The Federal Republic of Canada

[g_bambino]

Yes, but anybody can rise to such distinction in America....not so in a monarchy.

Anybody? Are you sure?

Of course...no slavery or manifest destiny in the British Empire...LOL! The Americans did it faster and 'mo better....even taking pause to help the old girl out during WW2.

Perhaps you missed my words, so let me repeat them for your benefit: ...just as how the British Empire came to be. Got it?

I won't comment on who was faster or better; it isn't really relevant.

The "Canadian monarchy" is still trying to figure out Quebec! Tell us more about "fracture".

This isn't relevant either.

Edited October 16, 2007 by g_bambino

[bush_cheney2004]

I won't comment on who was faster or better; it isn't really relevant.

But I will....thirteen little colonies booted Throne and Empire in the ass. The rest, as they say, is history.

[M.Dancer]

But I will....thirteen little colonies booted Throne and Empire in the ass. The rest, as they say, is history.

Well to be fair now. 13 colonies plus france and holland.....lets face it, without the Dutch and their ships and France and her military expertise and navy.....these United States would be a historical footnote...right beside Watt Tyler and the other guy.....

And interesting book on the subject is Barbara Tuchman's The First Salute.

[bush_cheney2004]

Well to be fair now. 13 colonies plus france and holland.....lets face it, without the Dutch and their ships and France and her military expertise and navy.....these United States would be a historical footnote...right beside Watt Tyler and the other guy.....

And interesting book on the subject is Barbara Tuchman's The First Salute.

Perhaps, but lightning struck twice...again in 1812...sealing the deal. This is when somebody boasts that "Canada" burned down the White House.

[M.Dancer]

Perhaps, but lightning struck twice...again in 1812...sealing the deal. This is when somebody boasts that "Canada" burned down the White House.

No, that was his majesty's forces.....Canadians repelled the American invaders near where Brock's Monument stands....there is a plaque near it...It says...Here General Brock urged on his troops with the immortal words...

"Onward York Volunteers"

[bush_cheney2004]

No, that was his majesty's forces.....Canadians repelled the American invaders near where Brock's Monument stands....there is a plaque near it...It says...Here General Brock urged on his troops with the immortal words...

"Onward York Volunteers"

That's swell, and a small price to pay for permanently booting the Throne and Empire in the ass. The 20th century would reveal the final irony, also in war.

Edited October 17, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[M.Dancer]

That's swell, and a small price to pay for permanently booting the Throne and Empire in the ass. The 20th century would reveal the final irony, also in war.

Hardly permantly...afterall, here we remain.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hardly permantly...afterall, here we remain.

That's the point....an Empire no more. The "Royals" diminished to tabloid fare.

[g_bambino]

That's swell, and a small price to pay for permanently booting the Throne and Empire in the ass. The 20th century would reveal the final irony, also in war.

You've veered completely off the point: neither the American Revolution, World War II, nor any of this other stuff in any way proves the US republic to be better than the Canadian, or British, constitutional monarchy.

Edited October 17, 2007 by g_bambino

[bush_cheney2004]

You've veered completely off the point: neither the American Revolution, World War II, nor any of this other stuff in any way proves the US republic to be better than the Canadian, or British, constitutional monarchy.

Of course not...it isn't any better...just different. It's just fun to respond to Canucks who try to inflate their own fake monarchy by disparaging the US form of government. It's a recurring theme....US as foil to define Canada...the UnCola!

[g_bambino]

Of course not...it isn't any better...just different. It's just fun to respond to Canucks who try to inflate their own fake monarchy by disparaging the US form of government. It's a recurring theme....US as foil to define Canada...the UnCola!

Well, then, I apologise. Clearly I misinterpreted your comments: "A sad tale of an Empire lost as the minions had no more need for monarchy's obsolescence...," and "...300,000,000 and growing strong....one vote to a customer....and no need to bow heads, kiss rings, or curtsey," and now "fake monarchy."

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, then, I apologise. Clearly I misinterpreted your comments: "A sad tale of an Empire lost as the minions had no more need for monarchy's obsolescence...," and "...300,000,000 and growing strong....one vote to a customer....and no need to bow heads, kiss rings, or curtsey," and now "fake monarchy."

No need to apologize (even sarcastically) since you support "minionship" whole heartedly....but it won't be any better by pretending it is so. Alas, why is the poll question even being asked?

[g_bambino]

No need to apologize (even sarcastically) since you support "minionship" whole heartedly....but it won't be any better by pretending it is so. Alas, why is the poll question even being asked?

No, there wasn't a need to apologise sarcastically. But, it did get my point across nicely.

[bush_cheney2004]

No, there wasn't a need to apologise sarcastically. But, it did get my point across nicely.

Great....I love a spirited slog. But you dodged the question....if so grand...why dost thou minions pine for a change?

[g_bambino]

Great....I love a spirited slog. But you dodged the question....if so grand...why dost thou minions pine for a change?

I didn't create the poll, so why should I answer your question?

[bush_cheney2004]

I didn't create the poll, so why should I answer your question?

Thank you....you just did!

[g_bambino]

Thank you....you just did!

As I didn't state why the poll question was asked, as I couldn't because it wasn't I who asked it, I don't believe I did answer your question. But, if you're content, then so be it.

[bush_cheney2004]

As I didn't state why the poll question was asked, as I couldn't because it wasn't I who asked it, I don't believe I did answer your question. But, if you're content, then so be it.

