Is it just me or do others think how low our leader has fallen when he feels he must defend himself by appearing on television to say he has never hit anyone?
Gordon Brown denied claims, made by Andrew Rawnsley in his new book, that "Sometimes things were said in the heat of the moment," but added, "I have never hit anyone in my life."
He pathetically continued, "If I get angry, I get angry with myself... I throw the newspapers on the floor or something like that, but please."
This is not how I expect the leader of the country to behave. If he had any dignity left he would have ignored Andrew Rawnsley's accusations and had a spokesperson speak on his behalf. His behaviour is becoming more and more bizarre - a pitiful sight.
Posts
34 comments:
I just blogged on this SR. Does anyone seriously believe this oaf?
Absolute lies - now firmly embedded in the culture of the Labour Party. He's a barefaced, detestable liar - and hopefully the mask will continue to slip.
Did Brown lie about how he lost his eye? I don't think so.
Mr Cameron is so sincere in comparison, 'I'm just a normal Dad.'!!!
Some do Cato or surely nobody would vote for him. I'll come and read your post because it's sure to be more succinct than mine.
Ronnie, I think his eye condition is inherited, so I believe anyway. The story of the rugby isn't true. I notice Brown has back away from it these days.
Oh TT, did you see it. Wasn't it dreadful to see a person, who is supposed to be in charge here, grovelling about what an author said?
Strathturret, Brown has let people believe he lost his eyesight in a rugby match but that appears to be incorrect. He's had his condition possibly since birth.
As for Cameron, don't let me start raving on such a lovely day.
Are you suggesting that all the biographies of GB are wrong about his eye? Would lying about something like that not obviously be found out?
As you know, I'm not a great one for conspiracy theories.
from Times
Almost 38 years ago a brilliant young eye surgeon performed an operation on a precocious teenager who had lost the sight in one eye and was in grave danger of losing his sight in the other.
Without Hector Chawla’s intervention, the young man would almost certainly have gone blind and the life of Gordon Brown – and the recent history of Britain – might well have been very different.
But after four decades as a barely acknowledged footnote in Mr Brown’s career, Dr Chawla has spoken at length for the first time about the procedure that saved the future Prime Minister’s sight.
He told The Times: “I want to set the record straight. The story in most of the biographies is that he had four operations which left him with partial sight in one eye.
“That’s not true. He had three operations that left him blind in one eye and one operation that I performed that restored his vision completely [in the other eye]. And nearly 40 years later he’s still got perfect sight in that eye.”
When the teenage Gordon Brown, then a student at Edinburgh University with a growing reputation as a left-wing radical, was referred to Dr Chawla in 1970 he had already gone blind in his left eye.
During a rugby match several years earlier he had gone down on a loose ball and been kicked in the head close to his eyes. Within weeks he had started to notice a shadow across the vision in his left eye and the diagnosis was a detached retina – the membrane that lines the inside of the eye and converts light into nerve signals that are transmitted to the brain.
Brown would do anything to get elected.
You're right, it's unedifying.
Thanks for that Strathturret. Somewhere I read another article which said the problem was already there but it goes to show there is always two sides to a story.
It was ghastly Alex and not behaviour I expect from a senior politician.
Is he going to pop up on TV every time someone criticises his temperament?
Andrew Rawnsley has been on SKY News this morning stating that he did not claim in his book that Brown ever hit anyone so why is Brown stating in the Independent that he didn't hit anyone unless he is desperately trying to muddy the waters?
The fact that Brown is not threatening to take legal action against Rawnsley and the Observer is all the proof we need that the claims made by Rawnsley about Brown are true.
Brown has been now been conclusively exposed as an extremely disturbed individual whose psychological flaws make him unfit to be a leader and manager of the UK.
Thank you for that M. I haven't seen television as yet today. Usually do my best to defer it as long as possible.
No surprises there then that Brown chose to divert attention from the truth.
A seriously flawed man indeed.
Hi Subrosa, I always knew Brown looked deranged, but the latest revelations about him are simply shocking. They show he is very dangerous, and also a liar. Barking just wrote more about all his criminal incidents, it's very detailed and interesting.
He is desperate now, that his true behavior is being exposes. "I did not hit anyone" even worse than "I did not have sex with that Woman" (bill clinton). All these lefties are liars, some are just worse than others.
My typo's, it's early out here!
Barking Spider's Blog,
and brown is Exposed!
This reminds me of just one thing:
"They have tied me to a stake; I cannot fly,
But bear-like I must fight the course. What's he
That was not born of woman? Such a one
Am I to fear, or none."
... cont after accidental 'send' ...
Despite all his wickedness, by the end of the play you feel sorry for Macbeth (well, I do). It's getting the same with GB. I've started to pity him. Won't someone get a revolver and do the decent thing?
The worst thing Subrosa is that this sorry, pathetic sight is having a positive impact with the electorate.
Is it really the case that we are all out of touch, and the average voter actually does want the PM and No.10 to be some kind of high emotions Eastenders soap opera?
