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.
With all that supposed power you seem to think the queen has it might not be in your best interest Dknoble to p iss her off.. at this point ya might want to keep one eye over your shoulder ..
Great pic. Needs captioning. I'll start:
"If you think the War of 1812, as you colonials call it in spite of the fact that it dragged on into 1815, is a done deal, think again. By now you are ready to plead with Us to torch the Capitol again. We are not amused. This time, We refuse. Your punishment is that you have to keep it, and do not look to Us to help you solve your problems."
Great. Tell me about the doctrine of paramountcy, as understood in and by the Canadian constitution. Cite your answer to the Constitution itself.
Show me where, in the Constitution, it tells us how the Prime Minister becomes Prime Minister.
What is the role of Black Rod? Again, cite to the Constitution.
(Hey, this could be fun!)
You bet, as soon as you send over your 40,000 word essay detailing and citing the pros/cons and differences between the US Constitution and Articles of Confederation.
Apparently, no one in the world can ever speak about the Canadian constitution unless they become a Canadian constitutional law professor.
Your claim of the queen being Canadas head of state while technically true has long since turned into a mere symbolic status that really represents no potential for the Queen to be wielding any power in Canadas governance. Kinda like driving in the southern USA and seeing many confederate flags and assuming slavery is still alive and well and the Rebs may rise again.
Your analogy makes no sense. Slavery has been abolished, and therefore cannot legally take place. While, the Queen, who symbolizes monarchy, and has the legal right to use her executive powers.
Well you see there's another one of your assumptions gone awry; it's difficult to separate the instigator from the U.S. like one might be able to separate the yolk from an egg, so to speak, when the instigator goes to so much trouble to align himself so stridently with a supposedly superior postion simply due to being a citizen of the U.S.
I try; believe me I try, but fail to separate you from the U.S. because you use that umbrella, not only to foster threads on here, but also to hide under when people respond to your posts as you've done above.
What assumptions? Although this thread has nothing to do with America, you've continued to randomly bash the US, which highlights the fact that you have some deep personal issues with the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
How can anyone mistake your infantile manner of phrasing your original post in a confrontational manner such as you have with that of the reasoned information gathering characteristic of the interested spectator? All too often your posts are worded in such a manner so as to ellicit the very responses you then use to berate the poster.
I have no illusions as to your real motivation for STARTING threads in the Canada forums.
More than just illusions, your rantings show that you're deep in delusion, especially with this conspiracy theory of yours.
My approach might have been tougher in that thread, but my intention and motivation was the same: encouraging working together. After constantly seeing Canadians unfairly bash the US on issues such as race, I was trying to point out that we're all in the same situation and should find solutions together. Which is why I said:
Quote:
More than anything, I think this is a teachable moment, that the US needs its friends and neighbors to work together to combat racism and other issues so we can all move towards a better America, Canada, and World.
In both threads I'm encouraging working together: For Canada and America to work together on race issues, and for Canadians to work together with these immigrants on removing monarchy.
You bet, as soon as you send over your 40,000 word essay detailing and citing the pros/cons and differences between the US Constitution and Articles of Confederation.
Then you say,
Quote:
Originally Posted by drknoble
... Although this thread has nothing to do with America....
Well, which is it? You want me to post my papers (or cites to my papers) on the US Constitution? In a thread that you yourself admit has nothing to do with the United States of America? Really? Perhaps you should reread and rethink what you want in a thread that you started on the Canadian monarchy.
Admittedly, my own studies and papers on the US constitution have never dealt with the Articles of Confederation. I've been more interested in researching and authoring papers on the US constitutional law in regards to its effect through the Northwest Ordinance 1787, the Missouri Compromise 1820, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854; and how they all coalesced to create a state of anarchy in the Kansas Territory in 1856: the sack of Lawrence, John Brown and his sword-wielding assassins, and the beating of Massachusetts' senator Charles Sumner in the Senate chamber by Preston Brooks of South Carolina.
As you can see, it is obvious that I've studied Canadian constitutional law. It should be equally obvious that having studied that rather thoroughly, I branched out and studied that of our close friend and neighbour. Perhaps not as thoroughly as I could, but I study that which interests me. Still, as you said, this is not a thread about America. So we'll leave it at that.
Quote:
In both threads I'm encouraging working together: ... for Canadians to work together with these immigrants on removing monarchy.
And if most Canadians either don't feel that it's important enough to care about, and don't support these immigrants, then ... ?
One overwhelming question that has not come up before in this or previous threads in which you have participated: why do you care? You're obviously not Canadian, you are not resident in Canada, you seem to have no political connections to Canada at all. Why does it matter to you how Canadians are governed, as opposed to (say) the French, the Chinese, the Spanish, the Moroccans? What is it about Canada as a constitutional monarchy that puts a bee up your butt?
It's very possible that the same thing is happening in the Canadian gov, since it's legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknow
You are as stubborn as an old freakin mule. I have had many conversations with Canadians who would like to see an end to the Monarchy and they had reasonable reasons for that but NONE of them used your arguments. They are not germane to the subject. Your arguments are just ignorant , uninformed and really dumb.
It would be like me saying the US Senate should be abolished because a state with less than a million citizens like Wyoming elects 2 Senators and so does California with 40 million citizens. Your voting power in Wyoming is something like 80 times that of Ca. That seems extremely disproportional and undemocratic EH!!!
If I did not understand the US constitution it would be a good argument but if I do understand the document and the intent of it, then the argument is stupid and ignorant.
That makes no sense, because, unlike the Queen, the US Senate is elected, and therefore democratic. Not to mention the fact that the US Congress is much fairer in the way it achieves separation of powers and checks and balances, since the House of Rep favors the most populist states, and the Senate favors the least populist states. This is clearly a fair and democratic system.
That makes no sense, because, unlike the Queen, the US Senate is elected, and therefore democratic.
Unfair comparison. The Queen is Head of State, akin to the US President. The US Senate is akin to the UK's House of Lords. As such, you cannot compare the Queen/President (i.e. the Head of State) to the House of Lords/US Senate, both of which are lower bodies.
My point is that your personal involvement in this debate is moot. It could be argued that a non-citizen could have some influence on an internal political debate if their points and arguments were reasoned and logical. Some might listen.
However when the arguments sound more like rants, your chance at having any influence on anyone is lost.
Unlike others here, I do believe this debate exists in Canada, albeit just under the surface. It pops up now and then, but it is always there.
But my point is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by drknoble
Canadians have been participating in our debates, why should it be any different the other way around?
I welcome all Canadians who are supporting us on our road to a better America. Why are you so against my support of these immigrants, who are only trying to change Canada for the better?
No, since there is no argument that obesity is healthy or good, unlike the discussion about the Monarchy. Your points about our monarchy has brought forward many good arguments for it, hence my statement.
Only those who are seriously confused or disturbed would ever argue that obesity, slavery, or monarchy is healthy or good.
I welcome all Canadians who are supporting us on our road to a better America. Why are you so against my support of these immigrants, who are only trying to change Canada for the better?
Your opinion. And many Canadians share that opinion.
But many other Canadians do not. So what are you going to do?
Tell me, do you stir up this stuff in the Australian forum? The New Zealand forum? The Indian or Pakistani forum? The South African forum? The others all have a Westminster system, just as Canada does; what is it about Canada in particular and its system of government that bugs you?
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.
You bet, as soon as you send over your 40,000 word essay detailing and citing the pros/cons and differences between the US Constitution and Articles of Confederation. 
Perhaps not as thoroughly as I could, but I study that which interests me. Still, as you said, this is not a thread about America. So we'll leave it at that.
