ForumGarden

This is the legendary speech by Gordon Sinclair. It is one of the "Legends of the Internet" now. With the bashing we take every day from all over the world, I thought it prudent to remind everyone...just who we are.

Americans: The Good Neighbors

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most

generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out

of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and

forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying

even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who

propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the

streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in

to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes.

Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into

discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about

the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those

countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar

build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to

equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas 10? If

so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except

Russia fly American Planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the

moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk

about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American

technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times and

safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store

window for everybody to look at . Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued

and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they

are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at

home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through

age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad

and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both

are still broke.

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other

people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to

the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during

the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm

one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They

will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they

are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their

present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."

Stand proud, Americans!

When I was a child, my Mum told me about her time spent in America as a teenager. She moved to America with her family in 1926 and returned to England when her Mother died.

She spoke of the attitude of the Americans as being completely different to over here. She extolled them in many ways. They make you feel welcome, she told me. They give everything a try. They have big ideas and do what they can to make them work. Over here, ideas were laughed at.

She would have gone back if she could, but, at the age of 15, when her mother died, she had to take over from her mother and look after 8 brothers and a sister.

When they came back, they brought net curtains with them. No one in their street had net curtains then, it was a rarity in England. But that soon changed.

The American culture affects the whole world, but no one likes to admit that it's good and that it didn't come from them.

This forum is a good example of the decency, the big-heartedness, and variety of Americans. Will the rest of the world get them down? I don't think so.

Yea well thats one side of it.

The first American I ever met was a heavily tattooed, big, black sailor in a nasty part of town in Lisbon, Portugal. I was very lost and, at 17, pretty scared. He rescued me, paid a cab to take me safely back to my hotel and when I thanked him just smiled and told me I was welcome, ma'am. The second American I met was in Hawaii. I had a plane stopover and must have looked tired. She was on her way to work but gave me the key to her apartment so I could rest up before my flight out. Since then, I've been to America many times and had my initial impressions confirmed. Americans, like Australians, are of many racial mixes, geographical and social backgrounds, so it's not easy to generalise. But I've found as a whole they are kind, open, decent, friendly people... grin.. Most aussies would agree, and we have always stood proudly alongside the US.

On an aside - a colleague once asked me how I could bear to eat American food. I found this very perplexing as I recalled the vast variety of great tucker I'd tasted over the years across a vast country. It turned out my colleague had no idea what she meant, and had never been to America anyway. Ignorance has a lot to answer for.

Of course I once met an American on a ski slope - kid you not - who really did think I came from Austria and didn't seem to have heard of Australia at all... so maybe there's a bit of that about everywhere.

AussiePam wrote: The first American I ever met was a heavily tattooed, big, black sailor in a nasty part of town in Lisbon, Portugal. I was very lost and, at 17, pretty scared. He rescued me, paid a cab to take me safely back to my hotel and when I thanked him just smiled and told me I was welcome, ma'am. The second American I met was in Hawaii. I had a plane stopover and must have looked tired. She was on her way to work but gave me the key to her apartment so I could rest up before my flight out. Since then, I've been to America many times and had my initial impressions confirmed. Americans, like Australians, are of many racial mixes, geographical and social backgrounds, so it's not easy to generalise. But I've found as a whole they are kind, open, decent, friendly people... grin.. Most aussies would agree, and we have always stood proudly alongside the US.



On an aside - a colleague once asked me how I could bear to eat American food. I found this very perplexing as I recalled the vast variety of great tucker I'd tasted over the years across a vast country. It turned out my colleague had no idea what she meant, and had never been to America anyway. Ignorance has a lot to answer for.



Of course I once met an American on a ski slope - kid you not - who really did think I came from Austria and didn't seem to have heard of Australia at all... so maybe there's a bit of that about everywhere.






Austria...Australia *shrug*





:p

That speech brings to light one of the things that I'm most proud of in America....sure we have our problems, if you were to watch the nightly news, you might think that's all we have, but unlike some countries where not only are the problems not debated, sometimes they can't be mentioned at all, Americans love to thrash our problems out in the open.

