Brexit Means Brexit

I feel like i understand the gears and levers of Brexit, but the thing as a whole is baffling.  Like watching a drunk friend set themselves on fire.

I do think there are several key points to remember, and the media has been, as a whole, abysmal at covering the whole thing.  They use cute satirical phrases instead of explaining real issues, they completely ignore mechanisms and reasons and (even The Guardian!) hype conflict and confusion.

KEY ROOT CAUSES
1. Independence
Independence is emotionally so hard to oppose, but intellectually impossible to justify.  We saw this in the Scottish referendum; hell, we see it in Eastern Washington all the time.  It FEELS so right. But it's really not.  Community is strong.  Diversity is healthy.  But Independence SOUNDS so good.

2. Britain still remembers the Empire.
This couldn't happen in any other country.  There is a memory of a time when things JUST WORKED GREAT for the UK -- mind you they starved India and enslaved Africa to make things work on that tiny island, but there is a strong cultural memory (especially in the media, left center and right) of things working really well.  They are oblivious to the fact that this is a memory, but they are CONVINCED that things will just work for them if they leave. Without that memory of power, this doesn't happen.

3. Superpower
Britain thinks they have more power internationally than they actually do, due to centuries of white supremacy.  This is different than #2, it's more intellectual conclusion and less emotional reaction.  They really really believe deep down that they are a superpower, one of the 3 or 4 most important nations on the planet.  Every thought and decision is based on that core 'truth'.   It's wrong.  Without that belief that the world will come begging at their doorstep, this doesn't happen.

4. Anglo-Saxon Liberty
This is a whole interesting, disturbing concept in itself, that i should discuss further sometime, but going back to the Germanic tribes interactions with the Roman Empire there is a long history of a fanaticism for liberty and fights over personal vs communal liberty.   The Germans hated the Romans because they had an Emperor and the Germans had no kings.  British kings have always been 'below the law' citizens who had to obey laws, while French and other kings were 'above the law', their word was god.  There is a whole series of conflicts, wars and political conflicts which can be seen as a single ongoing conflict around liberty, including 1066, Empress Matlida, Edward III, Wars of Roses, Henry VIII, Cromwell... The US Revolution, US Civil War can even be included.  This is surely part of that universe.  The British KNOW that union is good for them, but they bristle, they don't like it because of a cultural (although poorly articulated) passion for 'liberty'.

5. Fear of brown people.
Sadly this is a big part of the wedge used to force people to a position on this issue.  And that's what happened, what that massive ignoramus Cameron unwittingly did, he FORCED Brits to take sides on an issue steeped in racism.  You really don't want to make people take sides like that.

6. Power struggles.
I really like the parliamentary system -- where there are many voices compromising, multiple parties with nuanced political ideas working together with the currency of percentage of the vote (instead of money).  I like the idea that a poor leader can be replaced by their own party without the party losing power. I like the idea that the leader is selected by party membership rather than by corporate faux election 'primarys'.  But this great system has failed terribly here.  Every decision maker, Johnson, Mogg, even Corbyn, possibly even May, has been making decisions about how to behave (daily!) in this crisis based entirely on how it will effect their ability to be PM.  It's sick.   In fact, i'm pretty sure a dozen or so 'contenders' have taken the attitude of letting May handle this impossible task before taking over as PM themselves.  No one wanted this shit bomb, let the woman sort it out.  Without that crazy power struggle, this is solved 2 years ago.

7. Split parties
Partially because of first-past-the-post, England (and i do mean only one of the four countries in the UK) has always leaned toward a damaging and oligarchic two party 'big tent' system like the USA; with Cameron's poorly thought out electoral 'reforms' that has gotten even worse.  Instead of creating additional parties, the 'big tents' have tried to embrace rivals to create a majority in a general election.  Neither party is unified.  So in addition to the competition and maneuvering of #5, you have factions in each party with starkly different ideologies.  The parties themselves can't get along or even agree internally and that negates a main benefit of a parliamentary system: the ability to make and execute decisions.  Without that infighting, this is solved 2 years ago.

