Thursday, September 10, 2009

Government in Action

Joe Wilson looks tame next to these displays. Check out these outbursts HERE from The Daily Beast. Have you seen Parliament? Margaret Thatcher and the ministers were laughing and enjoying their exchanges. Do you prefer the way the Brits do it or how it is here?

7 comments:

Beth said...

Interesting question. In watching the Parliament debates, I didn't see anyone changing anyone else's mind...it seemed to be a debate simply for the sake of debating. I would think that it would be a fun intellectual exercise for them to do, and for all of us to watch, but what is accomplished in the end?

frogponder said...

They are all politicians and therefore suspect.

Joy said...

That's true, Beth. More of an exercise in one-liners, isn't it?

Right, FP!

Ms. Moon said...

I thought about that last night, watching the speech.

#Debi said...

I have to agree with Frogpnder. I do think, though, that if debate were a bit freer, as it seems to be in the Brit clip, tensions might be less, and each side might listen to the other more.

The South Koreans can keep their model. Although, would anyone pay to see a cage match with Pelosi vs. Palin? :)

Marker said...

Overall, I prefer (and have often wished we had adopted) the British model. That said, would it have made the cowed Dems of 2002-03 feel any more confident in speaking up against Dubya's lie-driven march to the invasion of a country that did not attack us? I fear not.

Andrew Sullivan had an excellent post on the issue. He sums it all up very well when he says that "One side was engaged in a civil conversation; the other was engaged in an uncivil protest."

(Sidebar: A "cage match" with Pelosi vs. Palin? WTF??? They are not two ends of a continuum. "Would anyone pay to see" that? Maybe wingnut troglodytes who jerk off the moment Palin shows up on the teevee, but that's about it.)

Anonymous said...

Is it just me, or do the Koreans fight like girls?

Jackie