Nasty, Brutish & Short

Britain Archives

Friday Fun: "Family of Faggot Fans Fly the Flag."

June 27, 2008 08:31 AM

People in the old country shur do talk funny.  The BBC reports:

The Doody family

The Doody family hopes to raise profile of faggots.

Apparently it's a culinary delight made from pork liver and pork.  Yum!  Mr. Doody says:

"The great British faggot is full of flavour and a great belly warmer at this time of year."

He must be so proud of his family, winning a "competition organised by faggot producer Mr Brain's Faggots."  Who wouldn't be?

Oooo, here's an idea... Mr. Brain's Faggots should see if they can't get their product to be the official food of the Church of England.  Think of the cross-marketing potential!

Well, here's one reason to vote for McCain...

June 20, 2008 08:01 AM

...it will tick off all the right people.  Like the French.  Byron York has lunch in Paris, and discusses it with one of them:

In the European mind, Guantanamo is one of the centers of evil in the world, a dungeon where George W. Bush commits unspeakable acts on innocent Muslims who just happened to be on a battlefield in Afghanistan or Pakistan when U.S. troops captured them.

She says the prisoners in Gitmo have been denied their constitutional rights.

I say they are enemy combatants; they have rights under international treaties, but not American constitutional rights.

But they have “global rights,” she insists.

What are “global rights”? I ask.

There’s no precise definition, but as far as I could tell, “global rights” appear to be American constitutional rights applied to the entire planet. It’s an astounding notion, given that American constitutional rights definitely do not apply across the entire planet — not even in places like, well, France.

A lot of the English aren't much better:

I have a friend in London, very Euro in outlook, who is terrifically frustrated and worried about the election.

His chief concern: the role of Americans. “It’s a pity that Americans are the ones who elect the president,” he says. “It would be much better if the people of the world voted on the American president.”

And guess who would be elected in such a scenario? Here’s a hint: It’s not John McCain.

Basically, it's us against the world.  And by us, I mean red state people.

From the "I wish I wrote it department..."

February 14, 2008 09:33 AM

...Iowahawk chimes in with:

Heere Bigynneth the Tale of the Asse-Hatte.

An Archbishop of Canterbury Tale

 

1  Whan in Februar, withe hise global warmynge

2  Midst unseasonabyl rain and stormynge

3  Gaia in hyr heat encourages

4  Englande folke to goon pilgrimages.

5  Frome everiches farme and shire

6  Frome London Towne and Lancanshire

7  The pilgryms toward Canterbury wended

8  Wyth fyve weke holiday leave extended

9  In hybryd Prius and Subaru

10  Off the Boughton Bypasse, east on M2.

11  Fouer and Twyntie theye came to seke

12  The Arche-Bishop, wyse and meke

13  Labouryte and hippye, Gaye and Greene

14  Anti-warre and libertyne

15  All sondry folke urbayne and progressyve

16  Vexed by Musselmans aggressyve.

17  Hie and thither to the Arche-Bishop's manse

18  The pilgryms ryde and fynde perchance

19  The hooly Bishop takynge tea

20  Whilste watching himselfe on BBC.

Read the whole thing.

Speaking of religion...

January 16, 2008 11:33 PM

Here we have the deposition testimony of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, being questioned under oath by attorneys for the 11 churches in Virginia who chose to decamp for more hospitable climes last year--and who were promptly sued by the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia, and the national Episcopal Church, at the instruction of the deponent you see before you. In this clip, the Presiding Bishop is being asked about the Dar es Salaam Communique, which was the document in which the leaders of the Anglican Communion ordered the Episcopal Church into a form of ecclesiastical bankruptcy receivership. And in particular, here the Presiding Bishop is being asked about this language from the Communique (which she assented to, before she returned to the U.S. and promptly rejected it): We are deeply concerned that so great has been the estrangement between some of the faithful and The Episcopal Church that this has led to recrimination, hostility and even to disputes in the civil courts.