I am content....words that flowed freely become conspicuously absent when the pointed question is posed. God save the Queen.

[g_bambino]

I am content....words that flowed freely become conspicuously absent when the pointed question is posed. God save the Queen.

Anything conspicuously absent is purely a creation of your own imagination. I addressed the question you asked, not the one you didn't.

[bush_cheney2004]

Anything conspicuously absent is purely a creation of your own imagination. I addressed the question you asked, not the one you didn't.

I don't think so....this prior gem reveals much:

"Again, if you don?t like the way it is in this country? leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay. You are by no means an indentured ?nigger?."

[g_bambino]

I don't think so....this prior gem reveals much:

"Again, if you don?t like the way it is in this country? leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay. You are by no means an indentured ?nigger?."

Pulling quotations out of context, especially when they have nothing to do with the issue at hand; how cute.

As you tend to not read things thoroughly, let me highlight the words of the person to whom I was responding: "I'm tired of being the cereimonial nigger for a bloodline that should have ended circa French Revolution." His term, not mine. And he is, I imagine, free to leave.

Of course, I'm sure you'll imagine I just said something completely different.

[bush_cheney2004]

Pulling quotations out of context, especially when they have nothing to do with the issue at hand; how cute.

As you tend to not read things thoroughly, let me highlight the words of the person to whom I was responding: "I'm tired of being the cereimonial nigger for a bloodline that should have ended circa French Revolution." His term, not mine. And he is, I imagine, free to leave.

Of course, I'm sure you'll imagine I just said something completely different.

You fail to see the irony in your earlier post from this thread, so quick were you to explain away the obvious transgression. How great be this "monarchy" when fellow subjects are urged to leave instead of fostering change. That sir, is why the mongrel 'merkin rebels booted your king in his royal ass.

I'm not reading thoroughly? Yet, this also caught my rebel eye:

"I can't speak for other people, but I hate the American system because it sucks - in every country it's used. The French system, with its own inherent problems, is not the same as the American; it is a semi-presidential format, not presidential."

Edited October 17, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[g_bambino]

You fail to see the irony in your earlier post from this thread, so quick were you to explain away the obvious transgression. How great be this "monarchy" when fellow subjects are urged to leave instead of fostering change. That sir, is why the mongrel 'merkin rebels booted your king in his royal ass.

No, it's easy to see the point you're trying to get at via creative interpretation instead of through direct and pertinent questions. It's nice to see, though, that you've ceased beating around the bush.

Firstly, nobody was urged to leave, at least not by me. What was clearly spelled out for that particular person was that he was free to leave, as opposed to the position he implied he was in: held unwillingly under the thumb of a tyranical monarch, unable to escape, "an indentured nigger," to use his words exactly. Departure is merely one way to bring about change.

As for why some people seek change, who am I to speak about the desires of individuals? But, in my experience, those Canadians who do want to have Canada become a republic are either uneducated on the present system, brainwashed with anti-British nationlism, greatly Americanised, have delusions of grandeur, or all of the above. Not once have I heard a valid argument, free of irrational biases, for making the switch.

It's really all irrelevant, though, as the vast majority of the populace has no real issue with parliamentary democracy as we have it, barring, perhaps, Senate reform; it's stable, it's continuous, and, with its blemishes here and there, it works. Just because 0.2% of the population is screeching for a republic hardly means there will be regicide soon. I mean, you do know there are Americans who advocate that the US become a constitutional monarchy, don't you? Does their presence make you think the Yankee minions are about to overthrow the despotic republic? Please.

I probably shouldn't have said I hate the American system; there are those out there that suck worse than it does. But I do think it's inferior to constitutional, monarchical, parliarmentary democracy, and I'm glad I don't live under it. I've never hidden that fact; so, I'm not sure what purpose dragging out that other particular comment of mine serves.

[jbg]

if you took the time to learn how much fraud and lies were used in the passing of the bna act and what was supposed to be its purpose you would be against the monarchy; or you must be part of the corrupt government.

Get a copy of the Quebec resolutions that were supposed to be the bases of the bna act and you will see direct taxes were to be a power the colonies were not willing to give to a united Canada. Not only did they not give us a sovereign country ; but kept canada as united colony using the term dominion, which was the legal definition of a united colony. After much complaining -to clarify the matter the statute of westminster was passed to give the people and provinces their independence ; but like all dictators the federal government did not allow the provinces and people to form the type of government and constitution the desiyered. This country was formed and run on lies and fraud from day one in the name of the monarchy. Any Canadian who supports the monarch supports fraud.

First of all, any rule of civil procedure in a Court requires fraud to be stated with specificity. Where are your specifics.

Also, what does "desiyered" mean?

[jbg]

As for why some people seek change, who am I to speak about the desires of individuals? But, in my experience, those Canadians who do want to have Canada become a republic are either uneducated on the present system, brainwashed with anti-British nationlism, greatly Americanised, have delusions of grandeur, or all of the above. Not once have I heard a valid argument, free of irrational biases, for making the switch.

Exactly. Our system moves at such a glacial pace I follow Canadian politics. Because of checks and balances nothing really happens in our country.

I mean, you do know there are Americans who advocate that the US become a constitutional monarchy, don't you? Does their presence make you think the Yankee minions are about to overthrow the despotic republic? Please.

In 1974 when we had a President that needed badly to be cashiered your system and UK's system were our envy.