8. Misogyny
I don't agree with May's politics. Also, i tend to dislike politicians whose desire for office exceeds ideology and/or honorable behavior.  But i actually think she's done an admirable job of 'can't we all get along'.  And it almost worked.  There is no way a man would be treated like she's been treated -- no possible way.  Few men could've done even as well as she has with this radioactive hot potato (handed to her by a less competent man), but can you imagine if the buffoonish ignoramuses Cameron or Johnson were PM during this?  They never would've been treated with the disdain that MPs, media and even her own cabinet ministers have treated this female PM.  No way.  Without that sexism, this is solved 2 years ago.

8. Euro
The EU was founded on the single basic principle of preventing war.  In the 250 years before 1952 France had attacked Germany 3 times, Germany attacked France twice and France and Spain had exploded into warfare twice all causing Europe-wide wars.  In the century before THAT religious wars engulfed the continent 3 times.  The EU was created to prevent that ever happening again, and all across the continent people know that, and that's why they love it so much, why support is so unbelievably high, especially in France, Germany and Benelux (like 90%).  The EU means peace and getting along with neighbors.  Then came a big corporation, BMW, like a drunk frat boy crashing the party.  They wanted a market the size of the US with no currency fluctuations so they could compete with Caterpillar.  They pushed the starkly anti-EU idea of a single currency.  That changed everything.  The downside of the EU was always a fear of a U.S.E., a FEDERATION like the U.S.A. rather than a CONfederation of independent states.  The Euro upended the balanced power in the confederation and in addition it brought in nutty right wing 'austerity' and powerful vs weak 'members'.  That's really what this is all about.  Without the Euro, this doesn't happen.

9. Special relationship
Since 1945 the UK has not really been independent, but has, in fact, been a de facto kind of 51st state of the US.  They have to do what the US says -- just ask Tony Blair about Iraq!  This has been a key part of the UKs schizoid relationship with the EU.  The US liked having a partial say in EU matters, the UK liked having a foot on either side of the fence.  Russia and China hated it.  My big fear 5 years ago, and it seems to be coming true, is an unaffiliated England with London being fought over by the US, EU, Russia & China like a modern day Vietnam.  Without the connection to the US, the UK is fully in the EU and not thinking of leaving at all.


So these root causes combined to make a chaotic environment and along came a rock-stupid male billionaire Oxford schoolboy who thought he could make himself more powerful by brilliantly leveraging all these issues into a major victory for his white self.  He failed and truly deserves what is coming, which is a place in history as one of the stupidest villains of all time.

In a Jessie Ventura moment, the UK (barely) voted to leave, and everyone was shocked, from Cameron down to most of the leave voters who thought it was a joke.  That leaves three major issues.  Introduction done, this is my take on Brexit:


I. Divorce
Once the UK decided to leave, they had to negotiate a divorce and build new relationships.  The EU wanted to stay together and was willing to work on it. All the accounts needed to be separated, new responsibilities delegated that the partner used to do.  New trading relationships negotiated with other countries and for that matter with the EU too.  Plans for what to do with the kids and the house and the bank account and the dog.  Who pays who what.

May's first big mistake was immediately invoking article 50, starting the departure process before agreeing on a plan.  This was like calling the guests into dinner before doing the cooking, or even planning the menu.  The UK as a whole had to decide what to ask for in the divorce.  They had to agree on what to ask for -- and now we are 3 years later and they still haven't agreed on WHAT TO ASK FOR to START the negotiations.  And oh by they way, you're the one leaving, you don't get to ask for ANYTHING.  It's stunningly arrogant to think that they can request BENEFITS for leaving -- but they haven't even asked yet because they can't agree among themselves! 

Like the great white Oxbridge power mad scum that they are, they assume they can set the rules.  They can't.  The rules are set.  The EU has been rolling it's eyes so hard the magnetic field of the earth is changing!  Even if the EU COULD negotiate, they can't let other countries think that it is EASY to leave, so they have to take a hard line, while hoping the UK comes to it's senses and just stays.