The reason this is important is because in the Virginia litigation, the 11 parishes have a strong upper hand if they can show that there was a division in the Church, because Virginia state law comes down in favor of local congregations retaining ownership of their property if there has been a "division". So she doesn't want to admit to the language that she agreed to, because "estrangement" strongly suggests division. Which as anyone can see, there clearly has been. But she doesn't want to admit it. And, she doesn't want to admit that she agreed with what she said, at the time she said it:

It's a study in evasive dishonesty. My kudos go out to the lawyer for the parishes, who kept pressing. It is very typical for deponents to give a long winded response when they don't want to answer the question before them, and it is really, really hard to remember the exact question that was asked, and make sure you ask it again exactly the same way. Here the attorney keeps pushing. There's a minute there when I thought "uh oh, they're about to let her get away with it." But he brought it back home. And got the answer he wanted. Remember, she had agreed with the statement that they are asking her about--and told everyone present, including the Archbishop of Canterbury and all the other Anglican primates that she agreed with the statement. And here, she admits that she did not agree with what she agreed to in Dar es Salaam. It's rather astounding to be able to confront a clerical witness with a "so were you lying then, or are you lying now?" kind of question. I mean really, was she lying to the Archbishop of Canterbury and all the other Anglican primates? Or is she lying now, under oath in civil litigation in the United States. It's one or the other. Lying then, or lying now?

It reminds me of my first trial, where I got to ask the "so were you lying then, or are you lying now" question to great effect, and much to the appreciation of the reporter from the Dayton Daily News, who was bored to tears. During the next break, the witness who I had been questioning resigned from his position as C.E.O. for the opposing party.

Would that Presiding Bishop Schori have the integrity to do the same.

More video exerpts from the Presiding Bishop's deposition are available here. She looks more and more dishonest in each one.

Big girls don't cry...

January 7, 2008 06:23 PM

...when faced with adversity.

Do they, Hillary?

So much better than slogging through "We Three Kings of Orient Are"

December 23, 2007 10:44 AM

The text:

Three kings from Persian lands afar To Jordan follow the pointing star: And this the quest of the travellers three, Where the new-born King of the Jews may be. Full royal gifts they bear for the King; Gold, incense, myrrh are their offering. The star shines out with a steadfast ray; The kings to Bethlehem make their way, And there in worship they bend the knee, As Mary's child in her lap they see; Their royal gifts they show to the King; Gold, incense, myrrh are their offering. Thou child of man, lo, to Bethlehem The kings are travelling, travel with them! The star of mercy, the star of grace, Shall lead thy heart to its resting-place. Gold, incense, myrrh thou canst not bring; Offer thy heart to the infant King.

While the choir sings:

How brightly shines the morning star With grace and truth from heav'n afar The Jesse tree now bloweth Of Jacobs stem and David's line For thee, my Bridegroom, King divine My soul with love o'er floweth Thy word, Thy word, Jesu, Jesu Inly feeds us, rightly leads us, life bestowing. Praise, O praise such love o'er flowing.

Sublime.

Did you know that if you break American law and are overseas, the feds believe they can just come kidnap you?

December 4, 2007 08:15 PM

Even if you're not an American citizen.  I had no idea.  From FoxNews:

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by U.S. authorities and could face criminal charges in America.

Until now it was commonly assumed that U.S. law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.

It dates back aways, folks, so don't blame Bush for some imaginary crack down on civil rights:

The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington.  Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

Wonderful news.  We can kidnap criminals from overseas and bring them here, but we can't won't send back the criminals who have come here just by walking over the boarder.  Lovely.

HT: The Llamas

Peggy Noonan Compares and Contrasts: Hillary and Margaret Thatcher

November 9, 2007 11:37 AM

Big suprise: Peggy doesn't think Hillary stacks up very well:

The point is the big ones, the real ones, the Thatchers and Indira Gandhis and Golda Meirs and Angela Merkels, never play the boo-hoo game. They are what they are, but they don't use what they are. They don't hold up their sex as a feint: Why, he's not criticizing me, he's criticizing all women! Let us rise and fight the sexist cur.

