I’m not one for crowing, and regular readers will know that I have been ready to defend Boris Johnson at times.  But today, it is clear that Johnson’s political nous is vacant.

He talked up Lewis - a “deputy mayor”, no less, despite the agreed definition of the title.  He leaped to his defence at the first sight of trouble.  Now the headlines read “Deputy Mayor resigns” and “Right-Hand man lied”.  Johnson’s judgement was flawed.

For the first time, Johnson can justly be criticised by his many opponants for active stupidity.  Ignorance has been the order of the day so far: now Johnson has bound himself strongly to a marked man.  Lewis’ resignation ruins his own reputation beyond repair, but also leaves Johnson somewhat tarnished.

On this issue, Johnson deserves all the criticism he gets.

- - -
Should it be significant, although I strongly hope it will not, it is worth noting Alan Sugar’s position.  If he does dare to stand in 2012, he cannot use Lewis against Johnson - he hired his apprentice knowing that he had lied on his CV!  The difference, of course, is that Lee McQueen had not been punished by the Church and questioned by police on several occasions for separate incidents.  And he lied about a degree, not, ironically, about being a Magistrate.

McCain’s latest advert is a light-hearted mockery of Obama’s change mantra. The message appears to be “the only thing he has changed is the Presidential seal - he can do that on Photoshop!”

But after watching the advert, I get the distinct impression that voters may see it differently. “Obama on Mt Rushmore! Obama on the Statue of Liberty! Obama on our $1 bills! Obama’s so American, and not at all foreign or Muslim!”

I am amazed McCain is wasting money contradicting the tripe he spews about his opponent!

I was at the Liberal Conspiracy/Guardian Blog Nation event on Wednesday evening.  One of the many thoughts to come from it (more of which might be written up at a later date) was that female blogging was alive and kicking.  I admit to not regularly reading blogs written by women, and for presuming that only a handful of women actually blogged.  I am well aware of the statistics showing the tiny minority of women bloggers, but have opened my eyes to the joys of some of the female blogs out there*.  Upon hearing Harriet Harman’s latest proposals for “equal opportunities” legislation, therefore, I made a concerted effort to see what the female and feminist blogs had to say.

The message is fairly clear - the proposals are extremely confusing.  It is unclear as to whether allowing women to be chosen above men of equal ability is anything new: surely this is already legal?  In fact, it is unclear as to whether or not any sort of positive discrimination is being proposed at all.  The draft proposals seem to be a wrapping up of existing legislation, being spun as a great move for feminism.  It seems as if the feminists aren’t buying it.

The Westminster media narrative has moved on, but it is worth considering the effect of this legislation.  It has been spun to appeal: one Tory commented that it was the most politically correct announcement from the most politically correct minister.  He couldn’t be more wrong.  I was ready to get on a high horse about the evils of positive discrimination, but found that I couldn’t.  Instead, I was left wondering why Harman needed to bother at all.  This is no new announcement, no change in policy, just a way of lubricating the existing regulations.  It is dull, but exactly the sort of legislation Parliament should be churning out - like the fertilisation bill, which gathered the loose ends of a whole sphere of regulation into one manageable bunch.  It actually allows employers to arbitrarily discriminate in any direction: not very PC at all.

The Daily Express ran with some tripe about how white middle class men are to be slain by the feminist monster, but the proposals give equal rights for potential employers to pick white men over black women arbitrarily.  This was a confusing announcement because of the spin.  The substance of the proposal is limited, but commendable.  If Harman had dared to present it for what it was, she may have missed headlines but would have done the important work of government.  One cannot help but think that Labour, in its current state, should not so easily sacrifice a rare display of good governance for the sake of a failed attempt at positive headlines.

- - -
*Penny Red is a favourite already.  Our Recommended Links list has more.

The Tories have (predictably) won in Henley, increasing their share of the vote.  Labour lost their deposit.

I am going to be controversial here, but here goes: it was a brilliant result.  Labour is in disarray, and they deserved the beating they suffered, albeit in very un-Labour territory.  The LibDems should stand to benefit from a seat in which they poll second, and where the predecessor ran away mid-term to get a better job.  But their campaign was disgusting (genuinely, not just reflecting the usual Tory complaints about LibDem tactics…) and should be seen as the real cause for their failure to make ground.

The party has a few good ideas, and is clearly preferable to the Tories, but I cannot say that I would vote for a campaign that behaved in the way the LibDems did.  It is a shame that they have so utterly failed to grow up and debate, not slander.  I sincerely the party learns from this, and Crewe, to play positive politics in the future.  They might actually gain votes that way!

The Scribo Ergo Sum team are a dedicated bunch, committed to delivering the very best a blog can offer.  Well, perhaps not, but we are keen to maintain standards.  We try to keep the website updated with quality content, and attempt to display it in appealing ways.  Our tabbed “essential reading” box, for example, allows us to shove content we like to the top of the homepage.  Exciting, eh?  There is something to be said for bloggers taking a keen interest in web design: the layout and aesthetics of a website are very important to the feel of it, and impact upon the reader’s experience.  So, please allow a temporary diversion from politics and meta-blogging as I attempt to weigh up the two mighty web browsers once and for all.

