Why did he do it?

Jump to navigation Jump to search

So, I am still unclear about the ramifications of Brown clever "step-down acquiescence??" To what ends does Brown find himself motivated, the legacy of his historical image OR some smart political outcome? Can you speculate for me?

70.244.180.126 (talk)00:06, 11 May 2010

I imagine it might be for all of those reasons. In any case it's a positive development for everyone, regardless of their political orientations.

HaroldWilson'sWar (talk)01:10, 11 May 2010
 

There is a dynamic ripple effect in the domestic politics, in the collapse of house of lords commonlaw beyond being an economic landlords club that has chosen just that as the basis for it's political indigestion of how to join the european union of economic western assassins without it's most amiable tie through the already established Labour/Socialist International. The scottish land class has taken the left leaning whig position as to the commons control of torries due to their limited peer persuastion in the house of lords( As economic swingers they fall outside of the loop for GNP to an alien position for allied archaic nationalism within set international boundries)(A limp handshake to a formal bow) a balance of papers worth piss besause they're not written in blood(royal) and labours extended channeling of energy and resources into the european common market where all pseudo nationalism of either the Liberals or the Scotch National Party has more say in a new european parliment where they can more directly bring their products to market while hurdling the pound's exchange for the solidity of it's return. Leaving the economy fenced in along already established markets of trade allow these interests to expand their soveriegn position ahead of the dissolution of their current nationalism which in a conservative role sits more like texas hold'em in a room full of war hawks. The scotts and the irish are enough together to give the necessary edge against tories infrastructural gutting of the past decade of progress even if they did miss their opportunity to bring justice to the divine right of kings by skipping the elected peers position for one of Constabulary and Magistrates that would have secured a stronger system of checks and balances based upon feasability of the laws execution and ideological merit by those who have to see fit in the guilt or innocennce of a nation by the the soundnss of their common law. To resurect this problem with answer in hand the queen need only demand greater responsibility of the lords of the manor by drawing the candalabras focus of light upon those who sit at the breaking edge of representative responsibility for sherrifs and appealate court justices, with a refresher course in fuedal law and the right of appeal. The respect of protection for the feifdom in the exchequer(cabinetry), sherrif(Military), magistrate(University), commons(Labour), & Queen (Divine Right). No this is not spelled or punctuated propperly it's spirited communication for contemporary problems within the common wealth.

68.48.127.136 (talk)01:50, 11 May 2010

Oh bollocks, it looks like some of the Blairites in Labour just won't have any of it, Looks like we'll be stuck with the Tories for a while. Bloody morons. Thanks a bunch, David Blunkett. Next time why don't you stay on the back bench.

HaroldWilson'sWar (talk)14:47, 11 May 2010