II. Ireland
May's second mistake was calling a general election.  Because she had an outright Tory majority, and assuming she could control her party, and assuming the stupid white men would listen to a woman, she could come up with a plan for this almost impossible divorce, get it through parliament and go to the EU for them to say No to it.  But she lost seats in the election and lost her majority, so she had to take on a coalition partner.  Wow, a grand coalition for a major national crisis!  Again!  That's a great idea!  Labour and Tory working side by side against a difficult problem for a better Britain!!!  No.  She chose the extreme rightwing Northern Ireland Unionist party and now they get to veto every decision.  And that they have.

The problem of course is that for 30 years they had open warfare on the border between the UK and the Republic in Ireland. Well, 300 years, but 1970s to 1990s they had shootings and bombings and assassinations and all out warfare in a modern white country.  With a lot of help that was solved by Bill Clinton in 2000.  And they found someone to guarantee the peace.  That was The EU.  And really the main thing that did it, was that with both countries in the EU, the border just didn't matter anymore.  There IS NO BORDER.  So they've had peace for a generation.  Peace is a nice thing for normal people, but politicians don't much like it.

Some crazy white folks can pretend that the UK dropping out of the worlds largest trading block with NO trade agreements, no laws or regulations, no flights in or out, no shipping, no medicine would be just fine.  It probably WOULD be fine for the handful of rich white lunatics supporting that insane idea.  But even they can't claim Ireland would be fine: war would return overnight.  And the EU, to their credit, is standing up for Ireland.

III. special treatment
If the UK leaves the EU on April 12th (or later if they are given another extension) and if the EU survives (which is certainly a question, but is very likely) then the UK will want back in sometime in the next 30 years.  And this time they will not get all the special treatment -- they won't be able to keep their own currency, their own immigration rules and everything else. 

How much support is there for staying?
 
Well, LEAVE won by 1.8% with a vote that skewed above aged 65.  More than 1.8% of the leave voters have died in 3 years.  Also the lies of the white guys have been exposed. Standard logic suggests that right now, on a 2nd referendum with just 2 options (LEAVE/STAY), stay would win big.  But standard logic can't apply here, and the fact is, the LEAVE camp want a 2nd ref almost as badly as as REMAIN do -- obviously they think they can win.

Anyway, a second ref is not going to happen.  What might happen is  a general election which would be insane (but look up Brexit in a dictionary!  It's all insane.)  There's no real reason to believe Labour could win outright and frankly i think the Torys would probably win another minority government.

What's the mechanism for never leaving at all?
 
That's easy.  In fact, it's the only thing that is.

May announces she's going to cancel their request to leave (the invoking of article 50 of the EU charter).  MPs vote yes.  She hops over to Brussels, hands the paper to Donald Tusk, he hugs her and says, "Wanna watch the footie?" 

Does LAB belong in Bikes Belong?

The Alliance for Biking & Walking, Bikes Belong, and the League of American Bicyclists — the three largest national bicycling advocacy organizations — intend to merge into one group.

Tim Blumenthal, head of the industry-backed Bikes Belong, will lead the new organization.

This is very concerning.

The claim is that this strange merger might create a stronger, more effective organization. But the opposite seems much more likely.

First off, i'm very worried about the fact that we will have fewer voices, even if there is a possibility that the only remaining voice is a little bigger.

I think it's been great having Bikes Belong in the mix these last few years. Finally having an industry voice was very valuable and it worked well with the League. But to let it take over our 100 year old advocacy organization -- that is a disaster. LAB has always been the check and balance on the bicycle industry, and often pressured the industry to focus more on transportation than various unnecessary dead ends. But now the industry is going to actually run LAB?  Bikes Belong, formed primary by Trek and often guided by the League, is a relatively recent attempt by the American bicycle corporations to advance bicycling. It is an industry group supporting a pro-industry agenda.

For over a century (the entire history of the bicycle!) the LAB/LAW name was the gold standard. They were steadfast and dependable in their strong and thoughtful support for all cyclists.  While by no means perfect, they are one of the most effective organizations i know of.  Not only are they responsible for bicycles being allowed by law on every street in every State (the main advocacy push of the 1970s) but they also advocated for and got PAVED STREETS! (The main advocacy push of the 1890s!)  Now it is proposed that they became simply an arm of the bicycle manufacturing companies?