Gods, I become more dispondent with this country and the state of politics day by day. I can sympathise with the apathetic, I am rapidly approaching it myself.
Hi Bunni, I knew you meant BS so it was ok.:)
More revelations. Have a look at the BBC.
Perhaps slightly too profound to describe Brown Richard. I would just say he has mental issues.
I can't pity him now Richard. He's way past that emotion from me.
Dean, don't you think that's a 'spin off' from the dumbing down of our education system for the past couple of generations?
Subrosa,
Absolutely agree that it is. The educational establishment, from Teaching Unions to those in political office needs radical and wholesale review and reform.
For a start, I'd like to see more powers devolved to schools, rather than anm ever-centralising centre in either Edinburgh or London..but then I'm a young ambitious localist when it comes to policy delivery!
Dean, I'd like to see the return of academic and vocational schools, along the lines of the Germans, Swiss etc. Trying to teach every subject to every ability in one building has always been nonsense but the Righteous decided everyone had to be the same.
Trouble is everyone isn't, but so many believed the hype that we'd all be the brightest and the best.
Years ago I fought like mad to keep vocational schools, but sadly I lost. I also lost in the fight to introduce NVQs or SVQs because I knew how they would reduce the quality of vocational further education compared with City and Guilds and the RSA etc. Too many Righteous again wanted everyone to have a 'certificate', most of which aren't worth the paper they're written on now.
Subrosa
When I was at school a long time ago, we had guys who could never pass an exam to save their life, yet give them a lump of wood or some metal and they could make things with their hands.
They were the guys who were our brickie, plumbers and joiners etc.
Now you do not get taken on for an apprenticeship unless you have passed some exams, so a lot of the people who were good with their hands are "written off" before they even start.
Maybe we should go back to tailoring the schooling to suit the pupil, not the pupil to suit the school.
"he had gone down on a loose ball and been kicked in the head close to his eyes"
Even back then he was clearly a most likeable chap, SR. ;-)
Dubbieside said something that appealled to me greatly:
"Maybe we should go back to tailoring the schooling to suit the pupil, not the pupil to suit the school."
Does anyone else think this is vital in reforming the education system? What about the reintroduction and wholesale expansion of the Grammar school and technical college system to provide schools targeted to pupils rather than a comprehensive system aiming to have every pupil suit the schools?
I would like Dubbieside and Subrosas thoughts on this, especially as they probably know hoe this kind of system functioned back before Wilson and the comprehensives.
Dean
Not much time for a full response, but the one thing that stands out for me is the fact that when I was at school there was no shame or stigma in being "good with you hands"
Now you are deemed a failure if you do not have "O" levels in basket weaving or plasticine molding.
Technical colleges were where you learned technical skills that could set you up for an apprenticeship. Now they are "universities" that do what? I am not entirely sure.
Somewhere recently I heard him say he didn't much like rugby but preferred tennis BS. His eye problem the public will accept no problem. It's his lies they won't.
In the late 70s I taught in a school near Hull with a very mixed intake. There was plenty of technical teaching going on, and it was so arranged that boys of a certain bent could spend the whole week doing motor vehicle maintenance, woodwork and metalwork, with just the legal minimum of English, Maths and RE. Discipline problems were few and far between, because everyone from the most academic to the least was engaged in something that interested them. The good behaviour spread to my English lessons, too - it wasn't just that they were distracted by the hands-on stuff. But then came the philospophy that everything had to be approached academically, and the rot set in. Looking back, it was a damn good system.
Back in the 50s that's the way it was Dubbie, especially in the vocational schools. A few slipped through the net and went to academies but not nearly as many who slip through the net these days.
Dubbie, my plumber can't even use a computer or fill in complicated forms - his wife does them for him. Yet he earns far more than I ever have done and he's also a lovely man too. No posing, no flashing of cash, just a lovely person who doesn't even charge call out prices to his long standing customers.
Dean, last year I did what I thought was a well researched essay on how to improve education in Scotland. It was posted on Scottish Voices which has now been taken down and I've lost it.
Our understanding of vocational and academic has gone completely. Part of that is the government's interference with the old apprenticeship scheme.
First they brought in YTS (along with these dreadful SVQs), then it moved onto another system, then another.
What happened with all these 'systems' was that employers didn't want to be told their apprentice was to be at college x number of days a week, they wanted them training on the job.
We have very few apprentices in this country now. All expect a proper wage just for learning. These new universities no longer offer quality courses in the main and turn to the much lower level SVQ system.
The whole of education needs a clear out.
It was an excellent system Richard. I certainly believe it's possible to teach 99% of children a reasonable standard of reading, writing and maths in primary, but when they reach secondary schools should play to the child's strength ie vocational or academic.
For me it's far better if buildings are separated for this. In my town the vocational school was closed and the academy extended to provide for the extra pupils. It still doesn't work well 30 years later.
Post a Comment