^^^ It is clear you don't like Canada having ties to the monarchy. Stephen Harper does though - hence designating the "Royal" once again before Canadian Forces What is waffle and trudeaus stance on the monarchy?
Oh dear. There's no-one named "waffle" running in this election. I think you may be confused. Perhaps it was the beating you took last night? You should get that looked into.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
^^^ It is clear you don't like Canada having ties to the monarchy. Stephen Harper does though - hence designating the "Royal" once again before Canadian Forces What is waffle and trudeaus stance on the monarchy?
Oh dear. There's no-one named "waffle" running in this election. I think you may be confused. Perhaps it was the beating you took last night? You should get that looked into.
mulcair isn't named a waffle he is one This election is a formality.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
^^^ It is clear you don't like Canada having ties to the monarchy. Stephen Harper does though - hence designating the "Royal" once again before Canadian Forces What is waffle and trudeaus stance on the monarchy?
"It's not am I comfortable or not" with women covering their faces, he said. "Makes no difference at all. It's a question of rights and it will be for the court to decide."
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I have my doubts that Trudeau would have a clue what he's doing All Mulcair does is moan about everyone else. I have no idea what his platform is. I just know what it isn't. Harper is a controlling psychopath who needs to leave office.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
BTW, this is the oath that new Canadians have to swear, and that all Canadians are supposedly beholden to:
"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."
Ummmmmm NOPE.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
fair enough. but why no queen as HOS?
Answered.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
fair enough. but why no queen as HOS?
Answered.
well don't all countries have something similar? if you weren't beholden to the Queen, you'd be to Stephen Harper.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
fair enough. but why no queen as HOS?
Answered.
well don't all countries have something similar? if you weren't beholden to the Queen, you'd be to Stephen Harper.
At least he's Canadian. That would at least make some sense to me. But ideally, we should all be beholden to the nation of Canada, not some idiot or old lady that none of us even care about.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
fair enough. but why no queen as HOS?
Answered.
well don't all countries have something similar? if you weren't beholden to the Queen, you'd be to Stephen Harper.
At least he's Canadian. That would at least make some sense to me. But ideally, we should all be beholden to the nation of Canada, not some idiot or old lady that none of us even care about.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
I guess you didn't read what I said either.
yes I did. I apologize if I missed something. not trying to be combative.
The part you missed is that I said IF Canada could still be a commonwealth without the Queen as head of state, that's what I want. I talked about working out a deal, etc. IF. I.e., things would have to different than they are now.
I didn't miss that. I just didn't think it answered my question. Why does it bother you that the queen is head of state?
I was responding to the first paragraph of your previous post.
fair enough. but why no queen as HOS?
Answered.
well don't all countries have something similar? if you weren't beholden to the Queen, you'd be to Stephen Harper.
At least he's Canadian. That would at least make some sense to me. But ideally, we should all be beholden to the nation of Canada, not some idiot or old lady that none of us even care about.
Or the charter
Yes, good idea.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
Headstrong, headstone. Thanks man, you get it. The first paragraph is the answer. If for NO other reason, Our allegiance to the Queen saved my grandfather's life. PJ"soul" is oblivious to that fact.
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
Headstrong, headstone. Thanks man, you get it. The first paragraph is the answer. If for NO other reason, Our allegiance to the Queen saved my grandfather's life. PJ"soul" is oblivious to that fact.
The fact that someone disagrees with you does not make them oblivious to facts, and putting Soul in quotation marks is a cheap shot.
She is not disputing that Canada's membership in the Commonwealth as it currently stands got your grandfather some medical benefits. She is instead arguing that there could possibly be a different way to achieve that. Probably not, but it's possible.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I get the impression that you assume the kind of help available to your family member would be rendered impossible of the queen wasn't the head of state. But I've been saying that I'd like that to continue and get rid of her as head of state, so I think it's actually you who is missing my point? Which is to maintain the commonwealth membership but get rid of the governmental designation. This would obviously be done through negotiation. It's not like it's Britain being good for Canadians but Canada doing absolutely nothing for Britain.
I know it's symbolic. That's what pisses me off, and I would like it to change. I do not like that Canada is symbolically tied to the British monarchy. That's what i have been saying all along. I don't know why you seem to think i believe there is somehow more to it. If you are not interested in the monarchy I actually have no idea why you are disagreeing with what I'm saying.
I'll spell it out for you. He.Would.Not.Have.Gotten.That.Treatment.Had.The.Queen.Not.Been.Our.Head.Of.State.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
Wtf? Are you even reading what I'm saying??
why would his grandfather have received free healthcare from Britain if we were no longer part of the commonwealth? because if you pitch the queen as head of state, we aren't in the commonwealth anymore.
