Just got this sent by e-mail........

Subject: G B - as American's see him ...

 In advance of a trip to Washington, profiles of the Prime Minister have been appearing in the U.S. This column tuned in by satellite to Eye-Witness News, Palm Beach, for a preview of the visit:

'Good morning America, how are you? This is your favourite son, Chad Hanging, reporting. The President of Englandland, Norman Brown, is arriving in our nation's capital this afternoon to meet with President Bush. But just who is this guy? Let's cross to our special correspondent Brit Limey.'

Hey, Chad . As you can see, I'm standing in the world-famous Trafalgar Circus, with the House of Fayed directly behind me.

So what can you tell us about Norman Brown?

Well, Chad , he has been President for some nine months now. He used to be Chancellor.

What, you mean he's, like, German?

No, that's what they call their Treasury Secretary over here.

And is he a Conservative, like President Tony Blair?

No, Chad. He's Labour. President Blair wasn't a Conservative, either. He only pretended to be.

So how did Brown get the job?

He just kept shouting at President Blair until he stood down.

But he won an election, right?

No, Chad, there wasn't an election. He did think about calling one, but decided against it because he was frightened he might lose.

How can you change Presidents without having an election? I mean, it's not like President Blair was assassinated.

That's just the way it works in Englandland. The leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Lords gets to be President.

So Norman Brown was elected leader of the Labour Party?

Negative, again, Chad. He did raise money and have a leadership campaign, but no one stood against him.

What, nobody? No primaries, no general election, nothing?

Affirmative, Chad .

Let me get this straight. His party hasn't elected him, the country hasn't elected him, yet he still gets to be President. Sounds like a tin pot Commie dictatorship to me.

You could say that, Chad. Norman Brown doesn't really like anyone being given the chance to vote on anything.

Someone must have voted for him, some time.

Oh, yes. He was elected to the House of Lords by his constituents in Scotlandland.

He's Scoddish, then?

That's a big Ten-Four, Chad.

So is he President of Scotlandland, too?

No, that's a guy called Alan Salmon.

Hang on, if Brown's from Scotlandland, how can he be President of Englandland?

That's just the way it goes in this crazy country, Chad. Brown can make laws for Englandland, but not for his own people in Scotlandland. Not that it matters much because Brown has signed away most of Englandland's lawmaking powers to unelected European bureaucrats in Brussels, Belgiumland.

That would be like stripping Congress of the power to make laws in America and handing it over to Mexico .

I guess so.

How in the Hell did the people of Englandland vote for that?

They didn't. Brown wouldn't let them, even though it was a solemn promise in his party's manifesto the last time people were allowed to vote.

Couldn't the Supreme Court have stopped him?

Not really. The Supreme Court of Englandland is now in Strasbourg, where the geese come from.

Isn't there any opposition?

There's a guy called Boris.

Sounds Russian.

I wouldn't be surprised, Chad. There are millions of Eastern Europeans living here now, mainly in Peterburl. Englandland has seen mass immigration over the past ten years, but no one voted for that, either.

What in the name of Ulysses S. Grant is going on over there, Brit?

We're talking about the country which gave us Magna Carta, saw off the Armada, stood alone against Hitler and invented parliamentary democracy.

How does Norman Brown get away with it? He must be a popular guy.

Far from it, Chad. According to the latest opinion polls, he's the most unpopular President ever. His approval ratings are even worse than George Bush. There's talk about him having to stand down soon. He's already promised the job to some guy who works for him - name of Balls.

Say again, Brit, you're breaking up.

Balls.

You're damn right there, buddy.

Please tell me you don't see the Brits like this?

Well In Canadaland we tend to be a bit more like the Brits, what with our own Parliment and all.
No House of Lords tho...we did away with titles some time ago but in Americaland....who knows...the people vote and then the Supreme court tells em they were wrong and choses the guy they didn't vote for to run the country...at least the way I see it from up here in Canadaland.. ...LOL

Quote - And we thought you Yankees were crazy.......

... and now we're sure you are :lol:

Nah, Bryster, we know better than to believe that.  We are smart enough to know it had to be toned down for the airways. (snicker)

Actually all I know is what they taught us in history class.  The Brits were the ones wearing bright red and white uniforms standing in long lines fighting(?) against guys hiding behind trees and rocks.

Actually when my daughter visited the UK she fell in love with the people.  The Brits have always been this country's best ally.  I had the US flag and the Union Jack flying on a flag pole for about a year after 9-11. 

What you should worry about is how well Martians are though of.

...in Americaland....who knows...the people vote and then the Supreme court tells em they were wrong and choses the guy they didn't vote for to run the country...at least the way I see it from up here in Canadaland.. ...LOL

The people in UnitedStatesofAmericaland don't vote for the president, the States do (it's in the Constitution). Each state gets a number of  "Electors" based on the number of senators and representatives they have in Congress. The idea is fundamental to the Founders' intent of a federation of sovereign states, which is what the USA is. Fans of this traditional system argue that it protects the rights of smaller states, assists with the separation of powers and helps prevent an urban "tyranny of the majority".

