The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
if he had had interesting policies, policies that really looked to the future, rather than merely pretending to, electoral legitimacy wouldn't have been so important. the policies would have made sense to more people, and would have started getting traction by now.
instead we got 'we didn't see it coming' (yeah right...)
instead we got selling us the idea of nuclear energy, and downplaying renewables, we got more coddling financial trickster-whizzkids in the city, we got more deaths in afghanistan, we got bleating platitudes, ossified ineffectiveness personified.
ok, he took the brits out of iraq, maybe he deserves more props for that.
with respect, your question itself is an excursion into pure tail-wag-the-dog territory!
this whole 'timing the elections' thing smacks of puerile politics, as if the energy-wave of novelty, (still intact public image as Great Leader!) was more important than the policies the man was promoting...
it's short term political maneuvering, as if divorced from reality.
people aren't nearly as stupid as the blairs and browns of this world think.
we knew iraq would be a clusterfuck, informed bloggers (such as yourself, one of the very best, imo) have been warning about the crunch for 5 years +, all that time wasted enriched his buddies in banking and multiplied the pain felt by the generations in hock his policies create.
i think a lot more of the public distrust brown than ever, whatever old labour cred he established has been long consumed by his naked hard-on for tony's power, the power he fretted and schemed on for years.
as for wearing that power, he's right of john major!
substituting pompousness for statesmanship, and hoping people won't know the difference. duh.
the little grey men rule england, but i think that era is about over.
once out of politics, i wouldn't be surprised if he reverted to a much more genial, positive side to his character.
power, and his addiction to it, have simply brought out the worst in him. present circumstances would test any leader in his shoes, it's true, but i can't believe there aren't much more intelligent, and most importantly able people in labour's ranks.
as an man, there are a lot worse in politics, his predecessor for example, but as a prime minister, he's hopelessly out of his depth, and it shows.
a stooge for the banksters, inadequate for the role of leading the UK out of the most difficult period since ww2.
'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 3 4 comments
by eurogreen - Jun 28 21 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 27 1 comment
by Oui - Jun 25 12 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 16 10 comments
by Oui - Jun 17 53 comments
by Oui - Jun 15 8 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 34 comments
by gmoke - Jun 29
by eurogreen - Jun 2821 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Oui - Jun 2712 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 271 comment
by Oui - Jun 2512 comments
by Oui - Jun 1753 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1610 comments
by Oui - Jun 158 comments
by Oui - Jun 1210 comments
by Oui - Jun 89 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 79 comments
by Oui - Jun 767 comments
by Oui - Jun 53 comments
by Oui - May 29163 comments
by Oui - May 22122 comments