Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You must still be confused because I already addressed that when I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by drknoble Let's focus on this, I as an American have admitted that those problems you listed do exist. Are you as a Canadian going to admit monarchy is a problem?
I'm waiting.....
And I'm still waiting...
Considering the numbers of posts from people who have said our monarchy is NOT a problem for us I think you've got your answer and you can stop waiting for people to say what you want them to say.
It's just a problem for you, not for us. Get over it, okay?
Considering the numbers of posts from people who have said our monarchy is NOT a problem for us I think you've got your answer and you can stop waiting for people to say what you want them to say.
It's just a problem for you, not for us. Get over it, okay?
The irony is that drknoble is making me more of a monarchist
The irony is that drknoble is making me more of a monarchist
It's funny but I understand totally what you mean. I'll tell you something along the same ironic lines. Prior to a few years ago I was more or less ambivalent about the monarchy and didn't give it much thought at all because things seemed to be going along okay and as was previously mentioned "it's our tradition" and "why try to fix something that ain't broke". It wasn't until I got on internet about 10 years ago and started reading on forums and other websites and started seeing how much vitriolic criticism was thrown at Canada about our tyrannical monarchy and our horrid queen by so many Americans that I started looking more closely at our monarchy and our queen. The more vitriole and sheer ignorance of our system that was displayed by these people shooting rockets inside their own dysfunctional glass house, the more I came to appreciate how lucky we Canadians are with what we've got. I became more of a monarchist and more loyal to my queen than I ever was before because of Americans. Ironic, yes. And I thank them for setting such a great example of want I don't want and haven't go.
Wow, it's amazing how your entire comment is filled with nothing but random, off topic distractions that have nothing to do with my points or argument. Why don't you show some focus and maturity, and stop being a "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle"
People can read those two posts very easily now that you've linked them together so we'll just have to leave it them to decide who is deflecting from addressing pertinent questions and lacking in either focus or maturity.
And while you accuse me of random, off topic stuff you then (maturely) insert "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" into the discussion.......er, all right; we'll take 'em, if they swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen.
The irony is that drknoble is making me more of a monarchist
Goll durn it! EXACTLY my thoughts.
How do they do this? Lucknow has hit on it as well.
We don't give the monarchy a thought from one year to the next and only think about them when an event such as Dianna's tragic death comes along. Now they're in the news with the pending birth but otherwise we just don't think of them as having a hands on effect to our political decisions.
It was a thread just like this one some months ago that really got me thinking that the extra level of oversight by a restrained and mature Monarch was a darn good thing to have.
A Governor General appointed at her privilege who sits and observes the conventions and parliamentary procedures is just another level of assurance the kiddies must show some semblance of rational behaviour. Imposition of order out of chaos, if you will.
They must constantly consider that should the Governor General find fault with a procedure or ruling and reports such back to the Queen, the mere fact she may bring what she sees as an infringment on our democratic rights to OUR, the citizens of Canada's attention, would be a stabilizing influence on some of them we've seen come and go over the years.
Would that she had some say about our damn Senate and their behaviour right now! A stern rebuke from her over their misuse of expense accounting might serve us well at this time.
I'm almost wishing she had more, rather than less, influence over our process. Something I would have never thought I'd find myself thinking just a scant few years ago.
I mistakenly referred to Lucknow as having expressed the same thing when it was your post I mean't to quote.
It's really the darndest thing that something we have taken for granted and only given minor considerations for generations, is suddenly given closer scrutiny with a practical and appreciative eye after being stimulated by American criticism. Uncanny.
It's not a contradiction in the least. Our system is a constitutional Monarchy and it is what it is. Take a look at many of the most successful nations on earth and you will find they have the same or very close to it, system as Canada does.
I've observed that when an American Head of State shows us that he has feet of clay, like Nixon or Clinton it causes incredible problems in the USA. The entire country suffers and loses much faith in the institutions of the country. The fallout sometimes lasts for years.
Our Prime Minister is just another politician. As such, of course he's a liar and a cheat, all politicians are that and more. If he goes too far he can be replaced tomorrow. His position is because he's the leader of his party. We don't elect Prime Ministers. "The Crown" is a different store though. It represents something so far above politics it can't be measured. It's permanent, stable, above petty political squabbles and incorruptible.
I'm sure many people here don't understand the extent of Canada's relationship with "The Crown".
In some regards the term, "The Crown: means almost the same thing as "The People" in the USA. In a court of law you are not being prosecuted by the government but it's always, The Crown VS. John Doe.
Most of the land in Canada is "Crown Land" owned by "The Crown. All measures passed in Parliament must receive "Royal assent" before they become the law of the land.
One of the most important functions of The Crown is to dissolve the government if the government does not have the confidence of the house of commons. This alone is worth it's weight in gold. It's impossible for Canada to end up with a do nothing, dysfunctional government like you have all to often in the USA. IN our system every single piece of legislation must pass in the House or the crown dissolves the government and an election is called.
There are many other aspects but since I've been ordered out of the house to make a Dairy Queen run by the sovereign Queen of Lucknow's house I'm outa here,
Are you seriously going to try and say that a democratic country having an unelected monarch as head of state is NOT a contradiction?
What gives the "The Crown" ie the Queen the democratic authority to dissolve the government?
You say that the permeant and unelected queen is stable, but what legally prevents the queen from using and abusing her Executive Power granted by your constitution?
Quote:
III. EXECUTIVE POWER
Declaration of Executive Power in the Queen
9. The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.
Power to Her Majesty to authorize Governor General to appoint Deputies
14. It shall be lawful for the Queen, if Her Majesty thinks fit, to authorize the Governor General from Time to Time to appoint any Person or any Persons jointly or severally to be his Deputy or Deputies within any Part or Parts of Canada, and in that Capacity to exercise during the Pleasure of the Governor General such of the Powers, Authorities, and Functions of the Governor General as the Governor General deems it necessary or expedient to assign to him or them, subject to any Limitations or Directions expressed or given by the Queen; but the Appointment of such a Deputy or Deputies shall not affect the Exercise by the Governor General himself of any Power, Authority, or Function.
Command of Armed Forces to continue to be vested in the Queen
15. The Command-in-Chief of the Land and Naval Militia, and of all Naval and Military Forces, of and in Canada, is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.
Seat of Government of Canada
16. Until the Queen otherwise directs, the Seat of Government of Canada shall be Ottawa.
Where are the checks and balances on that permanent executive power and how exactly does that represent stability?
Canada is officially considered a functioning Democracy by the rest of the world. Drknoble was not consulted.
Constitutional legality has what bearing when talking about Canada?
The Constitutional Acts of Canada stipulate the powers of the various representatives so the legality of their function is not in question.
More importantly why would any other sovereign nation use the constitution of the U.S. as a measure of the worth of it's functioning democracy when you're not living up to it youselves?
Your point would be?
I never said to use the Constitution of the US, even though it actually is a better measure, since it doesn't grant a monarch permeant and unchecked executive powers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ueen
