When is a "dog whistle" not a "dog whistle"?

Following my earlier post here:

Only on Saturday night, Iain Dale wrote:

"Brown to Spotlight Immigration in Bid to Woo Back Middle England

A reader tips me off that according to a government minister he spoke to tonight, Gordon Brown sees immigration as the issue which will set him back on the straight and narrow. He will be making a big speech on it in the next couple of weeks. Apparently he's been on the phone to Michael Howard tonight asking to borrow his dog whistle."

It seems that David Cameron beat him to the dog whistle.

...Iain has kindly read my post and replied saying:

Paul, have you actually read David Cameron's speech? If you had, you;d realise it was nothing of the sort. Indeed, I suspect you'd agree with about 98% of it.

To which I reply:

Iain, Thank you for reading my post and commenting on it. Did you read Gordon Brown's speech before you described it as a "dog whistle" speech? Unlikely - he hasn't made it yet. I have read Cameron's speech. But for the life of me I can't see any great difference in tone to Michael Howard's speech on immigration in 2005 (aside from mention by Howard of asylum seeker controls).So if you describe Howard's speech as a "dog whistle", why not Cameron's also?

Iain has further replied and I have replied to his reply and no doubt he will reply to that and I will.....

Iain Dale said...
You cannot be serious if you think that was a speech Howard could have given.
Tuesday, 30 October, 2007
Paul Walter said...
Did I say that? It is just that if you describe Howard's speech as "dog whistle" I don't see why you don't also describe Cameron's as that? Howard's speech was not racist but called for controls. Ditto Cameron's.
Tuesday, 30 October, 2007