When Hillary Clinton suggested that debate criticism of her came under the heading of men bullying a defenseless lass, an interesting thing happened. First Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL and an Edwards supporter, hit her hard. "When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her elevation into the 'boys club.' " But when "legitimate questions" are asked, "she is quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules."

When the past president of NARAL is criticizing you for playing the "sexism" card, there's a problem.

And what's not to love about this anecdote?

The story as I was told it is that in the early years of her prime ministership, Margaret Thatcher held a meeting with her aides and staff, all of whom were dominated by her, even awed. When it was over she invited her cabinet chiefs to join her at dinner in a nearby restaurant. They went, arrayed themselves around the table, jockeyed for her attention. A young waiter came and asked if they'd like to hear the specials. Mrs. Thatcher said, "I will have beef."

Yes, said the waiter. "And the vegetables?"

"They will have beef too."

Perfect. 

"Can't the man have a mid-life crisis in peace? In the animal kingdom such displays often attract a willing mate."

October 15, 2007 09:05 PM

Oh dear.  The Brits are upset one of their better known tv hosts appeared on tv in moleskin trousers.  Maybe he should have used LBJ's tailor?

terry wogan

HT: Jackie Danicki

The Brits call that a lunch box.  Yes, the slogan was new to me to.

UPDATE:  I almost forgot.  This Brit has nothing on Dick Cheney, as photographed during the 2004 campaign.  What's the slogan?  A [Republican] elephant never forgets?

And now, we know how he died.

October 11, 2007 03:26 PM

Who, you ask?  Count Gottfried Alexander Leopold Graf von Bismarck-Schonhausen!  We profiled his obituary back in July, because it began as few obituaries do:

Count Gottfried von Bismarck, who was found dead on Monday aged 44, was a louche German aristocrat with a multi-faceted history as a pleasure-seeking heroin addict, hell-raising alcoholic, flamboyant waster and a reckless and extravagant host of homosexual orgies.

It's an awful lot to put on a tombstone, but at least he managed to get in in the first sentence of his Telegraph obit.  And back in July, NBS commeter Dr. Mabuse asked, "But what did he die of?"  And now we know.  He'd injected himself with cocaine once an hour, for 24 hours.

And on a totally unrelated sidenote: This does kind of remind me of the time the Enquirer was interviewing my mom for my grandmother's obit and the reporter had never heard of "Vassar."  We still shake our heads in wonder over that.  [A weird obituary story is the only link between my grandmother and Count Gottfried von Bismark, lest you be wondering how he put me in mind of her.  She was not flamboyant waster or a reckless and extragagant host of homosexual orgies.  Well, not unless you count the times she'd have in her antiques appraiser.  That always got pretty crazy.]

As bad as the Episcopal/Anglican break down has been, at least it hasn't been THIS bad.

September 30, 2007 10:11 PM

Wherein I have a rare moment, and am actually proud to be an Episcopalian

September 18, 2007 03:13 PM

Because no Episcopalian would EVER have one of these.  They are Inspirational Catholic Jesus Sports Statues, and they are available for $22.95 from CatholicShopper.com.

DE_3984.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CatholicShopper.com describes them as "a wonderful way to reinforce Jesus "as friend" in everyday activities."  But I don't think Jesus should be helping that little girl with her golf swing. 

Nor do I think he should be teaching these little boys to play football in flip-flops.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"What a friend we have in Jesus.  Tackle him!" 

Oh sure, my Church may be run by hippies and heretics, but at least we don't have Inspirational Jesus Sports Statues.  What happened to the idea that you built things like this to remind people about Jesus?

West end of Chartres

HT the Llama Butchers.

Thanks to Global Warming, Entire Point of Colonizing the Americas Now Realized!

September 17, 2007 12:54 PM

Yes, it's true.  The Northwest Passage is now open for thru traffic.  If this had happened 400 years ago, we could have gotten our opium directly from China instead of cocaine from South America.  So life as we know it today would be much, much different.  Yay, global warming!

I say call me when it's warm enough for tourism potential. 

Below: A young woman reassures her sea captain father that yes, one day we will be able to get poisonous dog food and toys containing dangerous quantities of lead shipped directly to the East Coast.

