Hunt for new GG is on! Michelle Jean is out.

[bush_cheney2004]

... Language though can never be ignored in Canada. By convention, it is the turn of an anglophone to hold the office.

Shucks! I knew it!

[Bonam]

Shucks! I knew it!

Yeah Canada is really obsessed about the language thing. Same way the US is pretty deeply obsessed with the race thing.

[Smallc]

Yeah Canada is really obsessed about the language thing. Same way the US is pretty deeply obsessed with the race thing.

Well, considering that we have two official languages, it's important they be represented in important positions.

[Bonam]

Well, considering that we have two official languages, it's important they be represented in important positions.

Yeah you'd think we could just let demographics take care of that. There are plenty of francophones and bilinguals. Instead we have these ritualistic requirements and precedents on what language someone must speak for a certain job. Reminds me of Lebanon's government, where there are requirements on who must be a Shi'ite, who a Sunni, and who a Maronite Christian.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yeah Canada is really obsessed about the language thing. Same way the US is pretty deeply obsessed with the race thing.

Canada does the race thing too, but would rather not admit it. That's why such a silly term as "visible minority" is still kicking around.

[Bonam]

Canada does the race thing too, but would rather not admit it. That's why such a silly term as "visible minority" is still kicking around.

Yeah Canada does do the race thing, but it feels to me deeply less ingrained in the culture than in the US. Since moving to the US I've noticed a substantial difference in this regard, in fact, it is probably the most substantial cultural difference I have noticed.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yeah Canada does do the race thing, but it feels to me deeply less ingrained in the culture than in the US. Since moving to the US I've noticed a substantial difference in this regard, in fact, it is probably the most substantial cultural difference I have noticed.

That's because the US has been doing the "diversity" thing far longer and on a much larger scale. For instance, Canada knows how to deal with "Africans", but not "Blacks".

[Bonam]

That's because the US has been doing the "diversity" thing far longer and on a much larger scale. For instance, Canada knows how to deal with "Africans", but not "Blacks".

I dunno, I've heard the term "black" used in Canada a lot more frequently and freely. Here in the US, people seem to prefer the far more formal "African-American", even in casual conversation with no Negros present.

In general people just seem much more serious about the whole issue. In Canada you can just joke around on this topic and no one cares. In the US it feels like people would get offended if you, for example, used the term "nigger". In Canada I've heard "chinks" and "japs" used jokingly in the presence of Chinese and Japanese people with no offense taken or implied.

Also there seems to be a really deep cultural divide between white and black people in the US. It is so deep that many black people seem even to have their own different accent or even language, even though they grew up in the same area as the other people in a city. In Canada (Vancouver anyway), second (or more) generation people of any race (including black) in a given area all pretty much speak English the same way. It also seems like the economic difference between whites and blacks is markedly more pronounced in the US. Almost all the poor/homeless people I have seen in the US have been blacks, whereas in Vancouver I saw a mixture of many races.

Despite the US "melting pot" philosophy as opposed to Canada's "multiculturalism", I feel like integration between the white and black populations in the US has not come as far. And as a result of this people seem a lot more sensitive and serious about the issue.

Edit: Just to add an anecdote. When one random black beggar asked me for money and I, as always (regardless of the race of the beggar) did not give any and said something along the lines of "sorry" while walking by, he yelled at me proclaiming that he "hates white people". I have absolutely never encountered anything similar in Canada. And that was literally my 2nd day in the US.

Edited April 4, 2010 by Bonam

[bloodyminded]

I'd like to see a constitutional expert in there. Of course, no PM would ever ever ever do that.

Of course not. That would just be crazy.

[Muddy]

Who ever is chosen ,they should be Monarchy loyalists. A good grasp of history and how our Constitutional Monarchy came about. Barring that, just get a reporter from the CBC.

[Mr.Canada]

Who ever is chosen ,they should be Monarchy loyalists. A good grasp of history and how our Constitutional Monarchy came about. Barring that, just get a reporter from the CBC.

Yes, someone who appreciates the Monarchy and takes it seriously would be nice.

[Argus]

I would be disappointed if an appointment to a post such as the GG was made based primarily on racial considerations.

Like the last two you mean? Will the first Asian GG, followed by the first Black GG be followed by the first Aborigine GG? What happens when we run out of visible minorities? The first disabled transgendered mulato GG?

I'd suggest Roberta Bondar in place of Garneau. I don't think she's been involved in politics, but it's probably time for a male in the position, given our habit of rotating such things.

[Argus]

Well, merit can sometimes be a subjective thing....most of the previous office holders were put there because of merit in some form or another. Language though can never be ignored in Canada. By convention, it is the turn of an anglophone to hold the office.

What's Prince Andrew doing these days? Or if you want the first gay GG, Prince Edward...

[Argus]

Yeah Canada is really obsessed about the language thing. Same way the US is pretty deeply obsessed with the race thing.

The US will soon become obsessed with language too as the number of Spanish speakers continues to explode.

[Smallc]

Yes, someone who appreciates the Monarchy and takes it seriously would be nice.

You just said you thought we didn't need a governor general.