We may have trouble, but we are always trying to better ourselves.

Jives wrote: That speech brings to light one of the things that I'm most proud of in America....sure we have our problems, if you were to watch the nightly news, you might think that's all we have, but unlike some countries where not only are the problems not debated, sometimes they can't be mentioned at all, Americans love to thrash our problems out in the open.



We may have trouble, but we are always trying to better ourselves.


I dont know.

The heart of America is something to be proud of to be sure.

The people we elect....not so much.

Nomad wrote:

The people we elect....not so much.


Yeah, thank goodness we have a system where we can get a new one every four years, eh? Sooner or later we'll get it right!:wah:

Nomad wrote: I dont know.

The heart of America is something to be proud of to be sure.

The people we elect....not so much.


Hmm Mad:

Whom are you refering to?

Ted (hic) Kennedy?

Jives wrote: Yeah, thank goodness we have a system where we can get a new one every four years, eh? Sooner or later we'll get it right!:wah:


I wonder.

I read today Gore is patterning himself after Nixon.

Expect a run from him next go round.

Cream of the crop material huh ? :rolleyes:

Yeah, and I heard on CNN that even some of the Democrats think that Hillary Clinton can't get elected president...too bad. I kind of thought it would be cool to have a female president.

Jives wrote: Yeah, and I heard on CNN that even some of the Democrats think that Hillary Clinton can't get elected president...too bad. I kind of thought it would be cool to have a female president.


Id very much like to see a Margaret Thatcher in the White House but Hillary ?

Maybe, shes pretty tough. Condoleeza Rice could be the first, I think shes being groomed. Or is that way too far fetched ? Were still a little backwards there.

They're calling her the "Ice Queen" around Congress.

Jives wrote: They're calling her the "Ice Queen" around Congress.


Rice or Clinton ?

Thats going to happen. What are they calling the rest of the pricks up there ?

Don't worry America, your still appreciated, you've just had some problems thats all. Look, I know we slag you in Europe, but we also slag each other and ourselves at least as much, and most countries are so crap it would be unfair to even take the **** out of them. So cheer up, your not that bad, I still like you lot anyway.

Jives wrote: This is the legendary speech by Gordon Sinclair. It is one of the "Legends of the Internet" now. With the bashing we take every day from all over the world, I thought it prudent to remind everyone...just who we are.

Americans: The Good Neighbors

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most

generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out

of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and

forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying

even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who

propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the

streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in

to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes.

Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into

discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about

the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those

countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar

build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to

equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas 10? If

so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except

Russia fly American Planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the

moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk

about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American

technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times and

safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store

window for everybody to look at . Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued

and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they

are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at

home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through

age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad

and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both

are still broke.

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other

people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to

the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during

the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm

one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They

will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they

are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their

present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."

Stand proud, Americans!


I LOVE this! Rush plays it on his show often!

Nomad wrote: Id very much like to see a Margaret Thatcher in the White House but Hillary ?

Maybe, shes pretty tough. Condoleeza Rice could be the first, I think shes being groomed. Or is that way too far fetched ? Were still a little backwards there.


I'd vote for Condoleeza!

Gordon Sinclair a legend ... in whose eyes... sheesh I can't remember what he is famous for.... hehehehe

Geeze if every nation could see the good in every other nation like that wouldn't the world be grand. Yep be proud of who you are.... everyone

Why is it Americans seem unable to accept that because you criticise the actions of a government it doesn't follow that you dislike the people? Anti american foreign policy is not the same as being anti american.

You should see what our press say about the French and the EEC generally we're actually quite nice about you.

seems we're to blame for Iran not America.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/jou ... 10,00.html

I blame the english myself:sneaky:

gmc wrote: Why is it Americans seem unable to accept that because you criticise the actions of a government it doesn't follow that you dislike the people? Anti american foreign policy is not the same as being anti american.



