Gordon Brown bangs on about putting his "vision" to the country. The trouble is, that no one quite knows what this vision is. It's a bit like a politician saying "I'm in charge", when the very fact that they have said it indicates that they are anything but "in charge".
39 comments:
Even Stevie Wonder has more vision that Gordon Brown
personally I went to specsavers.
oops - typo -
than Gordon Brown
Surely the point is that if Gordon Brown is going to change the content of the 2005 Labour Manifesto to the significant extent he and(shudder) his advisers are intimating then that in itself requires a new mandate and a general election particularly as they were elected on the 2005 Manifesto of which large junks are still unenacted ?
I don't want a PM who has visions. I want someone who'll keep us safe and healthy; and make us rich and happy.
Brown and Cameron one plays visions and the other plays sounds of silence ,while the MSM play tubular bells,well they would but Brown has them on a close rein.
'Flash' has waffled pitifully about ,the need to set out a vision” . Here’s an experiment for you . Imagine Tony Blair`s thespian puppy delivery of this hogwash . What have you got ? Thats right undiluted Blair in dark suit and blue tie .
At the denouement of the Edwardian detective story, for one character ,the civility that has hidden his febrile evil fractures before the truth. Typically the villain is supercilious to the end .Let us see how it plays out ..
BROWN( Clapping sarcastically ) “What lovely a story Poirot . What a pity you have no evidence for your funny little theory…”..
POIROT-“ Au contraire mon brave … I can prove that you are not the conviction politician with an alibi for the last then years .Monsieur Joe Publique , who you thought so dull , saw you running the country like a rolling press release. Your imposture has been “magnifique “ .It amazed even zee leelte grey cells of Poirot .”
LADY CHUMLEY “ Poirot , what are you saying ?…”
POIROT-“ Blair …Brown … Brown , Blair look closely mon freres …Zey are zee same man “
COLONEL DUFFER-“ My god Poirot “ ‘ You`re right “ Seize the blackguard !“
Bestial; fear disfigures the villains laconic smirk and typically the he makes a dash for it over the croquet court. Finally , dishevelled and desperate , he is dragged back to the patio .There is no escape from the vice grip of a sweating plod and the astonished Hastings.
Brown can say what he likes about the inheritance tax sums , noone cares , its loose change in the 647 billion anyway. He can pose as a serious man “”Getting on with the job “ until the bovine ruminants return and good luck. We have seen who and what he is , and in his fond hope that it will be forgotten he has once again misjudged the intelligence of honest Joe Public
No one asked Gordon about Des Browne and his feelings about Gordon upstaging him last week. Has anyone seen Des recently or has Gordon turned him into Macavity Brown II
No problem with "the vision" thing, he will just look through the Tory policies again, and select a few more - then say only Labour can afford these as "the Tory sums do not add up". He still thinks we are stupid.
If he's so keen on his vision - why didn't we get any glimpse of it at the conference - instead of being deafened with a wall of noise about the election? I mean I know the whole thing is hogwash but really - it's such bad hogwash.
Fitaloon 1.25pm
"Swiss" is seriously pissed off with Gordon because he never told him about last weeks Press Conference announcement in Iraq. He refused to do Newsnight with "Paxo" to defend Gordon's position and so the hapless Ainsworth was "dragooned" into doing it and the rumour in barracks is that Des is dodging all engagements until after this afternoon's announcements
Of course, another word for having a 'vision' is a 'hallucination' ...
After the Tory Conference I was very clear on DC's vision. Why couldn't GB have done the same in his speech at the Labour Conference. Maybe I am Stupid Jo Public but I always thought this was one of the things conferences were for?!
No. Vision never came into it, GB wanted to frighten DC with all his talk of on early election. Instead of which DC showed us his Leadership and Visionary qualities - drew his party into one united front and showed the Country the way things could be under the Tories.
It's such a cop put, he's still trying to exploit the fact that he isn't Tony Blair with this inchoate almost cod-mystical 'vision' thing gobbledook. It's grotesque, Brown trying turn himself into a version of Clinton.
The only thing that caused Brown to cancel the election was his vision of the election results program with Tory gain flashing up every five minutes!
People who have 'visions' should be locked away for their own and our safety. Is he not there to reflect the will of the electorate ? Not to become a prophet leading his people to drown in a financial Red Sea.
The 'vision thing' sounds demented coming out of his mouth.He keeps talking about 'aspiration' too. He's becoming a flak feartie.
The coaward releases a book called courage, when he talks of his vison it's a sure thing the ideas cupboard's completely bare.
Bliar felt the hand of destiny or history on his shoulder, Gord-awful Broon has visions.
What is the difference ?
Judging by the way he announces fiscal policy and troop cuts, all these double visions are quite an achievment for a one-eyed ummm ... gentleman.
Alan Douglas
Could the Broon One has some terrible misunderstanding of standard English ?
He thinks it is "de vision, and rule".
ALan Douglas
Brown went on about a blackhole, what about Labours £34 billion deficit last year? This does not include PFI.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=277
The point is that the Labour Party won an election on a manifesto. The fact that we have a new PM is, in constitutional terms, irrelevant.
However, if the new PM wants to 'change' things, and move away from, or add to the manifesto on which his party won, then it IS surely a constitutional issue, and he should seek re-election and a new mandate.
The point is that without an election, any 'change' he brings which isn't specifically spelt out in the manifesto is undemocratic!
I say, I say, I say! What's the first thing you do if you want to get re-elected on a wave of popular support?
Antagonise the Murdoch press by leaving them out of the loop? No.
Antagonise the non-Murdoch press by leaving them out of the loop too? No.
Treat long-suffering British soldiers as a backdrop for your electioneering photocalls? No.
