Media reports majority do not support Monarchy

[blackbird]

26 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

In the US they are all independent from eachother but all beholden to the constitution  

That's the American system.  They swear allegiance to the flag and sing the national anthem to the flag.   I prefer our system where we have a Constitutional Monarchy.   If people want to live in a Republic, they can always move to the U.S.   I can't see having a politician as the head of state.  

[BeaverFever]

9 hours ago, blackbird said:

That's the American system.  They swear allegiance to the flag and sing the national anthem to the flag.   I prefer our system where we have a Constitutional Monarchy.   If people want to live in a Republic, they can always move to the U.S.   I can't see having a politician as the head of state.  

USA is a toxic backsliding democracy probably in irreversible decline. That said, head of state is a ceremonial role, it can be done by anyone.  We could still have an eminent non-political citizen as GG who perform the  ceremonial duties cutting ribbons amd giving speeches 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

We could still have an eminent non-political citizen as GG who perform the  ceremonial duties cutting ribbons amd giving speeches 

We already have that.  Having the Constitutional Monarchy, which the Armed Forces, RCMP and many people hold allegiance to, prevents a would-be dictator Prime Minister from seizing absolute control and abolishing the democratic system and Parliament.  That is one of the purposes of the Monarchy.  Without the Monarchy, what is to prevent a bad PM from setting himself up as a totalitarian dictator?  We see civil wars in other countries because of people trying to take over by force.  Sudan is an example right now.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

 We could still have an eminent non-political citizen as GG

That would not go over very well in Canada and could contribute to it's break-up.  There is no "eminent" citizen who would have the support of all parties.  The present GG does not seem very popular.  She was appointed by Trudeau.  Anyone Trudeau appoints would be rejected by the other parties.  She would not have the confidence of Canadians.  

It works to a degree now because the GG  is only there for five years and is a representative of the Monarch.  Nobody wants an appointed GG in Canada to replace the Monarch.  Such a person would only be a puppet of the PM.

[Queenmandy85]

Why not save all the bother and keep the King. If we had a President, we would have to pay her. How would a President be chosen? If she is elected, we get a Trump or worse. Remember  Austria's President Waldheim? Former SS officer. 

A president receives no pre-election training. Our late Queen began her apprenticeship when her Father ascended the throne. She was mentored by her father as well as Churchill and Eden for over 15 years. Our new King has been training for the role for over sixty years, with the best of mentors. He knows more about this country than most. How could a president or a Governor General get that kind of training?

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Queenmandy85

[Dougie93]

33 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 Such a person would only be a puppet of the PM.

only the British Crown defends the Reformation & Enlightenment from the tyranny of Romanist usurpers

God, King, Country

in that order

rally to the Colours, Orangemen of Upper Canada

[blackbird]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the tyranny of Romanist usurpers

Exactly!  The Romanist Jesuits have been working on a plan to bring us all back under the absolute authority of Rome for centuries.

[eyeball]

19 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Why not save all the bother and keep the King. If we had a President, we would have to pay her.

Why not just write both off if they're so pointless and superfluous?

I can't think of a more depressing symbol of the never-ending unchanging nature of the distance between us and our representation - between the governed and the government.

[blackbird]

26 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Our new King has been training for the role for over sixty years, with the best of mentors. He knows more about this country than most. How could a president or a Governor General get that kind of training?

The present system also means we have guaranteed allies, the UK, Australia, N.Z., in case of an attack against Canada because the Monarch is the Commander in Chief of these nations including Canada.  Without that we would be much weaker in the world.  We don't have a strong armed forces by ourselves but together we are much stronger.  That was proven in WW1 and WW2.

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Exactly!  The Romanist Jesuits have been working on a plan to bring us all back under the absolute authority of Rome for centuries.

HM The King is also bulwark against godless atheist Communism

Bolshevism being inherently unlawful under the rule of the British Crown

Bydand

[Dougie93]

31 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The present system also means we have guaranteed allies, the UK, Australia, N.Z., in case of an attack against Canada because the Monarch is the Commander in Chief of these nations including Canada.  Without that we would be much weaker in the world.  We don't have a strong armed forces by ourselves but together we are much stronger.  That was proven in WW1 and WW2.

even America only defends the British Crown

United Kingdom United States Security Agreement

America has no treaties with nor obligations to a People's Republic of Canada

Edited April 27, 2023 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Why not save all the bother and keep the King.

Veterans 4 Freedom contacted me  by phone

the brother on the other end of the line opened with :

"the oath to the Commander-in-Chief never expires"

only by those words could I recognize him as being loyal

HM The King is our bulwark against Fascism as well

the rule of some mob claiming to represent the "Canadian People"

Cuidich 'n Righ

 

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Why not just write both off if they're so pointless and superfluous?

Then we would be no different from the Americans. What do you propose should happen to all of the conservatives in Canada. The American rebels expelled all the conservatives in the US. Where do conservatives go if Canada goes leftist.

