It's time Canada be put in its place - Go to the Queen

[Wilber]

It was the public that lost in this foolish game of brinksmanship. That can be found in every single poll I saw. The majority were angry and angry at everyone involved. One thing good about this is that it got people talking about politics, which you couldn't get them interested in in September or October.

Sometimes this is what it takes to get people to understand how our government works, and I believe it works better then most other systems. Especially when we have two tone deaf leaders, there is a way out of a self inflicted crises vs a self inflicted wound.

At least for now. The Queen need not worry about the colony

Well said. I think the position of GG has just justified itself. I hate to think of where we might be today without it. Sanity had left the building. Good thing there was someone left in a position to impose it.

[whowhere]

At least for now. The Queen need not worry about the colony

The 1982 constitution is her fault and all that has befallen Canada since then as well. It's unfortunate that it will take strong acts by strong personalities to bring democracy to Canada and to end the communist regime of bureacrats, cons, libs, and media who exploit Canada to feather their own nests and stroke their idea of life even it is contrary to Canada and Europe's Heritage.

[Shady]

Beware the banana republic. Lets hope that the GG hasn't helped us take our first step towards one.

Nope. The first step towards becoming a banana republic was taken by the 3 "coalition" parties, who tried to undue the result of an election 6 weeks ago. Instead of acting like a proper loyal opposition, which they initially did by getting Harper to withdraw unacceptable legislation, they're now using the situation as a power grab. Attaining power they could never win at the ballot box, especially those of the NDP and Block.

If their coaltion attempt succeeds, then it's time to remove the maple leaf from our flag, and replace it with a banana. The only positive being, that they're setting the stage for a Conservative majority 6 - 12 months from now.

Oh, and try building actual grass-roots organization and funding, instead of relying on the government trough to maintain your failed political parties. Oink, oink, oink.

[g_bambino]

The first step towards becoming a banana republic was taken by the 3 "coalition" parties, who tried to undue the result of an election 6 weeks ago.

They tried to "undue" the election that gave them more seats than the Conservatives? Really?

[albyagolfer]

They tried to "undue" the election that gave them more seats than the Conservatives? Really?

Not sure how that math works. None of those patries had more seats than the Conservatives. Together, yes; seperately, no. And you and I and everyone else in Canada who sees any semblance of reality knows that an alliance with the Bloc will not work. An alliance between only the NDP and the Liberals might but the philosophical differences between them and the Bloc are enormous.

[g_bambino]

Together, yes; seperately, no.

Exactly.

And you and I and everyone else in Canada who sees any semblance of reality knows that an alliance with the Bloc will not work.

Indeed.

[Smallc]

There were two things that made me completely reconsider this. Stephane Dion, last night, and the Bloc.

[guyser]

Nope. The first step towards becoming a banana republic was taken by the 3 "coalition" parties, who tried to undue the result of an election 6 weeks ago.

Ah, There is that whiny untruth shining through.

Instead of acting like a proper loyal opposition, which they initially did by getting Harper to withdraw unacceptable legislation, they're now using the situation as a power grab. Attaining power they could never win at the ballot box, especially those of the NDP and Block.

Had a majority been announced for Harper we would not be here. He didnt, and here we are. All legal above board and the way things are supposed to be.

Some forget that a minority govt is a coalition govt . They need help from outside the party, almost the same as was occuring earlier this week.

If their coaltion attempt succeeds, then it's time to remove the maple leaf from our flag, and replace it with a banana.

You go right ahead, the mature people of this country will continue on as they always have.

Oh, and try building actual grass-roots organization and funding, instead of relying on the government trough to maintain your failed political parties. Oink, oink, oink.

Considering all parties recd funding from this your oink comment is directed at the Cons.

[guyser]

Does anyone think , moving forward, that those in charge of appointing or nominating the GG will be a tad more prudent ?

I dont have complaints with Jean nor with the last one (Clarkson), but maybe we need someone with more knowledge on what to do in issues such as this.

[madmax]

Does anyone think , moving forward, that those in charge of appointing or nominating the GG will be a tad more prudent ?

I dont have complaints with Jean nor with the last one (Clarkson), but maybe we need someone with more knowledge on what to do in issues such as this.

Yah THink? Not only more knowledge, but the optics of a foreign born Haitian refugee (IIRC) as GG sound great at first, until you discover her and her husbands ties to the Quebec Separtist movement. Even if the GG operated in a fair and unbiased manner in her ruling, it will always be pointed out the ties to the Separtists.