You should see what our press say about the French and the EEC generally we're actually quite nice about you.



seems we're to blame for Iran not America.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/jou ... 10,00.html



I blame the english myself:sneaky:


And I thought our Government was too dumb and stupid to manage to organise a **** up in a brewery, let alone all this strife in Iran.:-5

gmc wrote: Why is it Americans seem unable to accept that because you criticise the actions of a government it doesn't follow that you dislike the people? Anti american foreign policy is not the same as being anti american.



You should see what our press say about the French and the EEC generally we're actually quite nice about you.



seems we're to blame for Iran not America.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/jou ... 10,00.html



I blame the english myself:sneaky:
Because unlike Britain, Americans ARE their government. For the people, by the people and of the people. (See U.S. constitution preamble, which every american child the age of ten and above is required to memorize) Thats why it is taken as a personal insult. You cant seperate the people from the government. The government is elected by MAJORITY vote.

Raven wrote: Because unlike Britain, Americans ARE their government. For the people, by the people and of the people. (See U.S. constitution preamble, which every american child the age of ten and above is required to memorize) Thats why it is taken as a personal insult. You cant seperate the people from the government. The government is elected by MAJORITY vote.


That's a spurious arguement. You seem to think we just have to put up with things foisted upon us by our govt, it's just not like that. You forget who invented parliamentary democracy. We elected TB ourselves and are therefore responsible for what is done in our name whether we like it or not. We do need electoral reform very badly and hopefully there might be serious moves to change things. TB won't last much longer IMO.

But if someone criticises out govt from abroad we don't assume it is just being anti british for the sake of it or take it personally or maybe we just don'y worry about what foreigners think.

I'm curious, as an american living in the UK do you not get a sense of a growing anger at the govt, or is it wishful thinking on my part. In Scotland polls suggest he is becoming less popular than Maggie Thatcher, which takes some doing.

Jives wrote: This is the legendary speech by Gordon Sinclair. It is one of the "Legends of the Internet" now. With the bashing we take every day from all over the world, I thought it prudent to remind everyone...just who we are.

Americans: The Good Neighbors

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most

generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth.

Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out

of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and

forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying

even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.

When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who

propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the

streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in

to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes.

Nobody helped.

The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into

discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about

the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those

countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar

build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to

equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas 10? If

so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except

Russia fly American Planes?

Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the

moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk

about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American

technocracy, and you find men on the moon - not once, but several times and

safely home again.

You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store

window for everybody to look at . Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued

and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they

are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at

home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through

age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad

and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both

are still broke.

I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other

people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to

the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during

the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm

one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They

will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they

are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their

present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those."

Stand proud, Americans!


And after all this, yet America lets Americans go hungry & homeless. Letting poverty & dispare prevail for millions of it's own. Only in America can the rich get richer, & the poor get poorer! Maybe it's time America should start to put its' "own" first, and start to take care of business on its' own homefront!

gmc wrote:

I blame the english myself:sneaky:


OI.....watch it gmc....us southerners are 'cushty'....

gmc wrote: That's a spurious arguement. You seem to think we just have to put up with things foisted upon us by our govt, it's just not like that. You forget who invented parliamentary democracy. We elected TB ourselves and are therefore responsible for what is done in our name whether we like it or not. We do need electoral reform very badly and hopefully there might be serious moves to change things. TB won't last much longer IMO.



But if someone criticises out govt from abroad we don't assume it is just being anti british for the sake of it or take it personally or maybe we just don'y worry about what foreigners think.



I'm curious, as an american living in the UK do you not get a sense of a growing anger at the govt, or is it wishful thinking on my part. In Scotland polls suggest he is becoming less popular than Maggie Thatcher, which takes some doing.
Interesting question, gmc. Actually if the truth be told, the government here scares me. Because it's becoming less british and more european.