IE8 (beta)
I recently downloaded Internet Explorer 8.  It is still in beta version, but I like to consider myself one of the “web developers and designers” it suggests the release is suitable for.  Internet Explorer knows its audience: IE has something of a reputation within the “web developers and designers” community for being a bit rubbish.  Releasing a beta version for developers is their way of testing just how good the browser is - can it function according to web standards?

Web standards have been a big headache for Internet Explorer.  I am currently working on a design for a fairly complex site and have been attempting to introduce a lovely hovering menu for the navigation (made entirely using CSS, if you are interested).  Internet Explorer tries its hardest, then wheezes a little, and gives up with only a portion of it functioning properly.  Despite various get-arounds to deal with IE faults, new ones always emerge.  Every other browser can manage without trouble, but IE is incapable.  The sad truth is that the vast majority of web users rely upon Internet Explorer and the “web developers and designers” are forced to go out of their way to deal with the faults thrown up just because most people use a poor browser.  To be fair, IE8 displays my navigation menu perfectly.  The fact remains, however, that if each browser were judged on merit, IE would have ceased to be several years ago.

Internet Explorer 8 is meant to be a massive improvement on its predecessor.  It is.  The most authoritative test of browser standards compliancy, the Acid 2 Test, was the basis of the IE8 rebuild.  Unlike any Explorer browser before it, IE8 correctly displays the nifty little smiley face accurately.  Unlike most other browsers, though, IE8 struggles to display simple applications like Google’s Gmail.  Google have received requests about the problem with IE8, and the response is fitting:

Well, IE8 is not supported by Gmail yet, so you might want to use another browser - FF2.x or IE7. FF3 is not supported yet either, but we don’t get bug reports about that browser.

In other words, Firefox 3, released yesterday, works.

IE8 has its benefits.  The multi-tab view is a lovely way of selecting pages through image grabs, but is functionally redundant in all but looking fancy.  In terms of useful developments, IE8 introduces “webslices”, which are a nice little set of tools to grab useful parts of websites without visiting them.  I have subscribed to my friends’ Facebook status updates, for example.  And there’s more: if you highlight text, a menu appears offering all sorts of suggestions for what you might want to do with the chunk of text, from searching with Google to posting in a blog.  The opportunities here are immense, but I have to conclude that IE8 simply isn’t worth the bother.  It is streets ahead of IE7 but fails to display certain applications properly.  If it is still causing headaches for web developers, it is of little merit.

Firefox 3
I was a late convert to Firefox, and admit that about half of my internet usage still takes place in other browsers.  One thing puts me off embracing Firefox: it distorts some typefaces.  It’s not a big issue, and is purely aesthetic, but it is a recurring issue nonetheless.  Firefox 3 does not solve the problem.

But in every other regard, Firefox3 is perfect.  The download is speedy, pages load quickly, things display like they were designed to, and web developers can cut down on their workload.  Everyone wins, simple as.  There is nothing much more to say, except for what Mozilla boast about.  Mike Rouse has some pertinent comments:

If you are still using Internet Explorer you should ask yourself why you bother accessing the internet. If you’re still one of those mindless folk that still uses IE6 then you should be asking yourself why you even own a computer.

And you, dear reader?
Using the wonderful Google Analytics, I can see what proportion of visitors use each web browser.  It makes for interesting reading, because our statistics are very different to the average.  64% of visits to this site use Firefox: a percentage several times greater than average.  It is perhaps telling that bloggers and web nerds tend to use the better browser browser, proving that our readership is of a discerning nature.  Perhaps not…

For the 28% of you left with Internet Explorer, THERE IS NO EXCUSE!  Do everyone a favour, just get on and download Firefox!

It is clear that the Tory blogosphere is leading the way in the UK. Sites like ConservativeHome provide a brilliant service, and blogs like Iain Dale’s are popular (although I have never quite understood why I check in every day). The most-read blogs are those which eternally snipe in each direction, or at the establishment in general (Guido Fawkes, anyone?). Meanwhile LabourHome is pretty feeble. Are the right better bloggers?

The liberal/left blogs are beginning to find their feet. This site’s blogroll used to refer to Liberal Conspiracy as “a good idea, but not really getting off the ground”. Not, of course, that this website is making any such pretentions. The description recently changed, though, acknowledging that LibCon has improved vastly in the past couple of months and is now firmly secure as one of the must-reads of the British blogging world. Websites such as Boris Watch are carefully critiquing the new Mayor of London, not straying into petty slurs but rather keeping him in check.

