New Labour moves in contradictory ways nowadays:

It was once the big tent, now it is 'tribalism' and 'factionalism'.

Now is the time to ask the following questions: was New Labour ever actually the triumph of politics-as-marketing, as some say, or was it really the triumph of one individual?

Furthermore, which came first, New Labour or the Neo-Cons?

And did the lion really lie down with the lamb, or was that just tittle-tattle circulated by the lamb?

New Labour will no doubt get a deconstructivist makeover before long

Any French philosophers willing to step up to the plate? Perhaps only Freedom philosophers will do.

If Gordon Brown has received any good advice of late it would probably be along these lines:-

Choose the timing of your departure.

Brown has tonight fought off the people who wanted to tell him when to go.

Expect him to announce his departure when you least expect it.

Really depends on when things quieten down, but it could probably be a two week to two month window

....then again maybe that's the impression that he'll give people who are on the inside... or the outside... or just sort of, in the know... or whatever... who cares?

Allegedly, ex minister Jane Kennedy resigned over this 'window dressing issue'.

It appears that she felt hurt, betrayed and cheated by the PM. "He always said that I was the only window dressing for him."

Gordon Brown announced that ex ICI boss Sir John Harvey Jones from BBC's Troubleshooter series is to advise the government.

When informed that Sir John had sadly shuffled off this mortal coil some time ago, the PM replied that this would not pose a problem as he would be joining a government of the living dead anyway.

The current cobbled-together cabinet makes this the most undemocratic government since Ol Cromwell and Charles 1 came to blows on Britain's Got Talent.

An unelected Prime Minister relying on the Lords to complete his cabinet, clings on to power despite the support of a fraction of the British people.

When a certain Labour grandee once said that Brown would be a f-ing awful Prime Minister he clearly meant that he could only reach no 10 on a mandate as about as democratic as Yuri Andropov's (or Charles the First, for that matter).

Lucky for Gordon that we don't have an elected second chamber.