Mature movements have many voices with different perspectives. That is essential. That diversity is a good thing.  In the last few years it seemed that we (the bicycle movement) were finally maturing. I love that flowering:  the multiple different groups and sub-movements,  many voices of many different bicyclists, different perspectives and viewpoints. Consolidating into only one voice seems like a terrible step backwards from that maturity, marginalizing us yet again, not only on the local scene but on the national scene. At least on the national level we have always, always had someone we could depend on to stand up for us: The League of American Bicyclists. Ooops!

We do want the bike industry in the public sphere, talking to Congress and localities and we need the League speaking out -- they are the most important organization in the history of bicycling.   And we need them to be independent of the bike industry, to work with it but also to put pressure on it.


Secondly, mixing the Alliance for Biking and Walking in with the big bike organizations is clearly a big setback for both pedestrian advocacy, which will be overwhelmed by the bikes, and for cycling advocacy. Cycling's two biggest voices, soon to be only one voice, will have to make time and room for pedestrian issues. That could feel like (and could really be) an afterthought, and that would be a tragedy for pedestrians. Or it could cut into the ability to speak for the nation's bicyclists, which would also be terrible. Pedestrians, that's ALL OF US, need a strong national voice, it's hard to imagine how that voice will survive this merger.



Third, and worst, by lumping cyclists and pedestrians into a single block, we send the message to the opposition that we're all the same, with the same crazy demands trying to interfere with the 'normal' drivers. It makes it sound like we're just a bunch of irrational anti-car people with no clear message.

It perpetuates the idea that bikes and pedestrians are the same, with the same needs, ignoring the fact that, while most cyclists support pedestrian issues, and some pedestrians support bike issues, our space (in the city) our needs and our priorities are not only very different but very often in conflict. These conflicts will only increase as urban cycling increases. It is important for all of us that all of those needs are addressed full time by strong voices for both bikes and pedestrians.


The fact that industry rep Blumenthal will be CEO, not Executive Director indicates that the players themselves do not see this as a non-profit organization. Does that mean they also don't see it as a membership organization? Or are they just trying to get the extensive, activist membership to support the for-profit bike industry?

Since the 1890s The League has been a membership based organization. They have used that strength, as the voice of REAL cyclists, to effect great change.  Again, it is the idea that MANY VOICES are stronger than just one.  For decades, the bicycle industry just wanted to focus on new inventions and expensive toys. The industry is largely responsible for the widespread idea that bicycling is recreational only. It abandoned transportation cycling in the 1960s and pushed hard AGAINST transportation cycling throughout the 1990s, pushing people to buy over-engineered mountain bikes, and the 2000s forcing everyone towards farcical racing machines. These mistakes are at the core of many of the issues we struggle with today.

The League of American Bicyclists has been our steadfast voice throughout this: representing bicyclists and pushing back against the industry. Now they are merging with, and probably being consumed by a private industry group? How do you do that with a membership organization? I don't understand.


Andy Clark, the president of LAB says on his blog that none of the groups are in trouble, and that no programs will be reduced, no one laid off.

But we all know that mergers never happen because everyone is strong: they happen because one or more players are weak. When there is no good purpose for this surprise announcement, and a lot of concerns, i have to ask: why now? What is the pressing need to weaken our strongest voice and silence the chorus in favor of a monolithic voice of private industry?

Seattle Attacked from The Air

Central Seattle was the victim today of a series of sorties by the most expensive and deadly military hardware in the world.

The extremely low combat maneuvers are designed to frighten and pacify enemy nations. They are performed over residential areas only one time per year, with Seattle being the lucky exception to the strict aviation regulations. No bombs were dropped by the deadly warplanes this time.

While many people interpreted the fear generated by the terror machines as life threatening, it turns out this was just a Soviet style propaganda exercise reminiscent of columns of tanks passing the Kremlin in parade.

The ostentatious display of expensive military hardware was specifically designed to give Americans, especially liberals in Seattle, a warm and fuzzy feeling about war and imperialism and to make them feel happy about spending 70% of their tax dollars killing and subjugating people around the world.

