It might be less of a problem if you folks crawled up out of the 18th century
Westprog
"Turlough" <turlo...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:3DDE8875...@excite.com...
> Chesney Christ wrote:
> >
> > A certain Turlough, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
> > >It might be less of a problem if you folks crawled up out of the 18th
> > >century, and chucked your royal anachronisms...
> > Agreed. The Royal Dublin Society and the Royal College of Surgeons
> > (Dublin) should be first on the list.
> Actually, I was speaking of the queen and her family...
The British and Irish will retain their system of seperating the position
of
head of state from the elected leader
of the country, as it is a clearly better solution than combining the two
as
adopted by the USA in er...
the 18th century? The abuse of that system can be clearly seen in Iraq, just
to give an example.
J/
SOTW: "Psycho Killer" - Talking Heads
Turlough
Westprog wrote:
> The British and Irish will retain their system of seperating the
> position of head of state from the elected leader of the country, as
> it is a clearly better solution than combining the two as adopted by
> the USA in er... the 18th century?
Yes, as I'm instructed time after time when I mention the Queen having a
direct influence on everyday affairs. She's just the head of state, I'm
told, the laws are made by politicians. That is why I'm wondering why
the citizens of a town cannot change the name on their own, through a
democratic process such as a town vote? Even though our head of state
and elected (?) leader are the same person, the folks in my town can
change the name, or designate it to be known as a village or city
instead, simply by voting such a change, and restructuring the town
charter. This is clearly a better solution, I'd think...
Turlough
Kevinmccabe1
I dunno, Turlough. An additional check on public action is seldom a bad thing.
An examination of non-state action here in Seattle is instructive. For years,
we had the ultra-cool unofficial title "The Jet City." Then, sometime in the
eighties, a namby-pamby group associated with the trade and convention center
decided that we would henceforth adopt the unofficial name of "The Emerald
City." In the final analysis, we were re-cast as a 1930's movie cliche while
the City's main industrial products roared overhead. Hard to blame the
corporate folk at the lazy B for heading out to Chi Town after that slap. The
only odd fact is that it took them so long. So, there you have it in a
nutshell. Lack of an executive veto leads inexorably down the road to economic
ruin.
Kevin McCabe
Turlough
Kevinmccabe1 wrote:
> I dunno, Turlough. An additional check on public action is seldom a
> bad thing.
Absolutely, I have no problem with that. In fact, the state constitution
of Vermont and a gaggle of auld Yankees who refuse to die, is all that
keeps the Yuppies from turning a lovely state into a politically correct
theme park, constructed of plastic. This last round which approved the
same gender union might have been the proverbial straw. They'll be
burning churches and blowing up the Elks clubs next. Massachusetts and
New Hampshire are taking in the refugees. Ethan Allen would have gone
back to England if he could have seen the future.
> Lack of an executive veto leads inexorably down the road to economic
> ruin.
In Britain's case with the name change, it's the Queen's way or the
highway. Veto, me arse...
Turlough