Tell unbelievable porkies leavened with sanctimonious platitudes? No.
Surround yourself with second-rate yes men and treat them like furniture? No.
Pick your nose and eat the bogies while 500,000 people are watching you on television? No.
etc., etc., etc.
NOT a skilful politician.
I recall that Jim Callaghan and John Major had visions and, just like Gordon The McGravy Train Engine, they were no bloody good.
Don't forget that Gordon has only one eye and what he sees depends on which eye he puts his telescope to.
Brown is disintegrating by the minute facing questions on Iraq in the House. Stuttering, hesitant, unable to answer questions straight. Pretty humiliating. Judging by this performance it won't be long before he and his defective vision will history.
um ... "he and his defective vision ARE history".
Not wanting to get too personal, but I don't think "vision" is Gordon Brown's longest suit. In fact I expect he has trouble viewing objects in perspective.
Oscar, was it me, or did he honestly get on a high horse about going to Iraq just now? If there's one thing Question Time last week showed it was how the public saw through that trip, and yet he still peddles the same line and tries to turn it around on his critics. Astounding.
David - yes - he did try to get a tinge of moral indignation in his voice in response to DC. (crazy ... ) But as the questioning went on he just got more and more feeble. The guy is such a sham. I also caught Jacqui Smith yawning (quite early on in the proceedings) while her leader spoke. Not quite picking your nose - but still.
Gordon Brown has about as much vision as David Blunkett in a 'pea-souper'
Given that he only has one eye, he should hold off on talking about his "vision".
Brillian exposition, Newmania. But when Brown fled across the croquet lawn, his blind eye missed a croquet hoop and he tripped and fell on John Prescott, who punched him the face, which is when Poirot was able to collar him.
If he is having visions he must consult a psychiatrist, or go to vision express who are offering two pairs of glasses for the price of one.
I'd happily give the Old Brown Bottler double vision with my clunking fist.
Having heard him spinning away today as per usual, I can only conclude that he's completely barking mad.
He's very dangerous - we've got to get rid of him, and fast.
'We've got to get rid of him, and fast' - you'll find in a few months some of his own little friends will probably have done so, the planning has already started.
Gordos grip on reality gets weaker by the minute.
who was it who said we would miss bliar when he is gone? well i think we do at least his brand of bullshit was entertaining gb s is toe curlingly awful.
It has become clear that the late, great Tony Blair (remember him?) was a master of lies; someone so steeped in self-delusion that the sentimentality of the moment occulted reality and candour.
Not so Gordon Brown. This man is a second rater when it comes to lies. To paraphrase Bogart, "I don't object to a liar, just a cut-rate one."
He isn't like Blair. Brown's strict religious upbringing won't allow him to blank out the truth like Blair was able to. At the bottom of his heart, Brown knows he was predicating his election decision on the polls and knows also that he is telling a lie.
All he can muster is this filibuster and flam about a "vision"; a word by the way well used by Southern Fundamentalist Evangelists like every white van driver uses "f**k".
I cannot believe I am living in a mature democracy, with the legacy of so many heroes of our culture and language, to listen to this travesty of integrity.
I have always said that a country gets the leaders it deserves.
Well, all you smug liberals and all you terrible plasma screen telly people, look what you have done. You have given us this fractured human with one eye who used to disappear when the going got tough, and who now makes specious announcements to try and divert attention.
You have been sussed and you know it. The price we pay is two years more of the same. Thank you.
Well, I guess I owe you an apology (or at the very least, a nod of the head, of sorts) after my last rather scathing comment on your blog, Iain.
Yes, David Cameron turned in a fine performance at the Conservatives' conference last week, and I'm sure he knew exactly what he was doing, and that his speech played some part in the Con rejuvenation in the polls. Well played, Mr Cameron.
Yet I'm also inclined to agree with Dizzy's observation that, by and large, the electorate doesn't give a monkeys about party conferences nor political scandals/upheavals.
Even so, Mr Cameron's speeches have given me pause to consider whether to support the Con Party in the next election. I freely admit, I don't like where Cameron seems to be taking the Con party, I don't fully trust him (I am an "old school Tory" who would rather see Tebbitt as leader) but, alright, I shall at least give Mr Cameron some rope, after his performance last week.
Who knows, perhaps he is worth a chance? - signed, Mr Undecided.
We now know the only difference between Blair and Brown - they're both liars but Blair was a better liar - to use an old joke, if you can fake sincerity you've got it made. Blair could - Brown can't.
Plus - no matter how they spin it, David Cameron has made Brown back down on his intended election. When it came down to it, Brown blinked first.
So when push comes to shove in international negotiations in future - how sure are we Mr. Brown's backbone won't turn into custard again...........
Tony Blair puzzled me for a long time. Eventually I came to the conclusion that he had no convictions of his own whatsoever. he was a puppet whose strings were pulled by such as Cherie Booth, Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell. That allowed him make quite absurd claims with an air of total conviction.
Brown must now drink from the bitter chalice that he helped fill. He is already face-to-face with the problems of running a country that he helped to put on the path to ruin. He was widely applauded for his firm grasp over the consecutive disasters but what did he really do? Over the bombings he promised more stringent legislation. Over the murder of Rhys Jones he promised more stringent legislation. His Home Secretary promised some bins where unwanted guns could be placed anonymously.
With regards to foot and mouth, he did little. The work was done by professionals. A preliminary report shows that the cause was underinvestment or poor project management at a government facility.
When the Northern Rock problem surfaced he simply remained out of sight.
Mysteriously this all became a cause for his self description as capable and experienced. He was described in the usual newspapers as calm under pressure.
So far he has displayed neither wisdom nor a grasp of the essentials of administration. His vision is seen in a glass darkly.
Victor
Post a Comment