It's not a recession!

I accidentally listened to a right wing talk show the other day.

I didn't mean to, i just wasn't in a position to turn it off. I realize the terrible problems that selective media creates, but like everyone else, I still engage in it. We can learn a lot from people we disagree with. We can even learn a lot from people who are wrong. It's important to hear those things. But it's not easy and it's not comfortable. I usually change the station.

The guest on this show was David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's budget director. He is the person most responsible for Reagennomics. The world we live in today is his doing. He INVENTED this economy. Believe me, I didn't want to hear what he had to say. I'm very angry at him and the Reagen clan. I've heard the right winger arguments and they don't make any sense. The host and panel on this radio show however clearly felt they were in the presence of royalty. They were in awe and each and every one of them, especially the host, took time during introductions to express their deep respect and admiration for him.

After a few minutes of worshiping him, they started asking questions about the budget crisis. Almost immediately he said:

"It's very simple, we must cut the defense budget by 26%, preferably more. We must raise taxes on the rich and even the middle class. We must exclude the wealthy from social security. We have no choice. We've gone way too far."

The right wing host, Dianne Rheam, actually cut his mike and said that he "had to leave". The guests were irate. But I thought it was interesting that the guy who invented this hyper capitalist world says we've gone to far. That percolated in my head for a while.

A couple of days ago I read a quote from Warren Buffet, another annoying republican who I normally ignore. He said, "The debt ceiling debate is a red herring. Our current debt is high, but after WWII it was 152% of GDP. This is not that bad."

I've been trying to ignore the media's mindless babbling about the debt ceiling debate. They are flogging a non issue just to further the Republicans selfish agenda. There will almost certainly be a deal, right at the deadline, the only question is how much blood the Republicans can steal from the American people in that deal. If there is NOT a deal, the Republican Party will never recover. They will never win another election if they shut down the government or if they cause a default. Because despite the constant screaming from the far right about how bad government is, most Americans actually like the government. Just ask Newt Gingrich who's career was ended when he shut down the government.

Yesterday I was stuck in a car for three hours and my mind was wandering when it hit me. This is not a recession. This is a POST WAR economy. It's the classic situation, exactly like every other post war period in US history, in European and Chinese history and in the Roman Empire.

Wars cost money. Lots of it. They are the most expensive thing we can buy. And it's awfully hard to time them so that you have money saved up. So you borrow money for your war, and then you pay it back.

Several years ago as part of my job I was trying to track down inflation rates. I found data from Professor Robert C. Sahr at Oregon State University who had calculated the value of the US dollar annually all the way back to 1665. So I grabbed that data and created a graph.

It's very hard to get any usable information, visually, from this graph, because there are two major phenomena that dominate the graph: the relative stability over a long period of time and the massive inflation since WWII.

So to learn anything useful, we have to zoom in.

Now what becomes obvious is that there are periodic spikes, big jumps in inflation, where the dollar's value declined, but fairly quickly returned to a norm. It's fascinating that, ignoring those spikes, the dollar remained at the essentially the same value for 300 years.

Now with what I know about history, i instantly found the timing of these spikes very interesting. So let's label the years.

Yes. Each spike is a war.

We inflated the currency as a way to borrow money, to pay for the terribly expensive wars, and then we paid it back. It's a normal pattern. The Roman Emperors did the same thing. Since Rome was a military dictatorship, each time a general would lead a coup and become emperor, it would cost a lot of money. So they would collect all of the silver coins, melt them down, and add some tin, and make MORE coins than they started with. They inflated the number of coins but sold them for the same amount. They raised more money.

We just bought a four trillion dollar war, we have to pay for it. It's one of the most expensive things we will ever buy. It's like buying a house, you take out a mortgage because it's one of the most expensive things you will ever buy, then you have to change your budgeting for a period of time because you are paying off the house.

We are paying off our decade long $4,000,000,000,000 war. We may not want to, some of us didn't want the war in the first place, i'm not sure it accomplished anything, but we bought it, we took out loans to pay for it and now we have to pay it back.

