The druggie versus the hoodie
What’s worse? Huhne’s LSD-associated past, or Clegg’s past encounter with peyote?
Seriously for a minute, is that Times article on Huhne accurate? According to it, Huhne’s name is on the article. But according to the copy which I pilfered from that nice Mr Fawkes (February 2006, by the way), no name appears anywhere on the article, probably because if anyone admitted to writing the article they’d have been kicked out of university.
Can anyone see Huhne’s name on this page? I’ll happily issue a correction if I’ve missed it. But I suspect that Guido would have made rather more of it at the time if that was the case. I notice that the Times chooses its words carefully such as stating that his byline was “attached” and has not published the article on its site as proof. Why would that be?
Rate this:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Tags: Chris-Huhne, drugs, leadership-contest, liberal-democrats, media, panics, the-times
October 21st, 2007 at 11:42 am
The main problem with the article is it’s over-long, uses too many words and makes an interesting topic a bit dull.
October 21st, 2007 at 12:33 pm
“The Party that Eats Peyote!”
FUCK YEAH!
October 21st, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Andy - Oxford’s student publications generally fit that description!
October 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pm
What a Nasty party.
First Charles Kennedy.
Then Menzies Campbell.
Now Chris Huhne is personally attacking his opponent.
What Nasty people, What a Nasty Party.
October 21st, 2007 at 6:33 pm
I would have thought Huhne’s people would have denied it were it not true. They had plenty of opportunity to…
October 22nd, 2007 at 9:27 am
Actually, it’s the party that burns peyote, but who am I to argue?
October 22nd, 2007 at 9:37 am
John, why waste the effort and give the story legs?