I’ve just read a long expose on Not Born Yesterday, alleging that Gordon Brown has serious physical and mental health issues, which are affecting his ability to keep ‘just getting on with the job’.
Now the first question some might ask is to what is extent is this any of our business? Surely a politician is entitled to privacy when it comes to his medical records. And should we not applaud him for reaching the most powerful position in the country despite only having sight in one eye?
Brown has constantly over-used the word ‘courage’ (or as he says coo-ge, but perhaps pronounciation isn’t really fair game), andeven written a book on the subject, and likes to give us the impression that he is a man of great values. But we only have to look at the Libyan debacle to see what a farcical notion this is. And let’s not even mention that election that never was!
There is a legitimate argument to say that people with a defined disability - whether physical or mental - should not be discouraged from holding high office, but when is the line crossed between affirmative action, disability discrimination and simple, plain incompetence? Historical evidence suggests (Warwick MP) Anthony Eden’s usage of amphetamines to overcome weaknesses caused by a botched operation seriously affected his judgement over the Suez crisis, whereas Churchill seemd to keep his ‘black dog’ under control.
My opinion is that Brown is not, and never has been up to the job. The only reason for him staying on now is that he is secretly a Tory (we know how much he admires Maggie), and that he wants to wreck Labour’s chances of ever regaining power for at least another generation. Whatever your political affiliations (I declare I’m a firm conflour blue), this can’t be good for democracy.
So it really is no good speculating whether or not Brown is feeling down, we just want to get him out.
