On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 09:51:37AM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > Actually, a hereditary democratic hereditary democratic - an oxymoron, surely. > chamber such as the (old) house of lords > strikes me as being a pretty good system. Swapping 'randomly selected' for > hereditary would be a small improvement, possibly. Swapping 'selected by > Tony Blair after consultation with his own sycophantic smile' for > hereditary strikes me as pretty ******** stupid, corrupt and evil. Cough. swapping "any politician" for "Tony Blair" likewise. Random selection for the upper house seems reasonable. Of course, just like with jury service, people would desperately try to get out of it. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/ Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our "most advanced operating system in the world" which we decided to release incomplete just for a laugh
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Struan Donald
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Jonathan Stowe
- Re: BOFHs requiring license David Cantrell
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Greg McCarroll
- Re: BOFHs requiring license David Cantrell
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Simon Cozens
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Martin Ling
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Simon Cozens
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Martin Ling
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Jonathan Peterson
- Politics (was Re: BOFHs requiring licen... David Cantrell
- Politics (was Re: BOFHs requiring licen... Jonathan Stowe
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Greg McCarroll
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Martin Ling
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Simon Cozens
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Greg McCarroll
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Dave Cross
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Greg McCarroll
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Andy Williams
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Simon Wistow
- Re: BOFHs requiring license Jonathan Peterson