Having said that, the history of the place has always been rather european. Except maybe for Scotland, where until James I, (or VI) it became anglicised a bit, it remained pretty much Scottish, without undue outside influence. I havent been here long enough to truly understand the nuances of british politics. From the american standpoint, I dont recall hearing much criticism of the british system of government. You guys do enough of that yourselves! LOL!! I DO understand the british system is far older than our own.

But you guys dont vote your PM in. He is just the head of the majority winning party, right? You guys just vote for Mp's? Or do you actually vote for the party? I do know the Queen has alot more power over this place than alot of people think. I have been doing some studying on this. I find it fascinating that a democratically elected parliament exists in a monarchy. Unlike the popular opinion, whether people like it or not, she is NOT just a figurehead. She is a constitutional monarch. She is STILL the head of state here. They have many good books on the subject. And they explain very well just what she can do. Just because she refrains from siding with any particular party, doesnt mean she CANT!

Raven wrote: Interesting question, gmc. Actually if the truth be told, the government here scares me. Because it's becoming less british and more european.

Having said that, the history of the place has always been rather european. Except maybe for Scotland, where until James I, (or VI) it became anglicised a bit, it remained pretty much Scottish, without undue outside influence. I havent been here long enough to truly understand the nuances of british politics. From the american standpoint, I dont recall hearing much criticism of the british system of government. You guys do enough of that yourselves! LOL!! I DO understand the british system is far older than our own.

But you guys dont vote your PM in. He is just the head of the majority winning party, right? You guys just vote for Mp's? Or do you actually vote for the party? I do know the Queen has alot more power over this place than alot of people think. I have been doing some studying on this. I find it fascinating that a democratically elected parliament exists in a monarchy. Unlike the popular opinion, whether people like it or not, she is NOT just a figurehead. She is a constitutional monarch. She is STILL the head of state here. They have many good books on the subject. And they explain very well just what she can do. Just because she refrains from siding with any particular party, doesnt mean she CANT!


Scotland has always had closer ties with europe than the English-both in trade, influences and alliances against the english.

Actually this one scares me because it's becoming more American with the PM acting as if he is head of an executive branch of government with a remit to do as he pleases while in power.

Yes we vote for MP's to represent us but in practice most will vote for a party rather than an individual-though there are exceptions where an MP gets himself well known. It's a first past the post system in that the canbdidate with the most votes in that constituency wins. It's open to abuse as boundaries can be altered to bring in or leave out areas that might support one party or the other-it's called gerrymandering and both labout and tory do it when they get a chance. It's a problem in that we have a situation where the real voting pattern gets distirted so that we have a majority labour government with less than a third of the overall electorate, that vote, voting for them. People are losing interest and not voting because it doesn't seem to make a difference. We` had a similar situation with the Tories. When people get annoyed enough gthey turn out to get rid of sn unpopular govt, that's what happened in 1997. I reckon you will see something similar at the next election. Labour are losing grass roots support in scotland and that takes some doing.



The party with the majority forms the govt with he leader becoming prime minister and picking the cabinet. In theory he is merely first amongst equals and theoretically shouldn't tell them all what to do it should be by discussion, next to the PM the chancellor is the most powerful-obviously the characters involved matter, one of the criticisms of Maggie Thatcher was that she kept out anyone who argued with her TB seems to act as if he is in charge but only gets away with it because those around hiom anbd in his party are not standing up to him.

But they all answer to parliament and without enough support any changes they want to make don't happen. It's bad for democracy when one party has too big a majority. If enough labour MP's rebel the govt is stooped cold. The Labour MP's seem to seem to be showing signs of realisation that TB is becoming a liability.

The education reforms will be interesting-to get them through TB will need the support of the Scots MP's, without that they will not pass. Bit we have a different education system and this legislation does not affect Scotland, arguably they should not vote on it. It should cause a nive crisis for TB because it should really annot the English MP's-I hope it does cos it's wrong.

I reckon we have more chance of bringing govt to heel than americans do of taking back control from the money men in politics there. But i don't know enough about the way politics run in the states to know really.

