Definitively? Maybe to you, not to me.
OK. Find out how many British PMs have been removed since 1789. Then compare that to the number of US Presidents.
We've already got a score of 3-0 and that's only since 1885.
It takes essentially conviction for a criminal offense to remove a President. Removal of a PM requires only that the political winds shift. Actually, that count above should be 5-0 since to PMs were forced to resign by their parties in an attempt to avoid defeat at upcoming elections.
chill with the pedantic attitude. Its an obnoxious trait that conservatives bring to the fore whenever they can't have their way 100%, and its boring.
It's a trait we bring to the fore when leftists are wrong and refuse to admit it. The pedantry is just that- -an attempt to educate.
I just want to make sure that we accurately determine whether Bush was intentionally misleading the Amer. public or not, and if affirmative, that the proper steps be taken to impeach him.
Good luck. You're gonna need it. With a Republican Congress, forget about Congressional subpoenas or special prosecutors. So what's you're plan?
If they stick with Blair, it will have more to do with his ongoing popularity than with the Brits. enthusiasm over the toppling of Saddam.
According to you. Few of them are unhappy to see Saddam gone. THey are noted for not liking dictators.
I don't think so.
Then you're wrong again.
In fact I would say Stalin was more right than he was left.
You would, of course.
Let's see. Under socialism the state owns (most) of the means of production and private property rights are quite limited.
Under Communism the state owns (most) of the means of production and private property rights are quite limited.
Yup. They're different.
After all, he was friends with Hitler, the ultimate conservative, until they had a falling out.
I suppose then that Hitler was also a Roman Emperor since he also had an alliance with Mussolini who wanted to revive that 2,000-year-dead relic?
That was a marriage of convenience that shook the Communist Party to its core and you know it and I know it. Stalin hoped (unsuccessfully) to hold an attack by Germany with that pact and nothing else.
They don't remove it; they restrict it. In some cases, that's not a bad thing.
And in some cases it is. Are you wise enough to know which is which? Or is it a case of the changes that pinch you are bad?
A couple of sentences would have sufficed.
There's a problem with presenting evidence to back a claim?
He was an arrogant asshole with a will of iron who had the courage to think and follow his own course during a difficult time in Britain's history.
Arrogant? Is that a codeword for "right" as in "correct"?
He was right about Hitler.
He was right about the Communists.
And he did an outstanding job of inspiring the Brits to resist Germany until the US got into it.
Not a bad record at all. |
