Canada to waste 7.5 million dollars on some old hag

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

From what I recall, they have already had a referendum on it. The results were in favour of getting rid of the monarchy, but not enough to pass (54 percent if I remember correctly). They have also had high ranking people refuse to play God Save the Queen at public events.

well we don't play god save the queen at all. i think that's probably why the anti-monarchy sentiment is stronger there, it's in their daily lives a lot more than it is for Canadians. we've slowly been moving away from the crown for decades now, if it wasn't for the governor general and these stupid royal family events you'd be hard pressed to find anything left these days that still ties us to them. which is why i say just finish the job already and be done with it, let us elect a president and let the vice president do all the formal crap that the governor general is already doing

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

well we don't play god save the queen at all. i think that's probably why the anti-monarchy sentiment is stronger there, it's in their daily lives a lot more than it is for Canadians. we've slowly been moving away from the crown for decades now, if it wasn't for the governor general and these stupid royal family events you'd be hard pressed to find anything left these days that still ties us to them. which is why i say just finish the job already and be done with it, let us elect a president and let the vice president do all the formal crap that the governor general is already doing

This is what we have already. PM is head of government and the GG is head of State (formal crap). The American president is both head of state and head of government.

Head of State is also a movie starring Chris Rock, Bernie Mac and Tracy Morgan where the only thing white is the house.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

well we don't play god save the queen at all. i think that's probably why the anti-monarchy sentiment is stronger there, it's in their daily lives a lot more than it is for Canadians. we've slowly been moving away from the crown for decades now, if it wasn't for the governor general and these stupid royal family events you'd be hard pressed to find anything left these days that still ties us to them. which is why i say just finish the job already and be done with it, let us elect a president and let the vice president do all the formal crap that the governor general is already doing

All good points. For us, it has been more like a slowburn. I think when Australia finally ends their relationship with the monarchy, it will be like ripping a bandaid off. It will be swift and exact. The issue is debated in their government from time-to-time, while in Canada, it still seems sort of taboo. Although I do find it kind of funny that many conservatives are the ones that complain the most about the way our government is structured (appointed Senate anyone?), which is just as much part of our history and culture as our relationship with the monarchy. Afterall, they gave us this system.

Also, for anyone that thinks getting rid of the monarchy would mean no commonwealth membership, many of the countries in the commonwealth are already republics and some even have their own kings. It wouldn't change our status as friends with Britain.

[THE SCUD]

My posts, as I previously noted, were a tongue in cheek attempt to go nutbar-el-nutbar with Mikey. Sorry if the sarcasm is missed by those with broken detectors.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Her ancestors were (Africa, India, Ireland to name a few). The wealth and prestige of that family is directly related to suffering of millions.

The wealth and prestige of most countries can be traced back to the suffering of millions.

[THE SCUD]

Reported the first post to mods with a request to change the title. So disrespectful.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Also, for anyone that thinks getting rid of the monarchy would mean no commonwealth membership, many of the countries in the commonwealth are already republics and some even have their own kings. It wouldn't change our status as friends with Britain.

The moment has passed. There was an opportunity to bounce the monarchy with the death of Diana. The concept was severely bruised at that time and vulnerable. Certainly the Queen came to understand that and made concessions, like agreeing to pay income tax I believe.

The example of the recent Royal Tour of William and Kate and the staggering popularity of the two should be evidence that the opportunity for anti-monarchists has well and truly passed. Canada will still be a constitutional monarchy 50 and 60 years from now.

However, that observation doesn't mean there isn't a debate about someone being privileged merely by birthright. Sounds stupid. And it is.

They're more like cultural curiousities and tourist attractions these days and they do useful charity work. Is that worth the price to taxpayers? In Britain, it probably is.

Cowperson

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by troutman

King Charles might diminish any enthusiasm people still have for the monarchy, unless they can skip right to King William.

It's rumored to be King George VII - not King Charles

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by THE SCUD

Reported the first post to mods with a request to change the title. So disrespectful.

I hope they don't change it. [shrug]

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by THE SCUD

Reported the first post to mods with a request to change the title. So disrespectful.

Disrespectful to what? She's a celebrity, nothing more.

What has she done to earn respect?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hag

Bang on the money if you ask me. She's no oil painting.

[Hemi-Cuda]

i see the Queen the same as Kim Kardashian, both get paid obscene amounts of money for doing nothing other than being famous. at least Kim is easy on the eyes

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

i see the Queen the same as Kim Kardashian, both get paid obscene amounts of money for doing nothing other than being famous. at least Kim is easy on the eyes

If you can find me one woman who is what most would consider a looker at the age of 85 I will be most impressed. In fact back in her day she was quite a looker.

[Captain_Obvious]

[vanisleflamesfan]

I am confused. I thought that the majority of the people here on CP were fervent supporters of Stephen Harper and his Conservative government. I also thought that it was part of the Harper party line to love the monarchy. Why the disconnect? Why are some of you straying from the official Conservative message?

Here.

Here.

And here.

(This post probably should have been made in semi-green text).

[missdpuck]

You guys have got me wanting to watch The Remains of the Day again.

And calling any woman an "old hag" is kind of bothersome to me. Perhaps because i'm female. To me it implies that the only thing a woman could possibly have to offer is her looks and reproductive capabilities. Get off that already.

And isn't it a term used in falconry/hawking.I wouldn't even call a hawk an old hag.