Although theoretically, the queen, as head of state still has power she would be very foolish to try exerting it. Royalty is there as a nice figurehead and as a result of compromise but it wouldn't take much to get rid of them. figurehead.

I'm sad enough to find politics interesting. You might find these`links useul

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/br ... ution1.htm

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/su ... iament.htm

The development of the supremacy of Parliament stemmed from the English Civil War and has expanded ever since and is a dominant theme in British Politics. Those MP's who represent the public via representative democracy, have been handed the power to assess, pass or reject legislation. In every sense, the supremacy of Parliament is the backbone of British Politics and is only possibly threatened by aspects of the work of the European Commission and other European Union institutions.


Incididentally the roots of the American constitution lie in the English civil war as well. (charles was scots but that's a whole different story). We` might have stayed a republic if the fundamentalist christians that got control hadn't been so dreadful they made a monarch seem a good idea just to get rid of them.

Democracy grows and changes from within a people it can't be made by outsiders.

posted by bez

OI.....watch it gmc....us southerners are 'cushty'....


Cushty? What dos that mean? I couldn't find it in my scots english dictionary. I take it doesn't mean poncy southerner:-3

"When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in

to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes.

Nobody helped."

Actually, several UK based charities sent boatloads of food parcels to New Orleans - tinned goods, bottled water etc.

Or tried to. They were refused permission to import "foreign" foodstuffs.

:-5

I'm sad enough to find politics interesting.


Well it IS interesting!



Okay so where does the house of lords fit in?

Raven wrote: Well it IS interesting!



Okay so where does the house of lords fit in?


The House of Lords represents the Monarchy. Lords, barons, peers and knights traditionally served the reigning Monarch.

OpenMind wrote: The House of Lords represents the Monarchy. Lords, barons, peers and knights traditionally served the reigning Monarch.
So do all the white papers have to pass the house of lords then, before they become laws?

If so, then the monarch still rules.

gmc wrote:

posted by bez

Cushty? What dos that mean? I couldn't find it in my scots english dictionary. I take it doesn't mean poncy southerner:-3




cushty....as used by Del boy in 'Only Fools and Horses'



Happiness, in good order. Romany word used by super-chav Jamie Oliver. Kushtipen was once the English Romany word for 'happiness' from a Persian word meaning 'happiness' see kushti, kushty, cushti

easy-peasy, kushti



ponce n. 1. A man who is pretentious in an effeminite manner. Ponces (quite often referred to using the phrase perfume ponce) tend to grown their hair quite long and talk loudly into their mobile phone while sitting at the traffic lights in their convertible Porsche. Describing a place as "poncy" would imply that these sorts of punters made up the bulk of its clientele. 2. To scrounge - i.e. "can I ponce a cigarette off you?". I'm told that the word originally meant living off the earnings of prostitution.



Nice word to use GMC...

Raven wrote: So do all the white papers have to pass the house of lords then, before they become laws?

If so, then the monarch still rules.


This link explains the 2 'Houses' quite well I think.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords



And this is about the Monarchy



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_monarchy

gmc wrote: Why is it Americans seem unable to accept that because you criticise the actions of a government it doesn't follow that you dislike the people? Anti american foreign policy is not the same as being anti american.



You should see what our press say about the French and the EEC generally we're actually quite nice about you.



seems we're to blame for Iran not America.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/jou ... 10,00.html



I blame the english myself:sneaky:


I guess about the time they fly planes into bldgs. killing thousands of innocent civilians.

posted by raven

So do all the white papers have to pass the house of lords then, before they become laws?

If so, then the monarch still rules.


The lords can amend bills and send them back or refuse them but they can only delay them ultimately parliament is sovereign and has the last say. Their power to stop any bill waqs taken away in 1911 and they have no say at all in any finance bill.