By convention the individual state legislatures base their presidential electoral votes on the majority votes of their peoples (i.e. they ask them), but could in fact cast their votes as they wish. Most states stick with the Founders' system and cast all their Electors' votes according to the majority vote of their people (two states divide their Electors' votes proportionately).

Very occasionally (3 times in 55 elections) this system will produce a president that is legally and constitutionally elected by the States but happens to not reflect a majority of US citizens' votes if they were taken as whole. Since their votes were never intended to be taken as a whole, this discrepancy is legally and constitutionally irrelevant.

George W Bush's 2000 victory was one of the three occasions, but this had nothing to do with a Supreme Court decision. That was related to the legality of the vote in the state of Florida, which happened to be the deciding state as far as the Electoral College votes went. People still argue about that and the Supreme Court divided on "party" lines. What is interesting is that the total number of disputed votes at the time was less than the number of votes subsequently found to be illegal due to being cast twice - once in New York and again in Florida. If you're wondering which way those votes were cast, suffice to say that if GWB stole that election it was only because he stole it back. He won the 2004 election clear by whatever yardstick…

In ye olden days, candidates used to stand simultaneously for both presidential and vice-presidential positions. Would make this forthcoming election interesting, that’s for sure. ;-)

(edit - fecking format shite)
(frack, copynpaste buggers things up royally)

"That would be like stripping Congress of the power to make laws in America and handing it over to Mexico ." (Living in Fresno, one would think that had already happened.)

I'm sorry your Brown guy is almost as bad as our Bush guy . . . at least ours is definitely going away soon.  

Only problem here in the States is we may just end up with another George Bush 'cronie' named McCain and his lady side-kick, who has an 'unmarried  daughter with child"....  so much for the religious right which she touts so much.  So all in all, that means another 4 years of George Bush!!!!!!!!!!

"...who has an 'unmarried  daughter with child"....  so much for the religious right which she touts so much."

Thing is, she doesn't tout it so much. She's just purported to so tout it by the unhinged.

Besides which, the "religious right" in the US are generally content with the notion of unmarried mothers with child, given the origins of Jesus and all. You sure better hope that Levi is the father, otherwise you could just end up with another 2000 years of George Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That AIN'T gonna happen.

BTW:  Did you all catch the similarity in appearance between Tina Fay from S.N.L. and McCain's running mate?  . . . 

... anyrate I'm gonna go out there and get some fuel for my Ve-hicle beforst this topic gives me gas.

If you want to know how others see England, think about what you know about other countries... that'll give you some idea. But It's not until you actually live in another country that you find out how wrong you can be. :ohmy:

eurrrrphhh !
suscuse me - ok I went out and got food instead; good thing it's Friday.

Woah! LOL Cool it.. 
I was just passing on an e-mail I thought was funny.
I didn't expect the spanish Inquisition.

Quote - I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition

EH? Just a joke isn't it?

I know a lot of Americans have poor understanding of how the REAL world operates otuside their borders (or rather, the reality without being warped by the media)

but, hey...we've got Chavs and Neds...
No one's perfect :D

Scot from Scotlandland, where we wear skirts and hunt haggis and all live in the HIghlands, yes indeedy!! :tt2:

I didn't expect the spanish Inquisition.

And why would the cardinal not expect an inquisition when he, himself, lurks for slips in the loyalty.

Of course we think Yankees are crazy...but then I' m south of the Mason/Dixon line (Westerner by birther, Southerner by the Grace of God...;)

See, in the UK, people think of 'the Beautiful South (not the 90s band...;) as the home of reason and fashion, the 'better people'. People in the North are looked on as, well, uncouth...;) 

It's totally the opposite over here...;)

I have a vague idea on how Parliament works (except for Black rod and White rod...never did get that part). I was kinda wondering how Labor, the home of moderate politicians like Tony Benn (kidding...;) wound up in bed with us. Seems like to get elected, the Conservatives (do they still call them Tories?) would have to distance themselves from what used to be a traditional ally.

It's crazy all over, no one has a monopoly on it...; 

Hey! I'm from up North!
Just cause we bugger haggis & hedgehogs for fun, doesn't mean we're uncouth, you know!  :lol:

Pakled: Actually now it's New Labour, but yes we still call the other lot Tories.....and many other uncouth things besides.

How parliament works? Simple.
THe are two houses. The House of Commons - elected representetives of the people (MPs).
The house of Lords - unelected elitist reps of the upper classes.

The MPs who are in the Commons get there by promising to do what the people want and when they do get there they do nothing of the sort.

The political party that has the most MPs get to make propose laws that have nothing to do with what the people (you & me) want.
These proposals or 'bills' then get sent to the House of Lords for ratification - which they never get as they are always sent back to the House of Commons for amendments.

This goes on and on for about 4 years for each bill and eventually the bill gets watered down so that it can't do what it was intended to do and is therefore useless at which point it goes onto the statute books and becomes a Law.

