Good! So that's alright then. We now all know that Mr Brown is not a bully. He's just someone who cares and is determined to build a fairer Britain.
In the meantime Mr Darling, arguably the next most important man in government to the PM, has confirmed in an interview with Sky News that two of the Prime Minister's key aides briefed long and hard against the Chancellor when he predicted, back in 2008 that Britain's economy was in for a very rough time. According to Mr Darling, "the forces of hell were unleashed." Now who could have unleashed the forces? The 'forces of hell', clearly not a very nice man. But does this constitute bullying. No it probably does not but what then followed exposes someone who is clearly hell-bent on getting his own way.
During the summer Mr Brown wanted to replace Mr Darling with Ed 'Blinker' Balls, but Mr Darling got his own back by refusing to be replaced, insisting he would resign to the back benches rather than accept another job in government. This would have made the PM's job close to untenable. Result Mr Darling is still in No.11, while Mr Brown remains in No.10.
Now all this can do little for the smooth working of government in these most testing of times. Mr Brown is clearly someone who likes to get his own way. For years he wanted the top job, over which he agreed a deal with Tony Blair. Now is it, was it, right that Tony Blair, who said he was going to serve a full term, stepped down to allow a man into the top job who is most obviously not cut out for such a role?
As I've often said on this blog, Mr Brown is not a leader, he is not the stuff from which leaders are made. All that has gone on since he has come to power shows a man who is Machiavellian, a man who has not the skills to be PM and most worryingly a man who is by inclination introverted rather than an extrovert. Leadership in a parliamentary democracy, one that is founded on the longstanding principals of cabinet rule does not sit well with Mr Brown (nor did it with his predecessor but he was a lot cleverer, as were those he gathered around him.) Gordon Brown is a controller, not a leader.
Vast column inches are given over to the opinion polls, the tea leaves and crystal ball gazing by pollsters trying to determine who is ahead, and by how much, and what it could all mean for our future government. Clearly Mr Cameron has not grabbed the electoral high ground; it might all change when we have the TV debates, but then again it may not. So could Gordon Brown still be PM after the election? Yes he could, and then the country will be in real trouble. Watch then the infighting and the jockeying before the knives come out. We will be faced with a Labour party who thinks it is omnipotent, one that will contain even less experience than the current cabinet. Who will push the knife into Mr Brown should he win in a couple of months?
Gordon Brown may want to be careful what he wishes for. . .