In reality they have been instrumental in some stopping some of the sillier excesses of the present govt and the law`lords have censured the home secretary for exceeding his powers and arresting people without trial. However TB has brought in legislation to appoint a supreme court to take over some of the powers of the law lords, personally I don't like politicans thinking they are above the law and criticising judges for daring to point out you can't just throw people in prison without any evidence.

cars wrote: And after all this, yet America lets Americans go hungry & homeless. Letting poverty & dispare prevail for millions of it's own. Only in America can the rich get richer, & the poor get poorer! Maybe it's time America should start to put its' "own" first, and start to take care of business on its' own homefront!
Only in America can people despair of being poverty stricken because they can only afford basic cable.



Maybe it's time people get perspective about poverty. But I agree about our homefront.

gmc wrote: posted by raven





The lords can amend bills and send them back or refuse them but they can only delay them ultimately parliament is sovereign and has the last say. Their power to stop any bill waqs taken away in 1911 and they have no say at all in any finance bill.



In reality they have been instrumental in some stopping some of the sillier excesses of the present govt and the law`lords have censured the home secretary for exceeding his powers and arresting people without trial. However TB has brought in legislation to appoint a supreme court to take over some of the powers of the law lords, personally I don't like politicans thinking they are above the law and criticising judges for daring to point out you can't just throw people in prison without any evidence.
I have to agree with you there mate. If the evidence is there to jail me, then by god I want a speedy trial! To lock another away without trial is TOTALLY wrong. Yet a loophole exists in the states that allows a judge to send you to jail for contempt of court and keep you there for ever! No right to appeals or habias corpus.....nothing. The governments of this world are out of comtrol.

So why is TB messing with a system that has worked for a zillion years? Why would you need a supreme court? Did he oust the lord high justice then? Looks like he is trying to make the pm'ship like a presidency.

Accountable wrote: Only in America can people despair of being poverty stricken because they can only afford basic cable.


That's what I tell the conspiracy theorists. If the rich are running the world, and the rest of us are their slaves. Then they are pretty smart, because I have a car, a home, and cable TV. Being poor in the 21st century doesn't sting at all.

Let them run the world, just make sure I get to keep my Playstation.

:wah:

So why is TB messing with a system that has worked for a zillion years? Why would you need a supreme court? Did he oust the lord high justice then? Looks like he is trying to make the pm'ship like a presidency.


This is exactly what he is trying to do. And, if he could, he would also get rid of the Monarchy. Try to get him to admit to it though.

OpenMind wrote: This is exactly what he is trying to do. And, if he could, he would also get rid of the Monarchy. Try to get him to admit to it though.
What would be the point? Isnt he due to leave office soon?

Raven wrote: What would be the point? Isnt he due to leave office soon?


Unfortunately, I don't know enough about politics to answer that. However, I would guess that having a single presidency without a Monarch would speed up the process of enactment since there would be no need to go through a House of Lords. The House of Commons would become the Supreme lawmaker and would have control of the legal system.

There are probably other more relevant advantages, but I don't know them.

But isnt there something in place to prevent just that? The house of lords, surely has an ace in the hole to prevent the commons from taking total control, surely. As it is, isnt it a good thing that the process is so long?

Raven wrote: But isnt there something in place to prevent just that? The house of lords, surely has an ace in the hole to prevent the commons from taking total control, surely. As it is, isnt it a good thing that the process is so long?


Personally, I think the whole system is outdated and merely serves the elite and powerful. They're hunky dory while we thrash it out beneath them.

At the moment, though, the Monarchy stays and no one can get rid of it. Although, I don't know exactly how this is so.

OpenMind wrote: Personally, I think the whole system is outdated and merely serves the elite and powerful. They're hunky dory while we thrash it out beneath them.

At the moment, though, the Monarchy stays and no one can get rid of it. Although, I don't know exactly how this is so.
Have you ever considered that without the monarchy, Britain would be just another place. It would no longer be 'sparkly' and special.

Raven wrote: Have you ever considered that without the monarchy, Britain would be just another place. It would no longer be 'sparkly' and special.