[ToadBrother]

Yes, someone who appreciates the Monarchy and takes it seriously would be nice.

You don't see the point of a vice-regal figure, but still support the Queen? You may actually represent the first Republican Monarchist in the history of humanity.

Edited April 5, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Mr.Canada]

You just said you thought we didn't need a governor general.

You don't see the point of a vice-regal figure, but still support the Queen? You may actually represent the first Republican Monarchist in the history of humanity.

I don't like the Queen, she's allowed the UK to be turned into some Islamic paradise. She's taken a very proud and great nation and turned it into something abhorrent. She was the Queen sitting causing the fall of the British Empire.

At the same time we have a monarchy which isn't going anywhere soon. I believe if you're going to do something do it right or don't even bother at all. So might as well have someone in there who takes the post seriously.

[bloodyminded]

I don't like the Queen, she's allowed the UK to be turned into some Islamic paradise. She's taken a very proud and great nation and turned it into something abhorrent. She was the Queen sitting causing the fall of the British Empire.

The fault for the fall of the Empire lays within Imperial hubris itself.

[Mr.Canada]

The fault for the fall of the Empire lays within Imperial hubris itself.

Our world has gone downhill since the fall of the British Empire. There is now no identifiable nations. Being German or Dutch or American or Canadian means almost nothing as there is no longer a clear picture as to what any of these citizens look like as they are all mixed up now. This has damaged the psyche of the citizens as they can no longer identify with their places of birth as they've become bastions of mass immigration. Turning the once proud people of European heritage into whimpering babies too afraid to stand up for themselves.

However the nations of those who are mass immigrating still have a strong pull towards home because their home lands are still homogeneous. Human beings are tribal in nature I believe and it's hard to watch the self destruction of your own tribe. Maybe this was the plan of the socialist machine all along.

Geez, I just re read what I wrote and it sounds like I'm channeling lictor...lol. This wasn't my aim.

[bloodyminded]

Our world has gone downhill since the fall of the British Empire. There is now no identifiable nations. Being German or Dutch or American or Canadian means almost nothing as there is no longer a clear picture as to what any of these citizens look like as they are all mixed up now. This has damaged the psyche of the citizens as they can no longer identify with their places of birth as they've become bastions of mass immigration. Turning the once proud people of European heritage into whimpering babies too afraid to stand up for themselves.

If being "proud" of one's "identity" means invading other nations and producing generations of slavery, murder, theft and despair, then that identity is ugly and worthless, rather than something of which to be proud. They should stick that identity into the dustbin of history where it belongs, and start afresh as something other than thieving moral degenerates dressed up with pretty words.

Geez, I just re read what I wrote and it sounds like I'm channeling lictor...lol. This wasn't my aim.

Now you're being too hard on yourself.

[ToadBrother]

I don't like the Queen, she's allowed the UK to be turned into some Islamic paradise. She's taken a very proud and great nation and turned it into something abhorrent. She was the Queen sitting causing the fall of the British Empire.

She hasn't done any such thing. Since the Glorious Revolution, the monarch only acts on the advice of the Government. This means that policy is determined by the Government, not by the Queen. She's no more responsible for immigration laws than Queen Victoria was for the British Raj or the formation of Rhodesia or the Boer War. The only thing Victoria even had anything directly to do with was being named Empress of India, something that Disraeli was happy to comply with, though I'm sure Gladstone was frothing at the mouth (let's do remember that the Empire was not universally loved in Britain, and positive support among the British people was always spotty).

At any rate, Muslims still make up a very small part of the UK's population.

At the same time we have a monarchy which isn't going anywhere soon. I believe if you're going to do something do it right or don't even bother at all. So might as well have someone in there who takes the post seriously.

Seeing as we have a monarchy, how is the GG unnecessary? It's utterly impractical for the Queen to be in residence in Canada to give Royal Assent, or to deal with crises like a vote of no confidence.

Edited April 5, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Mr.Canada]

Seeing as we have a monarchy, how is the GG unnecessary? It's utterly impractical for the Queen to be in residence in Canada to give Royal Assent, or to deal with crises like a vote of no confidence.

Yes I agree with you. My post stated the same.

[g_bambino]

It tells the world that here, you can ascend to the highest attainable office in the land, no matter who you are. Men, women, and people of many backgrounds have held the post...something to be proud of, I would say.

Well, the highest attainable office in the land is that of sovereign. But, even then, the rest of what you say still holds true; our monarchs have been men, women, and people of many backgrounds.

As for viceroys, in Australia, state governors have been appointed governor-general. I wonder why the same is never considered as a possibility here. James Bartleman is part-aboriginal, was a career diplomat, and was a great Lieutenant Governor of Ontario.

[Smallc]

Well, the highest attainable office in the land is that of sovereign.

What I meant was the highest office that anyone can ascend to, that is, non royals.

[Topaz]

I think if Harper was smart, he would ask Le Blanc Lib MP. Why? Since father was the GG he knows about the job and he also ran for leadership for the Libs and I think he will again. I would think more Libs will back LeBlanc from Quebec and there's no skeletons in his closet and he could beat any Tory he ran against. I would like to see him the next leader of the Libs.