Governor-General

[ToadBrother]

It's mostly a symbolic thing, but not completely, and it's evidently very important to Aboriginals in this country.

[c/e]

I'm not disagreeing with you. Political obsessives like myself tend to concentrate on mechanics rather than overarching theory. The fact is that there is nothing quite like the Crown in most, probably any republics. The fact is that we are human beings, and human beings are deeply influenced by symbolism. To a lot of indigenous peoples throughout the former British Empire, the Sovereign has long represented, as I said in another post, that chief of chiefs, and the Crown certainly does have the legal weight of the guarantor of their rights, even if the politicians have historically ignored those rights.

Not being, how shall I put it, an emotional monarchist, but rather a functional monarchist, the symbolic nature of the Crown is less impressive to me. I think it is functionally duplicated by republics, but obviously there is a certain weight of history that no extant republic, save perhaps for San Marino, can rival. The United States had to do a considerable amount of mythologizing, as did most republics, creating their founders and first leaders as larger than life motifs, perhaps to satisfy that basic human instinct.

The one thing I have long noticed is that republics like the United States and France seem to have a rather peculiar attachment to the British monarchy, often obsessing over it much more than those peoples for which the Queen is sovereign. I often wonder whether in both cases there is some residual regret over the turfing of their monarchies.

Edited May 4, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Uncle 3 dogs]

Ann Medina

[ToadBrother]

Ann Medina

Ugh. I'd sooner have Don Cherry. I cannot stand that woman.

[Born Free]

Ugh. I'd sooner have Don Cherry. I cannot stand that woman.

Nancy Green perhaps?

[PIK]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/02/governor-general-jean-term.html

Ignatieff did not propose any names for Jean's replacement. Instead, he called for an extension of her term. Too bad. I would have been interested to hear which illustrious Canadian Ignatieff would have proposed. He is scheduled to hold a press conference on the matter later today.

Iggy took a private note from the PM on names for a new GG , so what does iggy do, runs to the media with note in hand and says we should give her a extension, just to try and score some political points and people wonder why harper does not want to share secret info with this guy,can he be trusted with this info or will he use it to score political points even if it cause harm to people that are in these papers?

[ToadBrother]

Iggy took a private note from the PM on names for a new GG , so what does iggy do, runs to the media with note in hand and says we should give her a extension, just to try and score some political points and people wonder why harper does not want to share secret info with this guy,can he be trusted with this info or will he use it to score political points even if it cause harm to people that are in these papers?

Iggy broke a convention, and one that isn't that serious, though it's still questionable. It's still nothing compared to a Minister of Justice who effectively argued that at some point in the last 140 years the Canadian Parliament accidentally overturned the Bill of Rights 1689 and the BNA Act 1867. In other words, as bad as Iggy is, he's still not the lawless SOB that Harper is.

[capricorn]

Iggy took a private note from the PM on names for a new GG , so what does iggy do, runs to the media with note in hand and says we should give her a extension, just to try and score some political points and people wonder why harper does not want to share secret info with this guy,can he be trusted with this info or will he use it to score political points even if it cause harm to people that are in these papers?

I don't believe this was solely Ignatieff's idea. This was advice provided to him from someone in his pool of advisors.

Was the intended purpose of Ignatieff going public with this a deliberate attempt to stoke opinions in anti-Conservative circles that Harper and Co. not extending Jean was proof they are anti-women and anti-immigrant? Well, there's no way of knowing but even if it wasn't the original motive, that's exactly what happened.

I followed the posts and comments on Liberal blogs and the comments sections in media articles and inevitably, some of the commentary centered around those anti-this and anti-that themes, including a sprinkling of anti-francophone. Those posters' efforts were not too successful in forging the opinion of the general public since a large number of them sided with Harper's decision to scout for a new GG. The majority felt that yes, Jean did a good job, but it was time to give another deserving Canadian a kick at the can. Trust the unbiased segment of our society to come to a rational conclusion.

[ToadBrother]

I followed the posts and comments on Liberal blogs and the comments sections in media articles and inevitably, some of the commentary centered around those anti-this and anti-that themes, including a sprinkling of anti-francophone. Those posters' efforts were not too successful in forging the opinion of the general public since a large number of them sided with Harper's decision to scout for a new GG. The majority felt that yes, Jean did a good job, but it was time to give another deserving Canadian a kick at the can. Trust the unbiased segment of our society to come to a rational conclusion.

That's been the general idea behind appointing the GG for much of the history of Confederation. Honestly I don't see what the push to keep Jean on is. Yes, she's done a good job, certainly no worse than most, better than some. Her bringing the military aspect to the forefront has, to my mind, been important (after all, the GG is the acting command and chief of our armed forces), but as for as the functional aspects of the job, there's nothing she did that nearly every GG before her wouldn't have done. When presented in 2008 with a situation where the Prime Minister requested a prorogation, even the Queen herself if she was in Canada at the time would have acquiesced to the request.

None of these people even consider that maybe she doesn't want to do it any more. It's a good job, to be sure, but she still has a family and possibly other pursuits that have been put on hold. Let someone else come aboard.