly given Ed's inability to say no to one Ed Balls), but Miliband Minor has a certain arrogance to him that makes him pretty repellant. Clegg seems to be incredulous that he is in a position of real power, while Miliband Minor seems incredulous that he isn't. Miliband Minor has all the arrogance of the utterly undeserved.

So, while I don't have a great deal of respect for Nick Clegg, I have nothing but contempt for Ed Miliband.

Speaking Ill of the Dead: Teddy Kennedy

Ted Kennedy, the last of the that fabled trio of brothers who once looked set to dominate US politics, has died. The fact that Teddy Kennedy managed to outlive his brothers is perhaps yet another example of the ongoing tragedy of the Kennedy clan. Because, at the risk of speaking ill of the dead, he was the least effective and least able of those brothers.

If you support social democracy and what the US incorrectly dubs as liberalism, then I suppose you can point towards some sort of a legacy from Ted Kennedy. Yet anyone who was in the Senate for as long as Kennedy should be able to point towards a substantial legislative legacy. And besides, it may be carping a bit but it is instructive to think just how he was able to run for the Senate and stay there for so long. Daddy's wealth and the high profile of his brothers meant that this Kennedy had a head start that few others could ever dream of. For all those talking about how Teddy Kennedy represents the Liberal dream in the US, think again. Those who came from nowhere to achieve great things are truly indicative of the American dream. It is Harry Truman, LBJ and Barack Obama who truly show what ability in the USA can do. All Teddy Kennedy showed is what you can do if you have a boat load of cash and a respected name behind you. And that is sit in the Senate for decades, representing a very liberal state.

Of course, no obituary of Teddy Kennedy would be complete without a reference to Chappaquiddick, which surely remains one of the worst political scandals of all time. Nixon helped to cover up a burglary, Clinton smoked a dubious cigar; Teddy Kennedy killed someone. Yeah, read that again. Teddy Kennedy left someone to die. If you want a good description of the full horror of what he did, read this extract from a Guardian article that tries (and fails) to show how Kennedy overcame the stigma of his killing:

Kennedy chose to flee the scene , leaving the young woman to die an agonising death not of drowning but of suffocation over a period of hours. Incredibly, it was 10 hours before Kennedy reported the accident, by which time he'd consulted a family lawyer. The senator's explanation for this unconscionable, despicable, unmanly and inexplicable behaviour was never convincing: he claimed that he'd struck his head and was "confused" and "exhausted" from diving and trying to rescue the young woman and had gone home to bed.

So... Teddy leaves a party with a woman who wasn't his wife, crashes his car into water with her inside, and then leaves that woman to slowly die. This probably cost him the chance of winning the presidency. Can you imagine what it would have cost someone who wasn't part of the Kennedy family? For this sort of thing, the average person in the street would be looking at a lengthy prison stretch. Kennedy got two month's probation. Why? Because of his family name. And because of his family connections. Daddy's wealth and the good name of his brothers saved him from having to take the full punishment for his utterly reprehensible crime. I know I won't be alone in asking why so many people are mourning Ted Kennedy - reasonably competent legislator and killer.

The true success of the Kennedy clan - and where they have proved to be most effective - is in creating an aura, a mystic, a cult around themselves that just does not match up to reality. Nonetheless, people had faith in JFK. And then in RFK. Because of what those two were perceived to stand for. And when both of those figures went to their early graves, the only person left to carry on the dream was Teddy. He didn't earn that position, and the only reason why he became such an icon to so many people is because of his surname. So it goes. Inheriting titles, wealth and power is a part of human society, and always will be. Yet I can't help but think that, outside of his circle of family and friends, most people are mourning the death of the Kennedy name, rather than the death of this particular Kennedy.