Plan B .... Weeping

Sapphire

Radiantsoul wrote: »

If you are not interested in their personal life then you ought to discount the fact that Gordon Brown wept as a personal matter that has impact on those who care about such things. The truth of the matter is probably that you dislike Gordon Brown and you are allowing that to colour your judgement. Had he bruskly answere that the matter was off topic then we probably would have had post bemoaning him for being cold hearted.

Cameron has let it be argued that his disabled child helped to soften his attitudes and make him slightly more of a compassionate conservative. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with this as it is something voters might like to know.

Exactly: he 'wept as a personal matter' – which should have been kept personal, not used as an election ploy. Had he said that the matter was 'off topic', I would have had a little respect for him.

From my experience, those who grieve the most do not display their grief to all and sundry – they keep it to themselves.

I'm sure the interview was very well orchestrated, and that Brown knew exactly what the questions would be – he probably prepared them himself, or members of his spin team did.

Disgusting behaviour on the part of Brown, as I said.

Yes, I agree about Cameron, who did not parade his grief in public.

peterg1965

I think having a 'moment' on camera is a deliberate election 'vote winning' ploy dreamt up by the spin meisters themselves Campbell and Mandleson. There is not one bit of contrition or emotion in Campbell's little finger nail yet alone his body. His 'pause for effect' on the Andrew Marr show was absolutely pathetic, he is an arrogant, over confident, over bearing bully. Even if what he said about Blair was well intentioned and the truth as far as he is concerned, being emotional on TV doesn't sit with his demeanour. After all, isn't he the man who made glib comments on his Twitter blog during lunch of the day he was interviewed by Chilcott.

What worries me is that the Labour party, love them or loathe them, will do absolutely anything to cling to power. I predict this being the dirtiest election campaign ever, it is already well and truly underway.

vivatifosi

Gordon Brown and Piers Morgan are friends. I don't doubt for one minute Brown's tears were genuine, but I do wonder whether Morgan, or possibly Campbell (another of Morgan's friends according to his diaries) placed the question knowing it would show his human side: Morgan constantly says in his diaries that people would like him better if they saw his human side. As for me voting for him, not a snowball in hell's chance. However I feel sorry for both leaders for losing children, that must be horrible.

dopester

Fat gob repeatedly bragged to the nation; "No more boom and bust", as house prices went on to treble in a spit of time.

What a stupid thing for a Chancellor to repeatedly say, whilst enabling bad-boom conditions and championing the financial sector involved in chasing aggressive growth.

Leaving people like Hamish longing for natural and easy 'liquidity to return', to get us back to 'normal'.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWbfvZF7-WQ&NR=1

treliac

drc wrote: »

Alastair Campbell's not human surely?

Any any pretence to the contrary is more likely to be, as Sky News has suggested, his attempt at 'road-testing doing emotion.' :mad:

..........

treliac

vivatifosi wrote: »

Gordon Brown and Piers Morgan are friends. I don't doubt for one minute Brown's tears were genuine, but I do wonder whether Morgan, or possibly Campbell (another of Morgan's friends according to his diaries) placed the question knowing it would show his human side: Morgan constantly says in his diaries that people would like him better if they saw his human side. As for me voting for him, not a snowball in hell's chance. However I feel sorry for both leaders for losing children, that must be horrible.

And was it the case that they just happened to have a photo of the baby to pop infront of his eyes.... in case he had any diffiiculty in welling up to cue?

I feel sorry that he lost a child, but more disturbing is the sorrow I feel for a country which has endured so much sleaze and dishonesty from its policitical leaders over the past decade or so. We've completely lost our way.

Debt_Free_Chick

I'm not discounting the possibility that Brown knew the question would be raised (content of interviews is often "flagged" up in advance) and actually agreed to the inclusion of a discussion about the death of his daughter.

amcluesent

I wonder if Clown will be greeting like a wain in the election interviews coming up on TV as soon as there's a 'tricky' question?

"Clown, about our gold..."
"Och, sorry, sorry..." <snuffles>, <dabs eyes><smirk, smirk>

whathavewedone

Losing a child must be the worst pain imaginable and I'm sure that different people deal with it in different ways. Some want to talk about it, some can't bear to - I don't have a problem with him talking about it per se and I don't doubt that his feelings are genuine.

However, the timing is highly suspicious. This looks like a cheap stunt so close to an election and also so close to the first anniversary of Ivan Cameron's death when the papers will no doubt be talking about it whether David Cameron wants to discuss it or not. This government has form for fighting dirty, spinning and if necessary telling lies to gain popularity (think Damien Mcbride and the smears about Ivan Cameron that were planned).

Gordon Brown's had bad press lately about punching staff and yanking secretaries out of chairs because they weren't typing quickly enough - this coming from a well respected left leaning journalist it has a big ring of truth. What better way of neutralising the effects of all this than by showing Gordon's human side.

Piers Morgan is a friend of Gordon's and a big labour supporter. Really I should reserve judgment until I've seen the interview (although I don't actually want to watch it) but if it really is as it's been described to be - big pictures of Jennifer up cue Gordon's tears then I think it clearly has been planned in advance for electoral gain.

There's a huge difference between saying that you appreciate the NHS because you've had a sick child and doing a scmaltzy interview on TV a couple of months before an election where you burst into tears.

I'm sure it will work with a lot of people though - which is the whole point I suspect. Releasing the details in advance also ensures a far bigger audience than would otherwise be the case.

Incidentally if the following week Cameron gets a puff piece one hour interview and breaks down as well in similar circumstances I will be equally scathing. I just don't think it's appropriate. I hate the way that politics is going. What next? In ten years time will Cat Deely/Cheryl Cole be presenting election night and will we all be voting via the red button after watching a schmaltzy film about each of the politicians designed to show their human side?

Graham_Devon

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

I'm not discounting the possibility that Brown knew the question would be raised (content of interviews is often "flagged" up in advance) and actually agreed to the inclusion of a discussion about the death of his daughter.

All the questions would have been checked beforehand as they always are. He would have agreed to some questions and not others.

The most powerful man in britain (well, actually, second to mandleson) doesn't go into an interview ready to answer any old question. You could wipe the floor with him and really put him on several spots at any one time!

I didn't see the programme, but was it a live interview? Or was it recorded?