I’ve tried to do the Kenneth livingstone Seagull as PM thing, and all I can say is that it hasn’t done a lot for the working class.
The cleaner now has an awful mess to clear up.
It’s all your fault.
One day I may tell you all the “I’m like a broomhandle in the morning” Ken Livingstone story (let’s face it there ar better chat-up lines than that!)
Well, I’m glad I could provide your servant with some useful employment, owl. And it’s nice to know, in a nasty way, that mindless, heartless, and soulless prejudice against “workshy mouth-breathing layabouts” is not a uniquely American disease. 
What motive id the Blair have for lying to his countrymen?
I had always envied the British their Mr. Blair until he supported Bush’s plans for the invasion of Iraq.
I think you’ll find they’re everywhere.
Have you ever BEEN to the North of England?
It’s not just that the Commons has to pass the impeachment motion itself. There are a whole series of procedural hurdles that would have to be jumped before they even get to that stage. Just getting agreement on the wording of the charges to be brought against him would be a very messy and hard-fought process. The initial vote, which would only be on whether to instigate the preparations for an impeachment, would have to be the first of many - assuming, that is, that they did decide to proceed. But if Blair did lose that first vote, he would immediately resign (or, less likely, seek a dissolution) anyway.
Precisely. It doesn’t stand a chance and, if it did, the Tories would simply move a No Confidence motion as the simpler and very much quicker means of achieving the same result. But even the limited objective of forcing debate might well achieve little because, even if the Speaker does allow a debate on the subject, it’ll probably just get bogged down in procedural minutiae. If you’re a Blair loyalist, why bother debating Blair’s record on Iraq, when you can pontificate at great length on some of the more redundant bits of Erskine May. Their argument will be that there are now other, more appropriate ways for the Commons to hold a prime minister to account. Which is true, if rather theoretical when the government has such a large majority.