The reason I ask is to find out just how much power Bush has.

In Britain we have a constitutional monarchy. The Queen is titular and
advises the PM behind the scenes (her aides do to).

Government is by cabinet (or is meant to be unless the PM is very
charismatic and controlling like Blair).

The civil service are the executive and it doesn't really matter if there is
a 'regime change' the service has an 'inertia' and a political colour. For
instance Thatcher was always coming up against them. It often takes several
terms and reappointment before the service starts reflecting the desires of
the elected government.

So Ed, you are building up Bush as this bogey man and I want to know how he
does it, how he causes such a cock up in your opinion. How does he wield
such power day to day to have caused this mess in your opinion?

-----Original Message-----
From: Remi Cornwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 29 September 2008 21:48
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout

Tell me something, is a president of the USA largely titular like a British
monarch or do they have real power. Is it government by cabinet or
leader-centric? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 29 September 2008 20:43
To: [email protected]
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout

The people who nuked the deal are the people who do not trust the  
administration and who, in addition to listening to the voters, were  
able to hear what various economists are saying. Of course, it helps  
to be very conservative or very liberal. Thank heaven, there was  
enough independent thinking this time to not create another Iraq in  
the financial world.

Ed


On Sep 29, 2008, at 1:30 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

> News stories I'm seeing make it sound like it was the conservative
> Republicans who nuked the deal.
>
> With Barney Frank as lead representative on the bill, in the end it  
> was
> apparently, in some sense, a Democratic initiative(?) or at any rate  
> it
> was certainly bi-partisan.
>





Reply via email to