Archive for the ‘insane’ Category

Iain Martin has provided, presumably from his sources inside the civil service, a fascinating and chilling insight into Brown’s autocratic, paranoid and hopeless (mis)management of day-to-day Prime Ministerial business. If you haven’t already read it, click through here.

It will take a lot of effort to work out just how much damage three years (or 13 years if you include his time as a diabolical, serially disloyal Chancellor) of Brown’s weirdness and chaos in Downing Street has done to this nation. The litany of disasters that can be traced directly back to Brown’s bunker door are emerging daily, of course, so the process could take less time than we think.

Quite frankly, I think how such a man was elevated to the level of the highest office in the land in the first place, without even the pretence of any form of democratic election, should also be a source of deep and urgent study. Why? Because it must never, ever be permitted to happen again and if that means radical alterations to the rules governing the way Prime Ministers are chosen, then so be it.

In the meantime we can be happy about a couple of things, and Martin alludes to these in his excellent piece: stable, reasonable, elected people are back in charge, cabinet government appears to have returned and the principles of ministerial and collective responsibility look like being rigorously reinstated.

We shall see, but after the cocksure, cowboy, sofa government years of Blair and the mentally disturbed, incoherent, mafiosi years of Brown, it certainly feels like accountability, professionalism and, crucially, normality have returned to Downing Street, Whitehall and, perhaps (just perhaps), even Westminster.

Well, you might disagree. But God help us all if I’m wrong!

Just remember, Brown’s chief hit man, Balls, is still around, waiting in the wings, shamelessly spewing his poisonous politics of propaganda, division, dishonesty and fear. He’s on This Week right now lying through his teeth about, in this case, his many crimes against Tony Blair on behalf of his boss, Brown, to whom he remains fanatically loyal. The chances of the evil Balls becoming leader even of his own party are pretty slim, I admit, (oh I do hope he wins!) but there’s still that chance, however slight, and the frailties of our system, exposed by the Brown 2007 coup d’état, mean that at that point, he would be a hell of a lot closer to Number 10 than is sanely conceivable.

If Iain Martin’s revelations reveal just how very, very, incredibly bad Brown was, just imagine what life would be like under Prime Minister Balls.

That would be a nightmare from which we might never wake up.


Read Full Post »

Nasty piece of work

I’m not a huge fan of the Mail, and certainly not its columnists, generally speaking. But in amongst all the pointless posturing and frequent pandering to their own puerile interpretation of middle England values, you do occasionally get a bit of a gem…

Watching Brown’s lunatic performance on Wednesday was painful, and, frankly, baffling. What kind of a man is this unasked for Prime Minister, wondered millions of people? Well, I reckon Richard Littlejohn might have found the answer. The bloke’s a borderline sociopath, according to this old bruiser of a feature writer, at least in terms of his public life. Littlejohn says:

Here are some commonly accepted traits of sociopathic behaviour. Stop me when you’ve heard enough.
Glibness and superficial charm; manipulative and cunning.


Grandiose sense of self and entitlement.


Pathological lying; absence of remorse, shame or guilt; callousness and lack of empathy.


Refusal to accept blame; tendency to blame others even for acts they obviously committed.


Authoritarian; secretive; paranoid; narcissism; grandiosity; an over-inflated belief in their own powers and abilities.


Prone to rage and abuse; outraged by insignificant matters.


Instead of friends, they have only victims and accomplices who tend to end up as victims.


The end always justifies the means; nothing must stand in their way.

Check, check.

Our survey said… Anyone we know?

Tell me which of the above does not apply to Gordon Brown. Well, I can’t. Can you?

Personally, I think ‘sociopath’ is far too grand a term for Brown. I think he’s just a narcissistic martinet with deep seated insecurities. But, hey, what do I know? Make up your own mind.

The only thing that still amazes me is that people are still planning on voting for this loser. They must be as delusional as he plainly is. It’s alarming that they’re loose in the country!

Ah well, only six more days to go, give or take a few hours. And then we’ll be rid of, wait for it, the worst prime minister and government ever to have been inflicted on this country.

Read Full Post »

Big tip of the hat to the peerless Barking Spider for unearthing this extraordinary assault on Gordon Brown by, of all people, George Galloway. Now, I know this could be a big case of pots and kettles – in the sense that there is clearly a heck of a lot of history between these two old Scots Labourists, and clearly one hell of a lot of bad blood – but even so, the very fact that Galloway could feel he could frame some of the things he says about Brown in the way he does in this interview really must give one pause. For one thing, it doesn’t sound especially political but very personal – and seems to come from personal knowledge.

Add to that the deluge of rumours and revelations of one kind or another about Brown’s mental health and general behaviour and anyone would be justified in wondering whether there is at least some substance to them; whether, thanks to some anti-democratic stitch-up in 1994 between Blair and Brown, Britain has been left at the mercy of a leader who is completely unfit, mentally, socially and professionally, for the role. At the very least, it hardly inspires confidence. Unlilke Galloway, however, it doesn’t inspire pity either, at least in me. Just bloody outrage that a man like that could have risen to the position of the two highest offices in the land, by, effectively, at least in the case of his current job, cynically exploiting what amounts to a serious constitutional loophole. “Undeserving”, “dishonourable” and “incapable” are the three words which I think best describe the man, consequently; “unforgiveable” the word to describe the behaviour of the parliamentary party that put him there.

Anyway, have a listen. It really is, well, extraordinary!

I’m not entirely sure whether we can really trust the utterances of a coiffured, oily old Trot like Galloway, but what he says nevertheless adds more substance to the overall image of Brown-as-angry-depressive-and-general-weirdo, his (real?) tears in a hideously soft interview with a self-publicising old buddy notwithstanding.

This mud is coming thick and fast. An awful lot of it is sticking, too. Good.

Read Full Post »

Or, at the very least, he should be if these latest revelations, from highly respected columnist, writer and long-time posh Labourist cheerleader Andrew Rawnsley are anything to go by. The Spectator has reported on this latest shocking insight into Brown’s terrifyingly dysfunctional world of violence and madness thus:

Stories of Gordon Brown’s temper are commonplace in Westminster. But they rarely make it into print. This, though, is about to change. The Mail on Sunday reports that Andrew Rawnsley’s follow-up to Servants of the Peoplecontains a string of revelations about Brown’s behaviour. The paper reports that Rawnsley has investigated whether the Prime Minister has hit a senior adviser, pulled a secretary out of her chair because she wasn’t typing fast enough and sworn at aides over the Obama snub. Downing Street is rubbishing these allegations. However, Rawnsley’s record is so good that these stories cannot easily be dismissed, also many journalists have come close to standing them up previously and so will not be inclined to dismiss them out of hand.
The Rawnsley book may make Brown’s temper a major election issue—which would be a disaster for Labour. The Sunday Times is reporting that Brown wants to stay on as Labour leader if the Tory majority is less than 20. This news might well prompt some former insiders to conclude that the interests of the Labour party are best served by revealing just how fraught life has been within Brown’s Downing Street.

The point for me is not, in this case, a political one. It’s a simple matter of the law – the law which – as anyone reading this blog who works every day with other people, whether in a management position or in the position of being managed by someone else (and that’s just about all of us, surely), will know – does not permit the kind of weirdly abusive, utterly contemptuous and, quite simply, disturbed behaviour that clearly is part of Brown’s “normal” modus operandi.

The man is unfit for general employment, let alone the role of Prime Minister of Great Britain – a position he has never earned, need we be reminded. However, given the kind of law-busting political protection he has always somehow enjoyed, and behind which the real scale of his unpleasant weirdness is still being hidden, I’m not going to hold my breath while waiting for him to be uncovered for the vicious, overrated, lying pile of insecure, egotistical, bullying, incompetent and impotent emptiness that he really is.

What becomes more clear as the days slide by and the election looms ever closer is that it will be a huge relief to a weary, depressed nation when he is finally put out of his (our) misery and sent the way the dodo.

Judging by these latest leaks from the bunker, he’s been rightly written off as a charisma wasteland by many in his own inner circle. Hardly surprising, then, that the entire country desperately wants to see the back of him – and I mean yesterday. Well, unless this country really is lost (and I don’t think it is) then they, and we, will get that wish.
But I don’t want to leave it there. For their various crimes, little and large (a crime’s a crime) I want Brown and Blair both to be hounded to the ends of the earth, until we have satisfaction for their hideous, painful, destructive long term political abuses.
Ultimately, though, it is all about class – in the sense that Brown, in particular, has none whatsoever.
What’s beyond doubt is that it’s time, most certainly, to get rid of the utter bastard.

Read Full Post »