The Queen has been an excellent Monarch and may God bless her. But I don't see the monarchy in my day to day life. Even if I go to London, I would have to go to Pall Mall to become aware of the monarchy. It doesn't have a direct impact upon my life save for its impact upon the nation as a whole. Like most people around the world, I only ever see the Queen on TV or in the newspapers.

Britain's heritage and history is fading and, now, more rapidly than ever before. Our children, nowadays, do not seem to be learning much about the subject. On top of this, as we more and more become a multi-curtural nation, many citizens do not have the same sense of the Monarchy or its role to the nation as would a subject born in the UK to a wholly British lineage.

Yes, to other nations, the Monarchy with all its pomp and ceremony, must instill a particular image of Britain. I doubt that foreigners think of the UK without sense of the Monarchy as being a part of the image. Further, the Queen can certainly hold her own against all the world leaders.

I believe that Prince William would make a good King. And that is important, too. The Monarchy is only as good as the Monarch. Prince William has done much already to command the respect of the forces.

However, I personally would not miss the Monarchy. And, I have never been one for pomp and ceremony (although I do understand the importance of tradition).

Tourists flock to the UK to get a taste of the Monarchy, the stately homes, the history.

There is no threat from the monarchy but I believe they should be self supporting in the most part.

I love the pomp and ceremony...no one does it better than us...IMO.

I dislike the pomposity of some of the aristrocracy

The lack of 'britishness' is causing a serious depression amongst those whose heritage it is. But only you yourselves can fix that. Insist on being proud of who you are and all that entails. Without Great Britain as an anchor of identity, can you just imagine what would happen to the world?

Remember and ponder those who fought and died for Queen (or king) and country. Nelson, Wellington, Churchill....just to name a few. Raleigh named a wonderful new place in honor of HIS queen. It's called Virginia. Look at what the british have accomplished at the behest of their monarchs. Drake comes to mind. Livingstone, Perry, Hillary, Scott. How about Darwin? Lets not forget Cook. All those people knew what they stood for. They could tell you a thing or two about what it meant to be british! What what!

Raven wrote: The lack of 'britishness' is causing a serious depression amongst those whose heritage it is. But only you yourselves can fix that. Insist on being proud of who you are and all that entails. Without Great Britain as an anchor of identity, can you just imagine what would happen to the world?

Remember and ponder those who fought and died for Queen (or king) and country. Nelson, Wellington, Churchill....just to name a few. Raleigh named a wonderful new place in honor of HIS queen. It's called Virginia. Look at what the british have accomplished at the behest of their monarchs. Drake comes to mind. Livingstone, Perry, Hillary, Scott. How about Darwin? Lets not forget Cook. All those people knew what they stood for. They could tell you a thing or two about what it meant to be british! What what!


What you say is very true, Raven. We have a tremendous history. But, unfortunately, things are changing for this nation, and we have little power over that, neither is it healthy to try and prevent change. It is, however, up to us to ensure that the change is beneficial for the nation. I would also like to see the traditions maintained in memory of our great heritage. But we cannot hang on to the old just for the sake of it. The world is changing and this is also having an influence on our nation. The true world leaders are now the boards of the multinational companies.

OpenMind wrote: What you say is very true, Raven. We have a tremendous history. But, unfortunately, things are changing for this nation, and we have little power over that, neither is it healthy to try and prevent change. It is, however, up to us to ensure that the change is beneficial for the nation. I would also like to see the traditions maintained in memory of our great heritage. But we cannot hang on to the old just for the sake of it. The world is changing and this is also having an influence on our nation. The true world leaders are now the boards of the multinational companies.
Having said that, it seems like it is only the english, having a problem with lack of identity. The scots, welsh, cornish, and irish seem to know exactly who they are and what they stand for! Why is that, do you think?

Raven wrote: Having said that, it seems like it is only the english, having a problem with lack of identity. The scots, welsh, cornish, and irish seem to know exactly who they are and what they stand for! Why is that, do you think?


They have fought hard against the Government for recognition of their status as independent nations and the right to govern theirselves within the UK. England has become complacent as it has nothing to fight accept itself.