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
Headstrong, headstone. Thanks man, you get it. The first paragraph is the answer. If for NO other reason, Our allegiance to the Queen saved my grandfather's life. PJ"soul" is oblivious to that fact.
The fact that someone disagrees with you does not make them oblivious to facts, and putting Soul in quotation marks is a cheap shot.
She is not disputing that Canada's membership in the Commonwealth as it currently stands got your grandfather some medical benefits. She is instead arguing that there could possibly be a different way to achieve that. Probably not, but it's possible.
Ladies, gentleman Canadian Politics No cheap shots allowed.
My grandfather was vacationing in England and had a medical emergency. He needed some prescription drugs. He asked where he paid for them and they told him "you are Canadian right? You don't pay anything." He couldn't believe it, because we are commonwealth partners, the hospital visit and prescription drugs were covered. Brilliant.
An American would not get that treatment. Word.
So just for fun, I decided to look into what the truth of your statement is (not that I'm trying to argue that your grandfather didn't get the medical care you report, just whether it was in fact because he was Canadian and that similar coverage would not be offered to an American). And guess what? It appears your supposition that he got free care because he was from a Commonwealth member state is wrong.
According to the Government of Canada website, "There is no reciprocal agreement on health care between the UK and Canada."
Furthermore, in the UK for everyone: "Emergency treatment is free. If you have an accident or need emergency medical treatment, you will receive that treatment free of charge, regardless of your nationality or place of residence as long as that emergency treatment is delivered at:
a primary care facility or General Practitioner's office, known as a GP's Surgery a hospital emergency room, called Accident and Emergency (A&E) or Casualty in UK hospitals. A walk-in center providing services similar to an emergency room."
Note that this applies to all visitors to the country, not just Canadians. Americans welcome, too!
Finally, guess who does actually get free medical care outside of an emergency in the UK? Not Canadians. Not Commonwealth citizens. It's EEA (European Economic Area) country citizens. Plus the Swiss, because who doesn't love the Swiss.
So all this has been a tempest in a teapot
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
he is one
This election is a formality.
I don't question why that is, I just know that's they way it is.
"It's not am I comfortable or not" with women covering their faces, he said. "Makes no difference at all. It's a question of rights and it will be for the court to decide."
it's not like canada is ruled by the monarchy in any way shape or form. you have stated our association with the british royals pisses you off, but I don't believe you've stated WHY it pisses you off. care to elaborate?
for the record, I think the royal family is a joke. I don't get why anyone gives a flying shit about them. they are nothing. medievil rich people living in modern times. but I get the history, and why they still have a seat at the table, even if that seat is basically the same seat as your crazy old uncle at thanksgiving. nice to have him there, but he's not making any familial decisions, but piss him off, and he might shit in your mashed potatoes.
www.headstonesband.com
All Mulcair does is moan about everyone else. I have no idea what his platform is. I just know what it isn't.
Harper is a controlling psychopath who needs to leave office.
I nominate Gord Downie.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."
Ummmmmm NOPE.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Or to Elizabeth May when she wins this upcoming election.
Thanks man, you get it. The first paragraph is the answer. If for NO other reason, Our allegiance to the Queen saved my grandfather's life. PJ"soul" is oblivious to that fact.
She is not disputing that Canada's membership in the Commonwealth as it currently stands got your grandfather some medical benefits. She is instead arguing that there could possibly be a different way to achieve that. Probably not, but it's possible.
Canadian Politics
No cheap shots allowed.
Jeff Martin?
He couldn't believe it, because we are commonwealth partners, the hospital visit and prescription drugs were covered. Brilliant.
An American would not get that treatment. Word.
So just for fun, I decided to look into what the truth of your statement is (not that I'm trying to argue that your grandfather didn't get the medical care you report, just whether it was in fact because he was Canadian and that similar coverage would not be offered to an American). And guess what? It appears your supposition that he got free care because he was from a Commonwealth member state is wrong.
According to the Government of Canada website, "There is no reciprocal agreement on health care between the UK and Canada."
Furthermore, in the UK for everyone: "Emergency treatment is free. If you have an accident or need emergency medical treatment, you will receive that treatment free of charge, regardless of your nationality or place of residence as long as that emergency treatment is delivered at:
a primary care facility or General Practitioner's office, known as a GP's Surgery
a hospital emergency room, called Accident and Emergency (A&E) or Casualty in UK hospitals.
A walk-in center providing services similar to an emergency room."
Note that this applies to all visitors to the country, not just Canadians. Americans welcome, too!
Finally, guess who does actually get free medical care outside of an emergency in the UK? Not Canadians. Not Commonwealth citizens. It's EEA (European Economic Area) country citizens. Plus the Swiss, because who doesn't love the Swiss.
So all this has been a tempest in a teapot