Given the fact that the current arrangement is precarious and fragile, and if Lib - Dem know their politics, that of grandstanding the two ancient gigantic sloths, I suspect they'd just have two priorities : one, fill the party and MP coffers ; two, prove to populace ( their constituency ) how inept their coalition partner is. So, expectant romantics beware !
I am no cynic or dreamer. I believe that this is the best that's happened to UK in a long time, as in coming of age. The monarchy will be more sidelined and rendered inconsequential. The people will gain in leverage, the dumb and street smart the most ... yes, much much more than even the intellectual frog in the wells. It's finally the death knell of feudalism, thought not of demagoguery. The immigrants ( read Asians, East Europeans ) will be valued and wooed, perhaps more than the white natives ... in pursuit of vote banks. UK's just entered a huge change, that'd cascade if I understand it correctly, and leave many with visions of glorious past, or with templates for future, fuming and terribly ill ! On May 12, 5:40 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12 May, 00:12, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > A rather naive interpretation of the British Constitution Orn. I'll > > be able to explain once someone works out whatever that is! It looks > > as though we will have a Lib/Con coalition now, subject to votes > > within the Liberal Democratic Party. > > I prefer to think of it as "Living in a Con-Dem-Nation". At least > they chose Hague for Foreign Sec.; that was a decent choice. > > >All the pundits are claiming to > > know what the British voters have said, but none actually ask us. > > Lizzie is a procedural phenomenon with no actual power to do > > anything. Apparently we need strong, lasting government to satisfy > > the "markets" and we never have any vote about them. > > Whilst our electoral farce trundled on, Europe got round to > > quantitative easing to catch up with the US and UK in buying up its > > debt electronically. This puts power in the hands of the European > > Commission and Central Bank, and we don't get a vote for them either. > > Are you suggesting that WWII isn't really over and that we're now > fighting on the 'economic front'? After all, we recently had another > Dunkirk evacuation, albeit due to the ash cloud from the Icelandic > volcano. If this IS the case, then, so far...score one for the Holy > Roman Empire--you remember them? They weren't holy, nor Roman, nor an > empire. That was clearly an early exercise in political correctness > for the naming of an area. > Actually, Lizzie DOES have some power left, although if she ever used > it, that would be the last time any monarch in the UK ever did. > Except for the odd monarch butterfly. > > First on the Con-Dem list of things to do is a bit of gerrymandering. > Once that's done, it may end up assuring another hung parliament, as > the gerrymandering would have to satisfy both the Conservatives AND > the Lib-Dems. Unless, of course, the UK decides to 'save' the > Republic of Ireland from the European 'economic killing fields' by > declaring it a protectorate with the right to vote Conservative. > Then, the country's, once again, safe in Tory hands. And, yes, that > IS sarcastic. ;-) > > Alternatively, there's the chance that Cameron could offer payments to > New Labour (which is practically Conservative) MPs and get them to > change parties, thus affording the Conservatives the majority they > require. Much like the buying of the Roman Empire...back in the good > ol' days. ;-) > > > > > On 11 May, 16:28, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/05/07/uk.election.queen/-Hide > > >quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -
