[ShepherdsDog]

Yet people shit all over the Royal family for not wailing and gnashing their teeth when Duh-yana and her boyfriend were killed as a result of reckless driving and alcohol.

[StuntmanMike]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

What qualifies this Governor-General--or anyone for that matter--to be a referee? Who voted for her? Why should she wield any power? She met the necessary GG qualifications of being politically correct, speaking both languages and working as a journalist. She's an ornament. She shouldn't be making decisions of that magnitude in a democracy.

That comment demonstrates an astounding lack of understanding of the Canadian political system.

We are not a pure democracy. Never have been. We are a Constitutional Monarchy. Didn't you know that?

$1:

AS for the crying--whatever. If you want your leaders to fall down and blubber everytime something goes wrong, then by all means fill your boots. Churchill, I'm sure, would have done a much better job if he had just openly wept instead of that silly "We will fight on the beaches" speech.

Once again, an astounding lack of historical knowledge. King George the 6th was the leader of the British people during World War Two, not Churchill.

And accusing the Governor General of "falling down and blubbering" is neither accurate nor admirable.

[PENATRATOR]

Yes and Queen Liz is our "leader" also, I don't recall King George making many decisions during WWII as I browse the history books

[ShepherdsDog]

The royals usually do as they're told.

[StuntmanMike]

PENATRATOR PENATRATOR:

Yes and Queen Liz is our "leader" also, I don't recall King George making many decisions during WWII as I browse the history books

Like most Canadians, you simply don't understand the Canadian political system.

The Monarch isn't supposed to make individual decisions as to policy. The same way the Regimental Commander isn't supposed to involve himself in the day to day operations of an Engineer Squadron. He appoints the Squadron Commander, the Squadron Commander reports to him. That's the way it works.

The Queen remains Canada's head of state. She is our "Leader." That doesn't mean she is out there making decisions about the nation's day to day affairs.

Her job, in our system, is to remain above the fray, and only intervene as a referee when the country's elected representatives fail to agree on something and the electorate hasn't given any politician the mandate to claim authority.

You can piss and moan about it if you like. You can distance yourself from it and argue for a better system. But I've yet to see one. And that includes the US one.

The fact remains that if we didn't have a GG last month, then it would have been up to the politicians to fight for the right to govern the country. What happens then? Does the guy who enjoys the support of the military win? Maybe the guy who wins over the labour unions?

After all, that's how it works in South America. And look at how successful they are!

Sorry Penetrator, but you swore an oath to the Queen for a reason. Try living up to it lad.

Long live the Queen!

[PENATRATOR]

I never shot down the Queen "sonny" or the monarchy, and don't patronize me or my proffession.

I merely suggsted that old Georgie made ZERO decisions as to how the war was run. Please re-read my 1 line post

[StuntmanMike]

PENATRATOR PENATRATOR:

I never shot down the Queen "sonny" or the monarchy, and don't patronize me or my proffession.

I merely suggsted that old Georgie made ZERO decisions as to how the war was run. Please re-read my 1 line post

Fair enough, my previous post was a bit condescending. Sorry about that.

However, I think my point is sound. The system of government we have in place is good, and this latest crisis proves that. Do you agree or not?

More importantly, did you see Bergeron get creamed today? That's not good news. Looks like a concussion.

[PENATRATOR]

I am not really a fan of the GG or her predecessor, however, that is a personality thing, not a monarch thing (I have heard some stories from insiders in my organization as to our GG's behaviour on board the aircraft, Clarkson in particular). I have no problem with ties to the Royal Family however, I do think a GG that was not a CBC employee could have been a better choice, though as someone already mentioned the last two meet all the current politically correct requirements of the post.

[StuntmanMike]

PENATRATOR PENATRATOR:

I am not really a fan of the GG or her predecessor, however, that is a personality thing, not a monarch thing (I have heard some stories from insiders in my organization as to our GG's behaviour on board the aircraft, Clarkson in particular). I have no problem with ties to the Royal Family however, I do think a GG that was not a CBC employee could have been a better choice, though as someone already mentioned the last two meet all the current politically correct requirements of the post.

I'm generally not a big fan of the politically correct criteria for appointing people to positions like GG either. But that's the age we live in, and I suspect the Tories would be capable of it too.

That said, I think the system worked during the crisis, and demostrated why our system of government is superior to most of the other models out there.

[Zipperfish]

StuntmanMike StuntmanMike:

That comment demonstrates an astounding lack of understanding of the Canadian political system.

We are not a pure democracy. Never have been. We are a Constitutional Monarchy. Didn't you know that?

No I understand the system just fine. I just don't agree with it. An unelected ornament should not be making crtical decisions sucha s whether Parliament prorogues or the country goes to an election.

$1:

Once again, an astounding lack of historical knowledge. King George the 6th was the leader of the British people during World War Two, not Churchill.

And accusing the Governor General of "falling down and blubbering" is neither accurate nor admirable.

Are you playing silly bugger with me? Or are you seriously under the impression that I thought Winston Churchill was the king of England? I didn't accuse the GG of "falling down and blubbering." Try re-reeading the post for comprehension. I said I don't find it a very admirable quality in a leader during war.

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

An unelected ornament should not be making crtical decisions

Just like our magistrates, no?

[Zipperfish]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

An unelected ornament should not be making crtical decisions

Just like our magistrates, no?

Sorry, I should have been more specific--an unelected, primarily ceremonial, figurehead should not be making critical decisions regarding the essence of our democarcy, such as whether or not an election should be called.

[ShepherdsDog]

but a governor general is part of the essence of our constitutional monarchy/parliamentary democracy. It differentiates us from other types of democracy, which aren't as stable as our own form.

[StuntmanMike]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

An unelected ornament should not be making crtical decisions

Just like our magistrates, no?

Sorry, I should have been more specific--an unelected, primarily ceremonial, figurehead should not be making critical decisions regarding the essence of our democarcy, such as whether or not an election should be called.

ShepardsDog makes a good point. We don't elect judges, yet they have more influence over national policy than almost anyone else in society.

There's also no pre-requisite for sitting on a jury, yet they are allowed to decide whether or not people spend the rest of their lives in prison.

But what you've said is interesting. It may be that an unaccountable, unelected figurehead, shouldn't be making decisions of such national import.

But what do you propose to replace it with?

[PluggyRug]

StuntmanMike StuntmanMike:

But what you've said is interesting. It may be that an unaccountable, unelected figurehead, shouldn't be making decisions of such national import.

But what do you propose to replace it with?

Canada needs a Guy Fawkes.

May bring together all dissenting factions.