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Queenmandy85

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Then we would be no different from the Americans.

no, you'd be far worse of than American citizens

American citizens are only bound to defend & uphold the Declaration of Independence & associated constitution

a republic of Canada would be subject to the travails of populist democracy

without the protections of the American constitution

worst of both worlds

HM The King is the constitution itself

without that, we Loyalists would be cast into the darkness of Romanism, Communism, Fascism, what have you

[Queenmandy85]

One factor that is ignored in this thread is that King Charles' approval rating is significantly higher than Prime Minister Trudeau, Pierre Polilievre, President Biden, or President Macron.

[Dougie93]

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

One factor that is ignored in this thread is that King Charles' approval rating is significantly higher than Prime Minister Trudeau, Pierre Polilievre, President Biden, or President Macron.

HM The King defends the right

the right of an Orangeman of Upper Canada to be a Loyalist

no matter how large the mob of Bolsheviks set against him

we are bound by solemn oath before God Himself

to defend & uphold our Commander-in-Chief

even if we be the lone survivors

Ducimus

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

Exactly! 

Christian Soldiers of the Crown

on the road to Calvary

William Prince of Orange ; defender of the Covenant

against every tyrants infidel lie

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 How could a president or a Governor General get that kind of training?

who amongst us would forsake the Ric-A-Dam-Doo

for the ignominious rule of a political appointee ?

Flag of our Mother, Victoria Hanover

Victoria Patricia

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

 The Romanist Jesuits have been working on a plan to bring us all back under the absolute authority of Rome for centuries.

a Canadian war of independence has already been fought against that, and won

upon the banks of the Boyne River, 1 July 1690

upon the Plains of Abraham, 13 September 1759

upon the Heights of Queenston, 13 October 1812

upon the shores of Lake Ontario at Ridgeway, 2 June 1866

upon the banks of the Somme River, 1 July 1916

upon Vimy Ridge, 9 April 1917

upon Juno Beach, 6 June 1944

Victoria Regina Imperatrix - Pro Patria

 

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

The present system also means we have guaranteed allies,

to include the First Nations

who only have treaties with the British Crown

there is no agreement between the First Nations and a supposed republic of Canada

God save the King & HM Mohawk Warriors

 

[Dougie93]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Why not just write both off if they're so pointless and superfluous?

a nation forged in fire upon Hill One Four Five at Pas de Calais

in that moment, the greatest nation that ever was

leading civilization itself into the future

in the name of George V, the People's King

the story of our people

the Loyalists of British North America

God, King, Country

who would ever swear an oath to kill & die for anything less ?

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Then we would be no different from the Americans. What do you propose should happen to all of the conservatives in Canada. The American rebels expelled all the conservatives in the US. Where do conservatives go if Canada goes leftist.

 

How would we be the same as America if we didn't have either a monarch or a president? Neither I said.

And what on Earth does being conservative or leftist have to do with anything?

[Dougie93]

On 4/25/2023 at 5:04 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

 Edward VIII were not up to the best.

his mother Mary of Teck

could not abide his disloyalty

so she had Edward VIII replaced

with his brother George VI

and George VI married Elizabeth Bowes Lyon

who said of Elizabeth Windsor the face of the Blitz ;

“The girls will not leave unless I do.

I will not leave unless the King does.

And the King will not leave under any circumstances whatsoever.”

a Scots German Empire to find a Northwest Passage

at the call of many men

Dlieas, brothers

 

[Dougie93]

26 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

@Dougie93 what are the logistics? Would that even possible if Charles would have said no?!

certainly he could have easily abdicated

but Charles Wales has always wanted to be King

he was mentored by Lord Louis Mountbatten, Earl of Burma

Chief of Combined Operations during the Second World War

Combined Operations which acquired the Enigma Machine, to win the war itself

Alan Turing at Bletchely Park with his "computer" waiting to break the codes

the Canadians at Dieppe fighting to cover the operation which Winston Churchill  called "Ultra"

this is the indoctrination of Charles Wales, this is what he was raised to fight for

that is the logistics by which I would defend & uphold the Sovereign

whatever differences I have with him, regarding his marriage to Diana Spencer, are not an constitutional concern

he is Commander-in-Chief, and that is the office I am bound to by solemn oath

British is not a race

British is not a place

British is simply a system of governance, called Parliamentary Supremacy

founded by the Dutch Regent, William of Orange

by Glorious Revolution against tyrannical Romanist Popery itself

on the banks of the Boyne River, 1 July 1690

HM King Charles III defends the right,  he is aware of his duty, I'm quite sure

Edited April 27, 2023 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Contrarian said:

What specific issues you have with Diana and why you believe that these issues do not affect Prince Charles' ability to fulfill his duties?

I believe in sacred marriage in the face of God Himself

you only marry a woman who will be with you in the next world to come

thus you do not forsake her for another

clearly Charles Wales did not believe in that

but I would not impose my definition of marriage upon the constitution

thus the King being a divorcee does not preclude him from being Commander-in-Chief