Some political opportunists on the right are pretending that the reason we are in debt is because of taking care of the American people, but that is just a lie to try to enrich themselves. If government gets smaller, the wealthy can fill the gaps for themselves, but the other 85% of Americans suffer for the luxury of the wealthy.

We are in a post war economy, we've got a big mortgage, but we still have to buy food. To suggest that the problem is social programs is like buying a house, taking out a half a million dollar loan and then looking at your bottom line, seeing that you are in debt and blaming the cat food.

I'm Proud of The BBC

Recently, the crazy right-wing nut who leads the British coalition Government has suggested abolishing the British Broadcasting Corporation. As hard as that is to actually imagine, there really is a discussion going on right now about it.

I find this bizarre and incomprehensible. The scope and the quality of the BBC (even outside of Britain) is simply amazing. Without the BBC most Americans wouldn't even think of the UK, and we surely wouldn't know anything about it. Instead we feel we know it well. There may not be much else that Americans like about British culture, but the BBC has made us all Anglophiles.

The impact of the BBC worldwide is difficult to exaggerate. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that it is the most respected, successful, even beloved aspect of British culture, full stop. It's certainly safe to say that the BBC is the most respected media organization in the world. BBC news is where the world turns for a big story. Internationally it has a reputation as simply the best, the gold standard. People in the US love the BBC's informative and educational shows so much that the mark of excellence for a US made show is to compare it to the BBC.

And the BBC entertainment division is legendary -- certainly the world leader in radio drama and the most fertile development ground for TV comedies. The astonishingly well made dramas set the bar for producers over here. Perhaps surprisingly to Americans, an awfully lot of the most successful sitcoms in the US were actually remakes of BBC shows. They originated at the creative headquarters, the BBC.

The BBC's impact on popular music, especially the rock music of the sixties can't be overstated, music as we know it would not exist without the BBC. John Peel supported every new type of music for 30 years and was especially important in the development of Punk and New Wave.

Inside of the UK the BBC is even more important, loved, needed and valuable -- it is the glue that holds the country together.

And perhaps best of all for every one of us who watches or listens, there are NO ADVERTISEMENTS! The BBC is funded by an annual per-set charge on TV & radios within the country. A non-profit, user funded, broadcasting system is, by it's very nature, focused on quality instead of advertising. The BBC is the poster child for this idea. There is simply more substance and better quality. Both radio and TV programs are far more educational, more entertaining, more well made than at a private for profit broadcaster because their goal, and even reason for existing, is to entertain and educate, not to score ratings points by appealing the lowest common denominator while spending as little as possible in order to enrich the owners.

Consequently the BBC has given a platform for talented people who cared about what they were doing to do amazing things -- people we wouldn't know about otherwise. In short the BBC has showed the world how it should be done.

The BBC has made me wish i was British for most of my life and i know hundreds of other people who feel the same way. The BBC has shown the rest of the world how to make radio, how to make TV, how to report the news.

Mitch Benn is a British comedian and songwriter. He's a favorite of mine. He writes topical parody songs many which he performs on the absolutely wonderful Now Show on BBC Radio 4.

Last month Mitch Benn wrote a magnificent song about this insane idea of abolishing the best thing the British have ever done. It's a catchy tune and it's fun to pick out the familiar shows -- although he can only include a small sample. It's obviously a funny parody. It's full of fascinating and sometimes gymnastic rhymes and it also is a powerful political statement that is deeply moving. I bet you can't listen to it only once.

After listening to it repeatedly, i decided to create a list of all the shows and personalities he mentions. The impact of the BBC is evident in the fact that i was already familiar with a huge number of these. A few are very key parts of our culture, even here, 5,000 kilomenters away; others are shows i love and listen to on BBC 4 and BBC 7 on the internet (i'm an addict!). And i was amazed at how many of the TV shows were either remade in the US or inspired US spinoffs, movies, and much more. No other organization, public or private can claim even a fraction of the cultural impact of the BBC. And that's in the US, across the ocean, where they theoretically don't have any presence!!

Below i discuss some of the shows that had an impact in the US, but first, here's the video of I'm Proud of The BBC. Enjoy!

