Private Letter From Gordon Brown: Sound as a Pound

Goodness me that Nadine Dorries MP (mid-Narnia, Con) is a hard-faced sort isn't she?

Following a long weekend of attention-seeking instead of the anonymity she ought to have been able to secure. And of ongoing and knowing smears against opponents - curious when she is complaining of smears against herself - she provides a rather poorly scanned and faxed letter she has received to a graphologist and a newspaper. Although the quality isn't great it clearly says "Private" at the start. Now it's all over The Times we feel it's probably too late to recover from Nadine's bad manners. So it's reproduced above.

Nadine Smearer will be hugely disappointed by the analysis of course. She looks BLOODY DISAPPOINTED in the accompanying picture. It says Gordon Brown is:

1. Goal directed, and generally well-intentioned;
2. Independent and self-starting;
3. He has been extremely careful in this writing;
4. You can tell when he's past, present, future;
5. He likes to be in charge and has sense of responsibility;
6. Doesn't agree with people just to be popular.

Seems to be alright then Elaine? (name of psychologist/graphologist) Well intentioned and all. Could you now check Nadine Dorries MP's private handwriting? She has put herself front and centre in a smear controversy when it looks like she could have remained anonymous. And she immediately gives a private letter to a graphologist/newspaper?

And you'd better check that David Cameron also. If his writing shows him as a defective do nothing blether we'd better not elect him.

Meanwhile what do readers think? Should hand-written letters from MPs be routinely subjected to graphology and psychoanalysis? Should a psycho-graphologist's report for all candidates be available from returning officers in all future elections? Is graphology scientific? Did Elaine study in or at Berkeley? Is it any good if the old Romany woman practitioner knows exactly who the writer is?