Image:Millais - Überfahrt nach Nordwest.jpg

The Northwest Passage, by John Everett Millais (1874).

HT: Dr. Mabuse, who says "Quick!  Someone call the Queen!  The Northwest Passage is open!"

I know you've already seen this on the Drudge Report...

August 28, 2007 10:50 AM

... but I'm posting it too because I just love this photo of Winnie Langley celebrating her 100th Birthday:

Winne Langley

Hilarious.  If an American newspaper ran that photo, how many indignant letters to the editor would they receive?

And on the birthday front, check out this creepy email I got from LexisNexis Martindale Hubble: 

Happy birthday from LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell! We're also celebrating the 10th birthday this year of martindale.com and we would like to invite you to make a birthday wish with us.

For the past 10 years, martindale.com has played a critical role connecting lawyers with other lawyers. Each month, more than 700,000 users tap into martindale.com to find the exact right lawyer to handle their matter or business referral.....

Now we'd like to hear from you about the next cutting edge features we should implement on martindale.com. Share your ideas with us by making a birthday wish on behalf of martindale.com. For each idea you submit, we'll enter your name into a drawing for a 42" plasma television.

So blow out the birthday candles and make a wish for martindale.com - We hope both your wishes come true! Have the happiest of birthdays and many more!

Yes, it's my birthday.  But I don't think I care for birthday wishes from massive legal research organizations with huge databases.  It just reminds me that they know too much about me, and probably everyone else.  Big Brother is watching you!  I also don't like that they think I'm going to give away a free "idea" in exchange for a chance to win a tv.  How patronizing--they are supposed to be an organization for professionals.

From the "Making NBS Seem Mainstream" Department

July 16, 2007 09:26 PM

Last week I introduced you all to someone who is even more conservative than I, this week, I give you someone more snobby.  Do check out the writings of one Rafal Heydel-Mankoo, and his blog, Reflections of a Young Fogey.  Mr. Heydel-Mankoo is an historian, honours consultant, protocol and etiquette consultant, and a royal and political commentator.  He is also the editor of Burke's Peerage & Gentry, and the grandson of Polish aristocrats Baron Adam Heydel and HSH Princess Karolina-Katarzyna Jablonowska. 

He also appears to be about 30, thus making him rather young to have devoted a career to monitoring other people's breeding.  I'm a Colonial Warrior, but I don't try to make a living off of it.  It would be fun to have him at a Warrior's event, though--mostly because he's significantly under the average age of 70, and also because he probably doesn't approve of Colonials Who Are Warriors.  A monarchist could really stir things up.  One gets the sense from reading his blog that he is definitely peeved we won the Revolutionary War.

Here's a sample:

Monarchists, traditionalists and historians gathered en masse yesterday evening in the dignified surroundings of London's Travellers Club library to honour the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660; thus marking the end of 11 years of hated, puritanical republican dictatorship. The Royal Stuart Society organises this splendid annual dinner on or around Oak Apple Day, May 29th, King Charles II's birthday and the date of his triumphal entry into London.

He then goes into a lengthy discussion of The Royal Stuart Society, and its aims:

The Society gladly recognises that those who form its membership are likely to have a varied range of particular interests. For some it will primarily be support for the institution of monarchy and the upholding of monarchical institutions against attack from their opponents. This support may favour, for instance, the legitimist stance based on hereditary principles and exemplified in the Jacobite movement and tradition after 1688. Adherents of this position will look with favour on the senior and direct hereditary heirs of the Royal House of Stuart although as our page on ‘Succession’ makes clear, none of those heirs has claimed any or all of the thrones of the British Isles since 1807. Other members of the Society will support or find acceptable the ‘parliamentary’ monarchy created by the Act of Settlement (1701) and now embodied in the reigning House of Windsor. For all there will be a consensus based on the desirability of having a monarchy rather than a republic. Closely linked with support for monarchy, members are likely to favour organised society in these islands being of a Christian, civilized and traditionalist nature. In a more general way they will favour co-operation with other credible monarchist bodies such as the International Monarchist League to support monarchical forms of government worldwide.

