h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I understand that Brown is virtually blind in his one good eye. He is able to write - just - if he uses a thick, black felt pen. So he has two options for vilification:
- scruffy handwriting
- impersonal wordprocessing.

Devil? Deep blue sea?

Rock? Hard place?

Now, as it happens, I won't be voting SLP at the next election: my preference is for a party capable of incorporating left wing viewpoints. But what bizarre grounds on which to judge a politician. (One who I've met in RL, incidentally, twice, and found to be highly personable).

cf: 'I'm not voting for 'im. 'E's a Jock!' The mind truly boggles.

>> So he has two options <<

You present a false dichotomy. He has the option of writing a well-written letter, correctly addressed to the right person, and naming the soldier correctly.

RF

How, RF?

HE CANNOT SEE!!! HE CANNOT WRITE!!! You gotta problem with that?

(Don't mean to shout, btw. I used capitals there just in case you are similarly impaired.)

btw...anyone seen the letter? A photo is in tpday's Grauniad. It is not at all clear that it is as described. Scruffy (of course) but no obvious crossings out or spelling mistakes. So maybe the Currant Bun is...how shall we say...spinning it?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/cartoon/2009/nov/10/steve-bell-gordon-brown-sun

Er, yes. I've seen a much better photograph than you have, obviously, as it is clear that it was addressed to "Mrs. James", and that the word "Jamie" had been misspelled at first then written over. Why do you deny this? Why does Gordon Brown deny this? It's obvious to everyone that he made a mistake. Wouldn't it be better to admit it?

RF

Well, if he or anyone else spotted the mistake before the letter was sent then he should have made a fair copy. Any other words in the letter would be correctable, but not the name of the dead man or the name of his mother.

If he didn't spot it, then - well, as has already been mentioned, the man has significant problems with his sight. I've not seen the photographs of the letter, and I wouldn't put it past the papers, or whoever is representing Mrs Janes, to do a little adroit photoshopping.

And maybe they did spell the name right RF. We are, as we have each admitted, both speculating.

All the other stuff about the neatness or otherwise of his writing or whether or not he uses a felt pen is irrelevant (a) to the question and (b) to his job.

I still think it's an admirable gesture though. Interesting that Thatcher started the tradition, thanks for that RF.

Quick question: Did the other PMs write hand-written letters, or did they just sign a machine-written letter?

http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2009/11/09/7629

Since the practice was introduced, apparently.

RF

RF:

We agree that the handwriting is unclear, yeah? It therefore follows that it is unclear whether or not he made mistakes. It's your call versus mine. I do not claim to be unequivocally correct here. Neither should you.

So...I guess the issue at hand is Brown's sincerity. The soldier's mother seems to accept that he was sincere in his apology. Do you?

No, Edward, I do not agree that the handwriting is "unclear". Get the best possible photo you can of the letter, and look at the "m"s and "n"s throughout it.

You'd have to be an idiot to think that there's any confusion.

RF

And yes, I've doubted Gordon Brown's sincerity since the 1980's. He's a liar.

RF

On The Availability Of Helicopters:

Which should we, as taxpayers, be shelling out for:

a) Materiel which will give an unquantifiable (but marginal) advantage in an ultimately unwinnable war which we are quite at liberty to withdraw from?

b) The usual stuff like schools, hospitals...


C'moooooon! Is the next election *really* to be fought on individual judgements on the quality of the PM's handwriting?

>>And yes, I've doubted Gordon Brown's sincerity since the 1980's. He's a liar.

And thus this letter vis not germane to your judgement. So you might as well shut up about it.

>>You'd have to be an idiot to think that there's any confusion.

I shall take that as the mindless insult it was intended to be.

You give good debate as ever, ReddyFreddy, you really do.

We need to pay for both, because it'd be reprehensible if we retreated from our obligations in Afghanistan.

We started it, and we stay until it's finished even if, as with the Second and Third Afghan Wars, it takes decades.

Ed: Why do you deny the evidence before your eyes? Is Gordon like the pope to you, infallible?

Just admit he made a mistake, for BoB's sake.

RF

A valid point, HI.

Just so long as we're crystal clear that the war will be won *not* by force and the inevitable placing of troops in harm's way that this implies but by a) massive development aid both in Afghanistan and Waziristan and b) persuading the USFDA to licence the immensely useful drug diamorphine, thus instantly robbing Afghani bandits of their income.

More Chinooks would be piddling in the wind. It really would.

anyone got a link to a photo of this letter?

may seem an obvious place to start in this debate

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gordon+brown+condolence+letter

RF

RF:
>>Ed: Why do you deny the evidence before your eyes? Is Gordon like the pope to you, infallible?

>>Just admit he made a mistake, for BoB's sake.

I have already stated that I will not be voting SLP.

On a personal level - yes, I quite like what I've seen of Brown. But then - hell - I once had a pleasant encounter with Teddy Taylor. On the economy - I think he's quite astute, but misguided. And I somewhat agree with Polly Toynbee that he's way, way late in endorsing Tobin taxes. What I really, really hold against him, though, is his cabinet loyalty over Afghanistan and Iraq.

So as you can see...I hardly count as a loyal Brownite.

You judge me wrongly, RF.

Iago.

The problem for the great powers picking a fight in Afghanistan is that they Afghans tend to win. The Americans are learnng the same long slow dispiriting and bloody lesson that the Russians learned in the 1980s and the Britains should have learned in the 1840s the 1880s and the 1920s.