However some things become law without the people knowing about them until it's too late. Things like, 'you can't protest within 1klick of the Houses of Parliament' , or 'You can't say anything you like in public'.

I could go on but you get the idea.

As for Black Rod.....I'd google it if I were you.

oh. Well that makes perfect sense...;) We have a similar concept over here called :Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fella behind the tree"...;)

@Silverblade - my ancestors are from around the Isle of Skye, which is nearly as north as you can get and stay on the island...;) Nothing meant. I've known lots of good Yankees and bad Southerners, so it all evens out.

Google - yeah...forgot. I originally read a really reactionary set of volumes by Churchill called 'the History of the English-Speaking peoples..which meantioned it, back in the 70s. Will have to do that..;)

I'm one of the evil northerners.

Here is the States we have a choice of a guy with lots of experience going against a guy with little experience....which when you think about it, having experience doesn't seem to make all that much difference....just look at all the past presidents and their records. hey....with McCain's record of past infedelities, he could be the first president to have an affair with the vice president!!!

This is hysterical!
There's folks saying the Obama has no experience.......but Hilary Clinton has no experience either!

Whatchu talkin' 'bout, Willis ... I mean Pakled? If you actually came to Fresno you'd think you was in the deep South - I means the 'Deep South' - like where English is a second language South. I means We're sooooo Southern we sees 'The Cross' when we looks up in the sky. We're so Southern that  penguins migrate North from here for the Winter, Robert E. Lee is considered a 'Damned Yankee' and Newt Gingrinch is considered a 'Liberal'. I myself drinks me 'Bush Beer' and my cat Katrina salutes every time she sees the 'Stars and Bars' . Why, my Nephew Jethero even sports the Confederate Battle Flag on the ol' Model A and Granny - oh wait that's 'The Beverly Hillbilllys' ... nevermind.     

Bryster, try to keep up: " . . . .and Hilary!!!! " quit the race over a month ago.      

Pakled,
no worries mate! :)
"Scotland, where men are men, and sheep are nervous!"
:p

Experience has taught me that Left or Right, Rich or Poor don't matter a damned, in the end, it's whether they are stupid bloody bastards, or not, that's the REAL factor, be it in politics or normal life ;)

Fresno California? wayul, they fought agin' us in the War of Yankee Agression (or what the womenfolk refer to as 'the recent unpleasantness...;)

Unless there's more than one Fresno (Kiwi version?)

I'm not a native North Carolinian (have to be born here, parents as well, and think vinegar-soaked shredded pork is real barbecue, and think that football really means that only one more season until basketball...;) so I don't have room to talk (am a 6th-generation Texan though, but the family's from the region between the Branch Davidian compound, and Crawford Texas...so don't mess with us...;)

Pakled:

(Under the category of waaaaaay too much information)

Fresno wasn't around during the 'great uprising' . . . it started out as a water stop for the railroad in the 1870's and by the end of that decade there were 7 bars and 100 prostitutes here (or was it the other way around) along with lotsa card sharps, outlaws and various bandits ... by the 1880's the Whitneys had settled here and so too the Shannons at which time the town got cleaned up a bit (I'm not saying that there was a correlation but knowing myself I wouldn't be a bit suprised if ther was). John and Patrick both had fought in the Civil War as sargents in the Union army. John was my great grandfather on my mother's side. His daughter  Ellen was my grandmother. she married William Whitney the Civil Engineer.  

My great grandfather  on my father's side was a mule skinner for the South. there are stories of him taking on as many as five adversaries at once in bars and coming through it without a scratch, but that's heresay handed down to my grandmother Mary Grafton who had a bit of Scotch in her (sometimes more than others) and who was born in Lousiana and moved to Texas where she met my grandfather James and who was known to fabricate some pretty fratured fairy taled and I ain't talkin about her knowing how shape steel - but if you ever tryed to stare her down you'd believe she could bent iron bars with her eyes alone . As I don't recall my great grandfather' s  given name it's sort of hard to verify anything about him . . . sad. And we don't talk about the Graftons(don't know why). I only saw a picture of my grandfather James once - taken around 1914 (the year my father was born) and I only found that out as I couldn't remember posing for a picture with a cowboy hat on. He too fought in WWI and died around 1919 as a result of the Flu that was going around. She moved to Fresno around that time and as a widow, totally corrupted all of Fresno and it's surroundings - according to my mother scotch wesn't her onl;y vice but I don't think My mother and Mary ever really got along ... so anyway eventually  my parents met got married WW2 happened  my dad fought in it, Korea happened my cousin Ralph got killed with the first Marine Divison at Chosin Reservoir and two weeks later I was born, did many of the same things Ralph did but a little further South and I didn't get killed came home went to college got shot in the leg (fractured tibia) walked down to the bottom of the Grand Canyon eight weeks later ... and the rest is as you might say is history.

... Now what were you saying about the North? . . . some of my ancestors weren't listening - personally though, I suspect Patrick just forgot to bring along his reading glasses.