<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Clegg: a bad way to make a good point</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2007/10/29/clegg-a-bad-way-to-make-a-good-point/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2007/10/29/clegg-a-bad-way-to-make-a-good-point/</link>
	<description>crass, boorish and more a bruiser than blogger</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:50:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Huntbach</title>
		<link>http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2007/10/29/clegg-a-bad-way-to-make-a-good-point/#comment-98021</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Huntbach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theliberati.net/quaequamblog/2007/10/29/clegg-a-bad-way-to-make-a-good-point/#comment-98021</guid>
		<description>When Clegg says the party was "too inward-looking" he needs to say just what he means.

Let him give specific examples of things the party did which he thinks make it too inward-looking and shouldn't have been done.

Let him give specific examples of things the party didn't do but he thinks it should have done which would make it less inward-looking.

Otherwise, what he says is meaningless, or it's meant to be some coded message.

I've been criticised for being "nasty" to Clegg, but this is my problem - what he says is just stuffed full of things like this where I end up screaming "just tell us what you actually mean by that, give us concrete examples".

The biggest danger with unsupported criticism like that is that it just feeds into the hands of our opponents, they would love to paint us as a party which is too "inward looking" and what better to prove their if our own leader-to-be is saying it is?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Clegg says the party was &#8220;too inward-looking&#8221; he needs to say just what he means.</p>
<p>Let him give specific examples of things the party did which he thinks make it too inward-looking and shouldn&#8217;t have been done.</p>
<p>Let him give specific examples of things the party didn&#8217;t do but he thinks it should have done which would make it less inward-looking.</p>
<p>Otherwise, what he says is meaningless, or it&#8217;s meant to be some coded message.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been criticised for being &#8220;nasty&#8221; to Clegg, but this is my problem - what he says is just stuffed full of things like this where I end up screaming &#8220;just tell us what you actually mean by that, give us concrete examples&#8221;.</p>
<p>The biggest danger with unsupported criticism like that is that it just feeds into the hands of our opponents, they would love to paint us as a party which is too &#8220;inward looking&#8221; and what better to prove their if our own leader-to-be is saying it is?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
