A royal visit, why ? (swimming, celebrities, Hispanics)

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by nzrugby

Oldest and most loyal allies ? nope, that is Australia, New Zealand, Canada, The West Indies.
All the above countries are monarchies with HM as head of state, the USA has a politician as head of state.
So a visit by Tony Blair would be more appropriate to a republic that does not use the Westminster system of government.

The USA can join the Commonwealth, nope, the original thirteen colonies can apply.
Kansas in the Commonwealth ,shudder.

There are one or two republics in the commonwealth. I forget what the exception was, perhaps the former colony clause?

The US is certainly one of it's oldest allies (after we made up of course) as it was a country before any of the ones you mentioned.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by nzrugby

Oldest and most loyal allies ? nope, that is Australia, New Zealand, Canada, The West Indies.
All the above countries are monarchies with HM as head of state, the USA has a politician as head of state.
So a visit by Tony Blair would be more appropriate to a republic that does not use the Westminster system of government.

The USA can join the Commonwealth, nope, the original thirteen colonies can apply.
Kansas in the Commonwealth ,shudder.

Actually, we are eligible to join at the national level, in accordance with the Edinburgh Accord.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by jeffredo

I read somewhere the US has a standing invitation to join the Commonwealth since we are a former colony (and that's the only requirement). Never happen of course.

We are definitely eligible to join. I would not be so sure of the "never happen" notion. Now that we are confident in our status as a republic and other republics have joined, there could be advantages to it. I don't believe there is anything in the Constitution explicitly forbidding it either. The Founders were pragmatic and actually did not want the degree of schism with the UK which ended up occurring initially during the war for independence and the few decades after it. They really viewed the issue as an internal British issue at the outset and wanted to solve it at the national level not merely the colonial level. It was no accident that concurrent with our woes here at that time there was major unrest throughout the British Empire. The Country Party and the Whig Party were at their apex of power and the Crown was pushing back. It was a troubled time in general.

The UK itself has evolved so dramatically since the late 1700s, that it sort of solved the issue over time in parallel. We're really not that far apart any more.

[winkosmosis]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

There are one or two republics in the commonwealth. I forget what the exception was, perhaps the former colony clause?

The US is certainly one of it's oldest allies (after we made up of course) as it was a country before any of the ones you mentioned.

What are you talking about? I can't think of a single commonwealth country that isn't a republic.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by winkosmosis

What are you talking about? I can't think of a single commonwealth country that isn't a republic.

Canada, Australia, the Caribbean Commonwealth nations, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea all have the queen as their head of state. There may be others.

[nzrugby]

Originally Posted by winkosmosis

What are you talking about? I can't think of a single commonwealth country that isn't a republic.

The UK Canada, Australia, New Zealand, West Indies are not republics they are monarchies with HM as head of state.
But she is head of state of the above countries in her own right, The UK does not come into it say for the sovereign country of Australia.
India belongs to the Commonwealth and is a democratic Republic.

[nzrugby]

Originally Posted by Fontucky

She did say "one of", not "the".

She also mentioned loyal, the USA was a touch late to the first and second tiff with Germany.
And yes I do understand the largest European immigrant group was from Germany to the US.

[Fontucky]

And then when we DID get there, it was:

Q: "What are 3 things wrong with the Yanks?"
A: "Overpaid, oversexed and over here."

Can't win sometimes...

[nzrugby]

Originally Posted by BayAreaHillbilly

We are definitely eligible to join. I would not be so sure of the "never happen" notion. Now that we are confident in our status as a republic and other republics have joined, there could be advantages to it. I don't believe there is anything in the Constitution explicitly forbidding it either. The Founders were pragmatic and actually did not want the degree of schism with the UK which ended up occurring initially during the war for independence and the few decades after it. They really viewed the issue as an internal British issue at the outset and wanted to solve it at the national level not merely the colonial level. It was no accident that concurrent with our woes here at that time there was major unrest throughout the British Empire. The Country Party and the Whig Party were at their apex of power and the Crown was pushing back. It was a troubled time in general.

The UK itself has evolved so dramatically since the late 1700s, that it sort of solved the issue over time in parallel. We're really not that far apart any more.

The USA joining the Commonwealth with HM as head of it ?
I would like to see some US politician explaining that in Boise.
I can hear the question now, why is the USA not head of the Commonwealth .

Not that far apart ? hmm I wonder.
Asking a bloke on the street in LA to explain the LBW law would earn one a blank look 99.9999 % of the time.

Comparing say the UK/ Aus/ NZ with the USA in the cultural sense would reveal a huge gap.

[steel7]

When i wa in england i did have genuine english fish & chips but no crumpets, roastbeef, yorkshire pudding & a spot of english tea.