In article
,
77002 wrote:

On Jun 4, 11:14*pm, Dave Jackson wrote:
On 04/06/2012 21:36, Railsigns.co.uk wrote:

Do you think so? Whatever you may think of Mr. Blair (or any other
politician), the fact
is he was democratically elected to serve in public office, whereas we
get no say in
appointing the monarch*whatsoever*.

How long would a directly elected president last before being in total
disagreement with the directly elected Prime Minister.

France encounter this from time to time.

So does the USA where it's been quite common recently for the elected
Head of State and Head of Government to be opposed to the elected
Government of which he is head. And which party has a majority in the
London Assembly?

Sam

--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

On Jun 6, 12:42*pm, Sam Wilson wrote:
In article
,

*77002 wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:14*pm, Dave Jackson wrote:
On 04/06/2012 21:36, Railsigns.co.uk wrote:

Do you think so? Whatever you may think of Mr. Blair (or any other
politician), the fact
is he was democratically elected to serve in public office, whereas we
get no say in
appointing the monarch*whatsoever*.

How long would a directly elected president last before being in total
disagreement with the directly elected Prime Minister.

France encounter this from time to time.

So does the USA where it's been quite common recently for the elected
Head of State and Head of Government to be opposed to the elected
Government of which he is head. *And which party has a majority in the
London Assembly?

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when federal politics in
those United States were conducted with a certain decorum. This was
such they they rose above their differences as the contucted the
Union's affairs. Tip O'Neil and Ronald Wilson Regan were politically
at opposite poles. And, yet they always behaved with a certain
dignity.

Sadly this is a thing of the past. Now US politics are very much "war
by other means".

London: I am not sure that a directly elected head really fits in the
British system. Moreover, since when have counties (or regions!) had
mayors.

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:42:07 +0100, Sam Wilson
wrote:

In article
,
77002 wrote:

On Jun 4, 11:14*pm, Dave Jackson wrote:
On 04/06/2012 21:36, Railsigns.co.uk wrote:

Do you think so? Whatever you may think of Mr. Blair (or any other
politician), the fact
is he was democratically elected to serve in public office, whereas we
get no say in
appointing the monarch*whatsoever*.

How long would a directly elected president last before being in total
disagreement with the directly elected Prime Minister.

France encounter this from time to time.

So does the USA where it's been quite common recently for the elected
Head of State and Head of Government to be opposed to the elected
Government of which he is head.

The US Congress and Senate are the legislature, not the government.
Unlike in the UK, members of the US government are not members of the
legislature. And often, as now, the two houses can be controlled by
different parties.

On Jun 6, 12:42*pm, Sam Wilson wrote:
In article
,

*77002 wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:14*pm, Dave Jackson wrote:
On 04/06/2012 21:36, Railsigns.co.uk wrote:

Do you think so? Whatever you may think of Mr. Blair (or any other
politician), the fact
is he was democratically elected to serve in public office, whereas we
get no say in
appointing the monarch*whatsoever*.

How long would a directly elected president last before being in total
disagreement with the directly elected Prime Minister.

France encounter this from time to time.

So does the USA where it's been quite common recently for the elected
Head of State and Head of Government to be opposed to the elected
Government of which he is head. *And which party has a majority in the
London Assembly?

There was a time in the not-too-distant past when federal politics in
those United States were conducted with a certain decorum. This was
such they they rose above their differences as they conducted the
Union's affairs. Tip O'Neil and Ronald Wilson Regan were politically
at opposite poles. And, yet they always behaved with a certain
dignity.

Sadly this is a thing of the past. Now US politics are very much
"war
by other means".


London: I am not sure that a directly elected head really fits in the
British system. Moreover, since when have counties (or regions!) had
mayors.

I'm betting HM costs the UK far less than the US President costs the USA.


I loved the security for the Queen.

Way less visible than for the U.S. Prez, who would have been hidden behind
scads of Secret Service agents and would have been practically invisible to
the crowds.

And who are these Secret Service agents protecting the Prez. from? Why, his
fellow Americans, that's whom. Every assassination attempt on a US Prez.
has been by a fellow American.

Kinda tells you something about the country, doesn't it?



--
Cheers.

Roger Traviss


Photos of the late HO scale GER: -

http://www.greateasternrailway.com

For more photos not in the above album and kitbashes etc..:-
http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l9...Great_Eastern/

On 06/06/2012 19:59, Roger Traviss wrote:
I'm betting HM costs the UK far less than the US President costs the USA.


I loved the security for the Queen.

Way less visible than for the U.S. Prez, who would have been hidden behind
scads of Secret Service agents and would have been practically invisible to
the crowds.

And who are these Secret Service agents protecting the Prez. from? Why, his
fellow Americans, that's whom. Every assassination attempt on a US Prez.
has been by a fellow American.

Kinda tells you something about the country, doesn't it?





There is a story in a obituary in Prospero about someone who went to
adjust the microphone in front of POTUS and was nearly shot by the
Secret Service. Sounds quite plausible, a friend used to attend a
meeting with George W every month. At the first meeting the security
people told them that it was not advisable to make any sort of sudden
move when POTUS was in the room.

On 06/06/2012 22:07, MB wrote:
On 06/06/2012 19:59, Roger Traviss wrote:
I'm betting HM costs the UK far less than the US President costs the
USA.


I loved the security for the Queen.

Way less visible than for the U.S. Prez, who would have been hidden
behind
scads of Secret Service agents and would have been practically
invisible to
the crowds.

And who are these Secret Service agents protecting the Prez. from?
Why, his
fellow Americans, that's whom. Every assassination attempt on a US Prez.
has been by a fellow American.

Kinda tells you something about the country, doesn't it?





There is a story in a obituary in Prospero about someone who went to
adjust the microphone in front of POTUS and was nearly shot by the
Secret Service. Sounds quite plausible, a friend used to attend a
meeting with George W every month. At the first meeting the security
people told them that it was not advisable to make any sort of sudden
move when POTUS was in the room.

In case they woke him up?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 06/06/2012 06:29, e27002 wrote:

Hey, I was not the guy who took this thread political. That said, I
will not sit by and let the left monoplolize.

We don't want to. Reading your drivel is good fun.
--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

In article ,
Recliner wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:42:07 +0100, Sam Wilson
wrote:

In article
,
77002 wrote:

On Jun 4, 11:14*pm, Dave Jackson wrote:
On 04/06/2012 21:36, Railsigns.co.uk wrote:

Do you think so? Whatever you may think of Mr. Blair (or any other
politician), the fact
is he was democratically elected to serve in public office, whereas we
get no say in
appointing the monarch*whatsoever*.

How long would a directly elected president last before being in total
disagreement with the directly elected Prime Minister.

France encounter this from time to time.

So does the USA where it's been quite common recently for the elected
Head of State and Head of Government to be opposed to the elected
Government of which he is head.

The US Congress and Senate are the legislature, not the government.
Unlike in the UK, members of the US government are not members of the
legislature. And often, as now, the two houses can be controlled by
different parties.

Good point - I had forgotten how different the US system is from ours.

Sam

--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.