Fiction writers cannot come up with this stuff. Find a better life in Canada, support its breakup through the french sovereigntist movement, and then represent the Anglo Queen with the position to hold the country together.

[blueblood]

Does anyone think , moving forward, that those in charge of appointing or nominating the GG will be a tad more prudent ?

I dont have complaints with Jean nor with the last one (Clarkson), but maybe we need someone with more knowledge on what to do in issues such as this.

Just do it like they did in the 1800's to the 20's, have some English Aristocrat appointed by the monarch come in. There wouldn't be an issue with what side they are on.

Or we could have a referendum picking one out of x amount of candidates picked by the English monarch.

[guyser]

Just do it like they did in the 1800's to the 20's, have some English Aristocrat appointed by the monarch come in. There wouldn't be an issue with what side they are on.

Wasnt it Massey on who was Canadian?

Or we could have a referendum picking one out of x amount of candidates picked by the English monarch.

I dont think we need to do that. The lesson this week should resonate when the next one is picked . Whoever picks it should take the time to vette any and all candidates and go from there.

A popularity vote will not get us the best, merely the most known/liked/famous.

[blueblood]

Wasnt it Massey on who was Canadian?

I dont think we need to do that. The lesson this week should resonate when the next one is picked . Whoever picks it should take the time to vette any and all candidates and go from there.

A popularity vote will not get us the best, merely the most known/liked/famous.

I knew they picked lots of english aristocrats back in the day.

I was suggesting a referendum on the three English stooges the Queen would pick just for the sake of democracy. I am not a fan of appointed people in that position of power with accountability.

[Alta4ever]

We can't really make those kind of assumptions with any certainty. I believe that there were many Liberals that were not in favour of this. If there was anything going on before, I don't think that many of them were part of it.

We can when you read the texts from trascripts of the NDP confrence call, or do you keep forgeting about those.

[Smallc]

We can when you read the texts from trascripts of the NDP confrence call, or do you keep forgeting about those.

Well first of all, that was an illegal recording. Second, its not completely clear what he meant. Talks go on all the time. They could have had this planned just in case for a long time. We really don't know and it doesn't do any good to speculate. All of this also has nothing to do with the Liberal Party of Canada.

[Smallc]

I am not a fan of appointed people in that position of power without accountability.

There is a reason she isn't elected. Her office is above such things.

[Oleg Bach]

There is a reason she isn't elected. Her office is above such things.

Don't want to shock you but the title of Queens Council or QC still exists - the title from what I understand is no longer given out to lawyers..but - there are a few older advisors left in Canada..who directly or indirectly report to the centre of the common wealth - The Queen. If you don't think the Queen is not going over the paper work as we speak then you are naive. This steely eyed wise woman has seen it all and still sticks to the principle of public service.

Those that hate the Queen or resent this woman and believe she is a mere figure head are sadly delluded. She is highly informed and connected. Also she is a brilliant buisness woman of good faith and honour. Our GG will do what's correct and expected of her. She IS the Crowns' representative in Canada...Tony Blair gave her full reports...as do some of the American elite that are not excluded - she's powerful and to be respected - and sacraficed her whole life to the service of common people. GG now knows the game and the protocol...she will be fair and just - It's her duty - DUTY is something forgotten by Dion, Deaucet and Layton..so is honour..It is honour that has kept our banking sector afloat...it was the forfeiture of honour and duty that collapsed the American banking industry...the numbers must add up..and the books must be balanced and not fudged or confused with deficit spending...Harper is sticking to old rules and is taking the old school approach...new school has failed us..time to go back and attempt to conserve what was tried and true and worked and what was real CONSERVATISM.

[g_bambino]

There is a reason she isn't elected. Her office is above such things.

I have the feeling that there are some here who wish the position wasn't above such things. With thinking that only operates in extremes, they seem to want thrown into the mix another elected individual because that would somehow be "more democratic", regardless, of course, of the fact that it would just be yet one more person to join the squabble about who has the mandate to speak for Canadians.

The monarch is apolitical and chosen in a non-partisan way; it is only logical that her representative have the same qualities, and elections are the antithesis of impartiality.

[g_bambino]

If you don't think the Queen is not going over the paper work as we speak then you are naive. This steely eyed wise woman has seen it all and still sticks to the principle of public service.

Being above politics is not the same as being unaware of politics.