And here are the words as i transcribed them:

Newsround Newsnight iPlayer website Toni Arthur Brian Cant Spooks and Adam Adamant Postman Pat Blackadder Hancock and Yes Minister Later With Jools Holland Pride And Prejudice Hitchhikers Guide world service Stewart Lee Mr. Benn Casualty 6 music Glastonbury Horrible Histories Dennis Potter Cbeebies Quatermass and Two Ronnies The Thick Of It radio 3 Open University Kermode & Mayo Round The Horne The Goon Show Blake's 7 Dick & Dom Last Night Of The Proms Gardeners' Question Time Last Of The Summer Wine Steptoe & Son Clangers and The Young Ones Edge Of Darkness Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Letter From America The Mighty Boosh and QI Panorama and Bagpuss I Claudius Absolutely Fabulous i'm proud of the BBC it's part of you and it's part of me it's just this and lousy weather that holds us together i'm proud of the BBC it's not too slick but it was never supposed to be it's comfort and inspiration for the nation John Mosston Red Dwarf Our Friends In The North Culture Show Woman's Hour Charlie and Lola Alan Partridge Sherlock News at 6 O'clock Live Aid Likely Lads Michael Palin NO ADS This Life That's Life Life on Earth The Good Life Captain Pugwash Tony Hart Till Death Do Us Part Ken Bruce News Quiz Keeping Up Appearances Outnumbered Miranda Who Do You Think You Are? Kirsty Wark Paxman Parkinson and Wogan Tripods Fireman Sam The Ascent Of Man One Foot In The Grave Ben & Xander Rob & Dave Antiques Roadshow David Attenborough Bruce Forsyth with The League Of Gentlemen Hairy Bikers Being Human In The Night Garden Have I Got News For You You & Me (Me & You) Monty Python Doctor Who!!!!! i'm proud of the BBC it's part of you and it's part of me we're not just listeners and viewers it belongs to us i'm proud of the BBC and at least it doesn't pretend to be free and it's to nothing to what we'll pay if it goes away Top Gear Merlin Ivor The Engine Watchdog Wimbledon Springwatch Formula 1 Blue Peter Swap Shop 5 live Top Of The Pops Trumpton and The Archers That Was The Week That Was Goodies and Songs Of Praise World At One The Day Today Sorry I Haven't A Clue Not The Nine O'clock News Nationwide Mr. Men Doctor Who again EastEnders Bottom Gary Lineker radio 1 radio 2 did i mention Doctor Who? Ripping Yarns Johnny Ball Test Match Special Bergerac Perfect Day Radio Active Howard's Way Jeremy Hardy Final Score everything on BBC 4 Only Fools Sky At Night and Shooting Stars Pete & Dud Teletubbies and Life on Mars Radcliffe and Maconie Jackanory A Bit of Fry and Laurie Children In Need Appeal Douglas Adams John Peel!!!! i'm proud of the BBC like everybody has the right to be it's British as mid-summer showers and it's ours i'm proud of the BBC if we let it go, then it's gone perpetually and even if you don't always choose it you'll know what you had if you loose it it wouldn't be the same without it no doubt about it i see The Wombles i see The Office i see Nigella on the BBC i see Rolf Harris i see Sue Barker and Bob the Builder on the BBC i hear The Now Show and Brian Matthew Steve Lamacq on the BBC i see Gavin i see Stacey Eric & Ernie on the BBC i hear Bob Harris and Ask Elvis and Just A Minute on the BBC i see Doctors and Faulty Towers Gordon the Gopher on the BBC i see Z-cars i see Grange Hill and Graham Norton on the BBC i see Mary i see Mungo i see Midge on the BBC

To expand on just a few of those:

• Spooks was remade in the USA as MI-5,
  
• Blackadder is a cult hit in the US,
  
• The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is legendary of course,
  
• Yes Minister and Pride And Prejudice are PBS staples.
  
• the BBC world service is widely considered the best news source anywhere.
  
• The Goon Show basically invented modern comedy, Monty Python developed from it.
  
• Steptoe & Son became Sanford and Son in the US.
  