The Colonial Warriors have a rather different charter, but we do allow membership to descendants of those who fought for the Crown.  So we'd welcome members of The Royal Stuart Society to join our "hated, puritanical republican" brood.  Apparently, though, the feeling is not mutual.

But I do have something that Mr. Heydel-Mankoo and I surely do agree on.  True story: A few years ago, I was in the Henry VII Lady Chapel at Westminster Abbey, near the stone that reads "The Burial Place of Oliver Cromwell 1658-1661."  And hand to God, this obese tourist woman who was standing next to me exclaimed:

"Awwwwwwwww.  He only lived to be three years old!"

If we hadn't been in a Church, I would have just unloaded on that woman.  I'm trying to take in the surroundings, and then there's this idiot.  If you are that stupid, you need to keep your mouth shut.  Those were the years that he was interred her, you fool.  Oliver Cromwell was not a baby.  He was a brutal dictator who got dug up, hanged, and decapitated after the Restoration of the Monarchy.  Not a baby.

Anyway, I'd like to think Mr. Heydel-Mankoo and I would share a common disdain for stupid people.  And both of us would probably would like this photo:

It's the Henry VII Lady Chapel at Westminster Abbey, sans fat, ignorant tourists.

Update: The BBC misrepresented the Queen's Big Showdown with the Photog

July 13, 2007 08:39 AM

I am trying to follow up on earlier posts, and this one is a good one:

BBC bosses face new questions over why they waited almost 24 hours to apologise for lying about the Queen.

The corporation has admitted it "misrepresented" what happened in an encounter between the Queen and photographer Annie Leibovitz at Buckingham Palace.

The Queen was apparently shown storming out during a photo shoot when in fact she had been walking to the shoot and the footage had been spliced together out of sequence.

There are calls for the responsible official from the BBC to resign.  I think it would be humanizing if her handlers would let her be angry on occasion, and ultimately good for her reputation.

"Less dressy, what do you think this is?"

July 11, 2007 01:15 PM

I am eagerly awaiting the first time this video is linked up on YouTube.  Apparently the Queen went off on celebrity photographer Annie Leibovitz, who had apparently suggested she remove her crown.  Here's a still:

She was not amused by the suggestion, apparently:

TV cameras follow the Queen storming off with an official lifting the large train of her blue velvet cape off the floor as the Queen tells her lady-in-waiting: "I'm not changing anything. I've had enough dressing like this thank you very much."

Sounds highly entertaining.

For those of you who think NBS is too conservative...

July 8, 2007 10:45 PM

... you really need to check out Andrew Cusack's blog.  He's young, extremely intelligent, a great writer, and an American who doesn't even believe in the Declaration of Independence.  Yes, he's a monarchist.  Talk about diversity of opinion!  You don't run into many monarchists these days.

It takes a special kind of person to post on the Fourth of July the following words: "Two hundred and thirty-one years ago today, the tragedy of our people commenced."  He then has a picture of George III alongside a picture of George W. Bush, and says he prefers the former.  Misguided, I know, but a fascinating perspective.

And he has some great things to say about Sewanee.  Check out his feature "Maces of America," a "series of post covering the history, design, and use of ceremonial maces in the United States."  In it, he writes of Sewanee:

The University of the South, which sits on a 10,000-acre domain in Sewanee, Tennesee, is in my opinion the St Andrews of America. To my knowledge it is the only university on this side of the Atlantic which comes close to, and in many regards exceeds, the Universitas Sancti Andrea apud Scotus in the maintenance of tradition.

High praise, my friends.  High praise.  Do check out his blog.  It's so well-written that you may find the comment sections too intimidating.  But go there and lurk.

The Episcopal Bishop of Bethlehem is a troll

July 7, 2007 09:23 PM

I'm using internet lingo, of course, which defines "troll" as follows:

Troll.  One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks with no substance or relevance to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

Over at my friend Brad Drell's blog, Paul Marshall has started speaking up in the comments.  He's the Episcopal Bishop of Bethlehem, PA.  Brad's a fellow attorney, was a fraternity brother of mine at Sewanee, and on the conservative side of things in the Episcopal-Anglican crack-up.  Bishop Marshall is not in the same camp. 

