This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Blair on Brown... Why?

According to the Guardian article, Blair stated he knew Brown would be a disaster...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/31/tony-blair-gordon-brown-disaster

Blair ego/meglomaniac of the highest order or truth-teller? Or just bookseller provocateur?

Discuss...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

the_educated1

Because he was brutally back-stabbed by a man that was suppose to be his party ally, the one-eyed Scotsman.

Brown has no one to blame but himself. He argued that he was the right man to take Labour to the next elections, and he lost.

There is no further explanation to that.

:p:

Reply 2

vnupe

the_educated1

How did he back-stab him? I am not familiar with that incident... And even if he did back-stab him, that was over 5 years ago, why dredge it up now? What is to be gained, is this more about political payback and selling books than healing the labour party?

Why make it so public and personal? This is not good for the labour party no matter how you slice it... He reminds me of Bill Clinton, clearly a bright charismatic man with many gifts, but also one that needs and craves the spotlight...

I truly am dumbfounded... Brown has been out of sight for a couple of months now, why not let sleeping dogs lie...

Reply 3

the_educated1

vnupe

How did he back-stab him? I am not familiar with that incident...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blair%E2%80%93Brown_deal

Someone published a great article about it on wikipedia, check it out.

An account of the pact between the two politicians was presented in detail in the 2001 book The Rivals: The Intimate Story of a Political Marriage written by BBC journalist James Naughtie.

This is a good account of the relationship too.

vnupe

that was over 5 years ago, why dredge it up now? What is to be gained, is this more about political payback and selling books than healing the labour party?

This is Tony Blair's memoir, naturally you dredge up the past to paint a picture of your journey from beginning to end. We don't know whether it was a personal attack on Brown, it may have just been Blair's decision to reflect on his previous political battles (both good and bad). Most memoir's are controversial, dealing with personal failures and conflicts of the past. Blair's was no exception.

vnupe

Why make it so public and personal? This is not good for the labour party no matter how you slice it...

A politician's life and all of its content is PUBLIC and PERSONAL from the very beginning, you should know that already. When you choose to play politics, you play it in a dog eat dog environment. Nothing is private any longer.

vnupe

Brown has been out of sight for a couple of months now, why not let sleeping dogs lie.

Because he failed miserably with the British people, some dogs are better off dead. Oh, and laying low for several months doesn't automatically make a sinner "innocent".

:p:

Reply 4

fox_the_fix

Blair is one of the few politicians I respect. Everyone knew Brown would be a failure...

Reply 5

dude55

I think it's stupid to try and make out they hated each other or something. I think all it comes down to is a clash of personality. Blair was New Labour, Brown believed in returning more to Old Labour principles. That's what really caused tensions in their relationship.

Reply 6

tommy5x

You have to admit though that regardless of his failings that Brown was an excellent Chancellor and exceedingly principled. He had a lot of crap to deal with; and anybody who whines that he inflated the decifit; that's what happens when you employ a Keynesian model of economics during recession. When you stimulate an economy with moey you don't have the country as an entity is indebted, but individuals are protected toa gretaer extent.

Reply 7

dude55

tommy5x

This.

Despite one or two mistakes, Brown is a brilliant economist and it can't be denied. Those who whine about the deficit need to realise it was necessary in order to prop up our economy. Brown led the way not just with the British economy, but with the global economy. Basically all EU countries and the USA followed Brown's policy on dealing with the recession.

Reply 8

vnupe

I used to respect Blair, but more and more he seems to be a meglomaniac... his phrase of Brown being 'emotionally bankrupt' or whatever it was, speaks volumes to me.

Brown was concerned about physical and fiscal things like jobs, the economy, etc. Blair seemed to be concerned about more ethereal issues like perception and spin... which shows him to be the consummate politician and some would argue the consummate con man...

Blair effectively left the cupboard bare for Brown... Brown was not and will never be as charismatic as Blair, nor should he be, but for Blair to 'throw' him under the bus' and opine these cryptic vignettes about The Labour Party's future is completely self serving

Reply 9

booksnob

vnupe

Hear hear

Reply 10

Tom Gilchrist

I hear fox hunting's back on the table again - after Blair says it was a mistake ;-)

Reply 11

vnupe

I partially disagree... I agree with you on what you say about Blair... and you know the saying: 'Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely'. I think this speaks to Blair like a T. He came in a bright eyed ideologue who honestly thought he could 'fight (and change) City Hall'. But when he became a more seasoned (engrained) politician, he started to look towards legacy and History more so than what was 'right' for the people of Britain.

And IMHO this is where he lost the plot... he blindly followed Bush into Iraq, again thinking more of his legacy than anything else (Oh to be seen as a conquering hero) not fully realising that the US and now subsequently the UK was/is fighting an ideological war. And his self-aggrandizing response in his interview with the BBC in regards to any regrets with this initiative, proves (to me) his lack of a moral compass.

Brown on the other hand was left to continue paying for the War and righting the economic ship caused by the economic downturn/greed of the bankers during the Blair era.

Brown is not nor will he ever be charismatic; and in today's media savvy/idiot box is king, marketing/spin is everything culture, he didn't really have a fighting chance. I for one think he got a raw deal, and the more people complain about someone (Blair being all spin and no substance etc.) it seemed through the vote in the last election, they voted for another (albeit younger version) of the person they were clamouring against... Time will tell if Cameron indeed has the mettle and is more substantive and less flashy.

Reply 12

Jakko247

vnupe

I agree

Reply 13

abc101

Am I the only one who got a disgusting image in their head upon reading 'Blair on Brown'? :s-smilie:

Reply 14

marty189

Haha - blair on brown... nice...

Personally i'm amazed anyone ever thought Brown would be any good...

Reply 15

Peace'n'loveman

vnupe

Whilst these two self-serving megalomaniacs fiddled ,poor britain became broken and burned.

Reply 16

vnupe

Peace'n'loveman

Whilst these two self-serving megalomaniacs fiddled ,poor britain became broken and burned.

I can see Blair as the meglomaniac, but how do you put brown in that company? Honestly would like to know...

Reply 17

The_Male_Melons

tommy5x

Agreed. Much of the the problems Brown faced was the fault of Blairs.
And yes, he was going to lose an election because we had 13 years of Labour. It was only natural for the a Conservative win (although no one predicted the coalition after "Clegg mania").
Brown was always going to lose the election. He wasn't a bad prime minister. I prefer Brown over Blair any day.
Blair was style over substance and was a weaker Prime Minister than Brown, in my eyes.

Reply 18

Sweet_Comrade

vnupe

I can see Blair as the meglomaniac, but how do you put brown in that company? Honestly would like to know...

Agree about Blair, less about Brown.

Reply 19

vnupe

How long was Brown in before he called the election? 18 months? A little more, a little less? Was that realistically enough time to distinguish his manifesto/provisos from Blair's? I think not, IMHO he was simply finishing Blair's 13 year old hand... Hindsite could suggest that if Brown was slightly more charismatic and telegenic then he could have pulled it out, but I think the country's political mood was for a change...