[Oleg Bach]

I have the feeling that there are some here who wish the position wasn't above such things. With thinking that only operates in extremes, they seem to want thrown into the mix another elected individual because that would somehow be "more democratic", regardless, of course, of the fact that it would just be yet one more person to join the squabble about who has the mandate to speak for Canadians.

The monarch is apolitical and chosen in a non-partisan way; it is only logical that her representative have the same qualities, and elections are the antithesis of impartiality.

That is the whole purpose of the Governor General, To provide impartiality - as we know you can't bribe the Queen..and you can not coerce her politically..she is similar to the American motto on the money - "In God we trust" - which means money is fine but it is not the end all solution to all. A little bit of devine right and intervention would be helpful whether you believe in God or not - or in the Queen or not....Personally I am thankful to her for opening the doors of Britain to my father and mother..and granted them safe haven after WW2. I spent the first year of my life in England....it was a good start...........the Queen represents civilization based in ancient doctrine.....Modernity instead of granting virture has removed it as we see in OUR parliment...mad and ambitious men attempt to take power....power taken by force is not power - It's abuse of a nation...and a disempowering of the nation and it's democratic principles.

[Argus]

Does anyone think , moving forward, that those in charge of appointing or nominating the GG will be a tad more prudent ?

I dont have complaints with Jean nor with the last one (Clarkson), but maybe we need someone with more knowledge on what to do in issues such as this.

I've said as much. But there's a problem. Virtually everyone who would be considered, say, an "elder statesman" here is aligned with one of the political parties. Thus we have the likes of Ed Schreyer giving unasked for advice to Jean basically telling her to do whatever the Coalition wants. Schryer's appointment was an effort by the Liberals to seem magnanimous, but he never did a very good job of abandoning his political and ideological beliefs, even while he was the Governor General.

Deb Grey, for example, would be a far more knowledgeable, not to mention accomplished and experienced an appointment, but in the current crisis most people would question her neutrality. We do not have the advantage the UK has, of a neutral, non political head of state raised from birth to the innermost knowledge of politics, with decades of experience in and dealings with senior political and international figures of every variety.

As an aside, just how involved would the Queen be in a constitutional crisis in Canada involving her representative? I'm sure she's been kept informed, but does she have the right or habit of calling up the GG to discuss something like this, and perhaps make her wishes known? I would father rather have the Queen's judgment as to what should be done than an ex television personality.

Edited December 4, 2008 by Argus

[guyser]

I've said as much. But there's a problem. Virtually everyone who would be considered, say, an "elder statesman" here is aligned with one of the political parties. Thus we have the likes of Ed Schreyer giving unasked for advice to Jean basically telling her to do whatever the Coalition wants. Schryer's appointment was an effort by the Liberals to seem magnanimous, but he never did a very good job of abandoning his political and ideological beliefs, even while he was the Governor General.

I have no knowledge of Ed, I recall when he was the GG, but aside from that....nada. So I will go with what you say on that.

But there has to be someone,nayone, outside of Ottawa and political life that knows and understands the constitution and the crisis' we can get into.

I know your feelings for judges, but that aside, there must be some who have neither expressed nor supported (publically) any party. Spread the net, get all the names on the table and move from there.

The list of GG's shows they are mostly elderly, the last two notwithstanding, and older people have a pragmatism not evident in Jean nor Clarkson. (they werent young I suppose but not old) We need that elder pragmatism in Ottawa.

How about a captain of industry? Why not, he would at least know that the last thing this country needs right now is instability and would be expressing that in no uncertain terms.

Deb Grey, for example, would be a far more knowledgeable, not to mention accomplished and experienced an appointment, but in the current crisis most people would question her neutrality.

Not sure, is she the one who served long term in Yellowknife? (if I have the right one she was friends w my neighbour-seemed a smart woman) anyhow, if I have the right Deb, fine. I dont think that party affiliation is all that important if the person has the chutzpah to know what is right. I honestly dont think a life long Lib with knowledge and pragmatism would approve of whats happened.

As an aside, just how involved would the Queen be in a constitutional crisis in Canada involving her representative? I'm sure she's been kept informed, but does she have the right or habit of calling up the GG to discuss something like this, and perhaps make her wishes known? I would father rather have the Queen's judgment as to what should be done than an ex television personality.

I have thought the same thing.

My only problem is I keep seeing Helen Mirren from the movie a couple of years ago. I can see her saying "what is going on in that frozen wasteland over there?"