So guess what Bishop Marshall is saying in Brad's comments section?  He accuses Brad of being crazy.  He says that there are meds available to cure Brad's condition (conservatism, I guess), and that he hopes Brad's "symptoms are being managed."

And yes, we do know that is THE Bishop of Bethlehem who is posting the comments, not someone doing so under an assumed name.  Can you imagine?  Granted, Bishop Marshall is best known for recently launching an unhinged attack on the Archbishop of Canterbury, accusing him of coddling conservatives (would that were so!) and destroying the church.  So at least Brad's in good company.  He's right there on Bishop Marshall's shit list, along with the The Most Rev. Rowan D. Williams, 104th Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England, and heir to the throne of St. Augustine.  Not bad for a guy from a small town in Louisiana.

But good company aside...  isn't it a little bizarre for a Bishop to be accusing members of the laity of being crazy via blog comments?  It certainly does makes one wonder who is off their meds.  And it doesn't seem to me like it's Brad.

The Brits also write much more interesting obituaries

July 6, 2007 08:38 AM

From the Telegraph:

Count Gottfried von Bismarck, who was found dead on Monday aged 44, was a louche German aristocrat with a multi-faceted history as a pleasure-seeking heroin addict, hell-raising alcoholic, flamboyant waster and a reckless and extravagant host of homosexual orgies.

What a great lede!

The great-great-grandson of Prince Otto, Germany's Iron Chancellor and architect of the modern German state, the young von Bismarck showed early promise as a brilliant scholar, but led an exotic life of gilded aimlessness that attracted the attention of the gossip columns from the moment he arrived in Oxford in 1983 and hosted a dinner at which the severed heads of two pigs were placed at either end of the table.

When not clad in the lederhosen of his homeland, he cultivated an air of sophisticated complexity by appearing in women's clothes, set off by lipstick and fishnet stockings....

Von Bismarck's university career ended in catastrophe in June 1986, when his friend Olivia Channon [daughter of one of Margaret Thatcher's cabinet ministers] was found dead on his bed, the victim of a drink and drugs overdose. Von Bismarck admitted that his role in the affair had brought disgrace on the family name; five years later he told friends that there were still people who would not speak to his parents on account of it, and who told his mother that she had "a rotten son".

Never concealing his homosexuality, von Bismarck continued to appear in public in various eccentric items of attire, including tall hats atop his bald Mekon-like head. At parties he would appear in exotic designer frock coats with matching trousers and emblazoned with enormous logos. Flitting from table to table at fashionable London nightclubs, he was said to be as comfortable among wealthy Eurotrash as he was on formal occasions calling for black tie.

Although described personally as quiet and impeccably mannered, von Bismarck continued to live high on the hog, hosting riotous all-night parties for his (chiefly gay) friends at his £5 million flat off Sloane Square. It was at one such event, in August last year, that von Bismarck encountered tragedy for a second time when one of his male guests fell 60 ft to his death from the roof garden. While von Bismarck was not arrested, he was questioned as a witness and there were those who wondered - not, perhaps, without cause - whether he might be the victim of a family curse...

He never married.

The Enquirer's obituaries could be so much more interesting, couldn't they?  But I'm not sure the West Side could handle it.

I Love the British Press

July 5, 2007 09:59 AM

Here's what they think makes for a good headline:

HERO CABBIE: I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON

And they're right!  Talk about a headline that draws the reader in.  So here's what the article says, since I'm sure you're curious:

A HERO cabbie who took on the Glasgow Airport terror suspects told yesterday how he booted one of them in the privates.

Alex McIlveen, 45, kicked the man, whose body was in flames, so hard that he tore a tendon in his foot.

"You were expecting sixty-seven virgins?" he then yelled, whilst kicking him again.  Actually no he didn't, but that would have been the only thing to make this story better. 

Britain has a new Prime Minister. Gordon Brown will never be as good as this one, though.

June 27, 2007 08:07 AM