April 21, 2008 (LPAC)--All is not well in the Brutish Empire. A pair of articles today reveal a serious split over the U.S. Presidential elections. On the eve of the Pennsylvania primary London's own Financial Times, as if there had been no American Revolution, is a suggestion that Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race after tomorrow. But the Times of London, in a piece called "Hillary as Lincoln? Barack as Lee?'', suggests that Sen. Clinton, like the Union after its hard fought victory at Gettysburg, might ultimately win.

Lyndon LaRouche characterized the surfacing of these opposing views as a split in the Brits, between hard-core Fabian fascists, versus more reality oriented forces.

Oozing hatred of Hillary Clinton, the FT says what Britain's assets in the Democratic Party have been arguing for some time: "After tomorrow's vote, the Democrats should move quickly to affirm Mr. Obama's nomination. That is not just because his lead... is unassailable and the contest should be brought to a swift conclusion. It is also because he is, in fact, the better candidate.... The Democratic Party has waited an awfully long time for a politician like Barack Obama. Enough already.''

Perhaps recalling the Brutish Empire's own failure in backing the Confederacy in the Civil War, the London Times writes that the Union might have been surprised by Robert E. Lee's innovations, but had the superior forces, infrastructure and perseverence to win. Besides, Barack's delegates come mainly from caucuses where voter participation is "notoriously feeble,'' and poll numbers show that "In the worse case scenario, the Republican champion may well wipe the floor with Mr. Obama."

Lyndon LaRouche consistently warns that the Brits have the dossier(s) on Obama, and know that he could be brought down in a flash. The faction fight among the Brutes only shows that once again the American revolutionary spirit--not the would-be gods of Olympus--is what has to determine the nation's future.