A little ghoulish for my taste, but perhaps the British are more pragmatic about these things.

politicians who "saved the country at times of dire need".

The only explanation must be that Brian Brady is 18 years old and has never read anything about the state of the UK in the 1970's.

What domestic problems can be laid at Churchill's feet? The British system of parliamentary coalitions during wartime was the problem. Churchill's opinion of Clement Atlee and socialism is well known. Blaming Churchill for the stupidity of post-war Labour seems a little over the top.

"Mrs. Thatcher obviously did more to save Britain than Churchill, because she took on the domestic problems he helped cause."

I respect Mrs. Thatcher's efforts as much as the next conservative, and obviously agree that she deserves a state funeral, but it's a bit much to compare over-aggressive labor unions to over-aggressive Nazis, at least in my book.

Mr. Driscoll, I beg to differ. I don't see a big difference between over-aggressive labor unions and Nazis(and what would an over-aggressive Nazi be anyway?). Political, Social and Economic blackmail was common to both groups, as well as terrorist acts when needed. Marginal groups(such as the labor unions and Nazis) are dangerous in a parlimentary system, in a way that is hard to understand for Americans, who are used to a stable form of goverment.

The Nazis couldn't get to Britain, Labour did. Churchill's maternalism helped establish the sclerotic welfare state.

OJ:

He'd dumped most of that stuff by WWII, and was a long ways removed from the progressive wing of Toryism. He used to joke that he really shouldn't be held responsible for views he articulated 30 years earlier. And even those early views weren't exactly socialistic -- read his review of "The Jungle" (available in this book) if you don't believe me. Or just read his famous speech saying a Labour government would mean the loss of personal freedoms that Britons had come to enjoy. He reportedly cribbed that one from Hayek.

OJ:

He'd dumped most of that stuff by WWII, and was a long ways removed from the progressive wing of Toryism. He used to joke that he really shouldn't be held responsible for views he articulated 30 years earlier. And even those early views weren't exactly socialistic -- read his review of "The Jungle" if you don't believe me (available in a book compilation titled "The Great Republic"). Or just read his famous speech saying a Labour government would mean the loss of personal freedoms that Britons had come to enjoy. He reportedly cribbed that one from Hayek.

Yes, he was a TR socialist, not an FDR socialist. But, like Ike, Nixon, and Reagan, did nothing to reduce the statism he'd helped create.