I firmly believe that these blogs are thriving because the liberal/left blogosphere is coming of age, not because of Tory political ascendancy. Take LiberalConspiracy as the most obvious example: nothing quite like it exists on the right. ConservativeHome’s CentreRight.com is the closest equivalent in terms of ethos, but is unrecognisable in production. LibCon is genuinely a forum for non-party affiliated individuals of the liberal/left. This kind of innovation is a timely development, and totally unrelated to Labour’s hemorrhaging support. It is not an opposition blog, but a political forum. This kind of innovation is lacking in the right-wing blogosphere.

I like to think that the liberal/left blogoshere is coming of age. Blogging is now so democratised that someone can construct a very good website for absolutely no cost. More professional sites still can be made with very little cost if you know someone who knows about websites. This website costs less than £3 per year, for the domain name, because it is generously hosted on the webmaster’s server. The design and functional support is offered without cost, meaning that a handful of 6th Form students from London can produce a reasonably professional-looking multi-authored blog without any cost. With the onset of free blogging software, everyone can have their own website.

Where the liberal/left blogosphere is growing best, though, is when it embraces multi-authored websites: a pooling of resources and knowledge produces a better brand. LiberalConspiracy is constructive - in aim, outlook, and content - and it is a better website for it. Is the right going to continue to dominate the blogosphere? I suspect not…

- - -
PS: Doug did not edit this article!

Miliband seems to think it is worthwhile ratifying the Lisbon treaty despite it having been vetoed by Ireland.  Why?

1. The EU bigwigs have demanded 26 ratifications.
If everyone else signs up, it is easier to see the Ireland vote as a hiccough rather than a final breath.  They will likely ignore the fact that 100% of the countries given the chance to decide to sign up decided to reject it.

2. It keeps the Tories in a sticky spot.
Cameron clearly opposed the Treaty, and gambled that the country would reject it in a referendum.  He was denied the opportunity by the Labour and LibDem promise-breaking, so Ireland’s decision seemed like a gift.  Labour hope to milk this for what it’s worth, though.  Cameron avoided ripping his party up over Europe again, but he will soon find that sweeping difficult issues under the carpet is no alternative for tackling rebels.  The damage this does Labour is nothing to the damage it does the Tories - at least Labour have an (almost) consistent policy on Europe, referenda aside.

What should Miliband do?  If he won’t do as I suggested earlier, he should at least accept that the decision to break his referendum promise was wrong.

One of the main beneficiaries of the EU over the last few decades has, it seems, rejected the Lisbon Treaty.  The only country given the chance to vote on the rehash constitution (after France and the Netherlands blew the original out of the water) has sent a fairly clear message.  Three of the most typically pro-European countries in the Union have rejected the bureaucracy’s advances.  The message must be learned.

1. Europeans citizens do not want a mega-country.
The economic and political benefits of a union of European nations are undeniable.  We have to co-operate as a continent, and a union body is the best possible way to achieve it.  But most people in Europe rather like being national citizens, not international ones.  They like national elections, not international ones.  They like the closeness and accountability of national decision-making, not the faceless international superbody of the EU.  The Constitution, Lisbon Treaty, or whatever you want to call it was an attempt to formalise this continuing development into a superstate and those countries which would most benefit have rejected it.

2. The EU is governed by the bureaucracy, not politicians.
The EU is constructed to channel power to the bureaucracy, not not the pseudo-politicians elected to the Parliament.  The recent Tory MEP expenses farce demonstrates how MEPs are encouraged to exploit the system to their advantage while sitting back from decision-making.  Little legislation is crafted in the European Parliament, but is rather dreamed up by the bureaucrats and waved through with little consideration in the Parliament.  There is next to no accountability for MEPs, with party lists promoting those who would not otherwise be elected and no public knowledge of what MEPs are doing with their time in the Parliament.  It is telling that the media do not cover debates or votes in Europe, and we know nothing of our MEPs - if their work is unimportant, it should stop, and if it is important, it should be made far more accountable than it currently is.  The Constitution was pushed by the bureaucracy, not the politicians, and the dirty tricks employed to replace it with the Lisbon Treaty were the work of deceptive cynics with no belief in accountable politics whatsoever.

3. If this is how the bureaucracy works, we should resist its advances.
The EU is designed to make nations insignificant.  It functions as if it knows best, but lacks the courage to test its convictions in the minds of the people of Europe.  We should resist the whole EU mentality.  We should seek a European Union which promotes economic and political co-operation in a way similar to the UN, which stops far short of trying to dominate nations.  We should defend national self-determination, not allow nations to be subsumed by the giant machine of Brussels.  We ought to reform the EU into a United Nations of Europe, functioning on very different lines to those it currently does.  In short, the failings of the EU should prompt a desire to reform it, not to walk further in - we will only encourage them.

The EU has no respect for nations - indeed tries to promote itself as one.  The longer we take to seek reform, the harder it will become.  There need not be any showdown or hostility, just a new focus in halting the EU’s growth while we reassess its direction.  I hope that Ireland’s rejection of the Constitution / Lisbon Treaty gives the opportunity for this to take place.