• The Young Ones defined classic comedy for my generation.
  
• Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Letter From America are PBS staples.
  
• Absolutely Fabulous was huge here too.
  
• Red Dwarf is a cult classic and PBS staple.
  
• Sherlock is becoming quite popular in the US.
  
• Live Aid is a defining moment in pop history.
  
• The Good Life, remade as Good Neighbors in the US.
  
• Till Death Do Us Part became All In the Family which was hugely popular, spawned half a dozen spin offs and pretty much defined TV comedy for the next 25 years in the US. Yes, it came from the BBC.
  
• News Quiz inspired Wait Wait Don't Tell Me. I listen to News Quiz every week.
  
• Who Do You Think You Are? is a Family History program remade in the US
  
• The Ascent Of Man The definition of the informative, interesting show. We have ENTIRE CHANNELS (Discovery) that are based on this series and similar BBC shows.
  
• One Foot In The Grave remade as Cosby in the US.
  
• Antiques Roadshow - the US remake is a part of our culture.
  
• Monty Python one of the most defining parts of our culture.
  
• Doctor Who in the 70s & 80s this was a cult classic in the US, and a PBS staple.
  
• Merlin is shown here.
  
• Top Of The Pops helped to define the 1960s music scene on both sides of the Atlantic.
  
• That Was The Week That Was was remade in the US.
  
• I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue is a wonderful, funny, radio panel game that inspired several NPR shows such as Says You. I listen to it weekly.
  
• Not The Nine O'clock News was remade in the US.
  
• Doctor Who again -- The modern Doctor Who is very popular here.
  
• Jeremy Hardy is one of my favorite comedians
  
• Pete & Dud gave us movie star Dudley Moore.
  
• Teletubbies was broadcast here and very well known.
  
• Life on Mars was remade in the US.
  
• A Bit of Fry and Laurie Stephen Fry is popular in the US and Hugh Laurie now stars in a popular US TV show.
  
• Douglas Adams is one of the greats, we'd be poorer without him.
  
• John Peel was one of the most important people in music history. Without him, rock, punk and most all popular music wouldn't be the same.
  
• The Office the US remake was a #1 show.
  
• Rolf Harris comedy songwriter
  
• Bob the Builder -- anyone with kids knows this!
  
• The Now Show a British news satire show, one of my favorite weekly half hours
  
• Ask Elvis -- This is Mitch Benn himself!
  
• Just A Minute a Great panel game that i listen to weekly on BBC 4
  
• Faulty Towers a PBS staple.
  

29 Reasons Bush Won't Be Allowed to Lose

We've had almost 3 years of George W Bush. The election is a year and month away;  everyone is caught up in declaring whether they LIKE or HATE him, but few people are willing to see past that divide to analyze what is LIKELY to happen. Here's my 29 reasons why W is certain to serve a second term. In no particular order. This is not an exercise in doom saying, or promoting, rather, it is intended to shed light on the issues that honest Americans MUST confront if we want to defeat Bush.

Republican EC Advantage, Sound Bites, Head of State, Most People Don't Care, Charisma , Incumbency, Everyone Votes With Their Feet, It was a Tie, Patriotism, Mississippi & Kentucky, California & Texas , $Money$, Good Looking, Convention Schedule, Democratic Primaries, Clinton/Gore, Black Box Voting, Action vs. Proof, Running Mate, Media Control, Media Preference, People Hear Nothing Bad, The Dems Expect to Lose, Clinton crowd, Florida, Another War, Make Shit Up, Call Off The Elections, Blow Something Up

Details below

Think When You Vote

I firmly agree with Robert S. Leigh's comment that it is of the utmost importance to exercise one's right to vote, but that is not enough. Voting alone does not ensure freedom. Mr. Leigh seems to forget that in the example he gave, the dictator (Hitler) was ELECTED. Voting does not ensure ANYTHING unless one makes an intelligent decision and refuses to cast their vote for the person that makes them feel nicer (or more important), or the person who is more popular or better looking or who's commercials are more inspiring. Voting is very important, but it is not enough. One must also learn to think.