Something I just don't get about the British goverment

Recommended Videos

Kortney

New member
Nov 2, 2009
1,960
0
0
punkhead58 said:
[small]Your ignorance is showing...[/small]
You could say the exact same thing about the President. Like the Queen, the President barely has any power whatsoever in the Government, because that's left up to Congress. The President is more of a spokesman for the country. He relays information from Congress without actually having any say in it.
That's not true at all. The President of the United States has serious, serious power. The President is capable of making many decisions without even bothering with the congress.

He can issue commands that override orders from any general and can override any acts or legislation from any senator or politician in the country.

The Queen/King on the other hand, can't.
 

Earthbound Engineer

New member
Jun 9, 2008
538
0
0
quiet_samurai said:
punkhead58 said:
Your ignorance is showing...
You could say the exact same thing about the President. Like the Queen, the President barely has any power whatsoever in the Government, because that's left up to Congress. The President is more of a spokesman for the country.
As is yours.

The president has the power to veto/approve/alter anything that congress passes. Can authorize the use of nuclear weapons. Declare martial law. Declare war. Pardon people of crimes. And many many other things if he choses to, and he can do these all on his own. It's just that in modern times a good president will go through congress and reach an agreement instead of just working towards his own personal agenda.

You should know what you are talking about before you go calling people ignorant.
Ah, yes indeed. And where did you come across this fact? Oh, that's right! You learned it from a textbook that was mandated as part of the curriculum in a school regulated by the government.
Take off your rose colored glasses, and stop being so naive. The "three branches of government" and the whole thing about "checks and balances" that you probably learned about in elementary school is a lie.
Do you know there are an estimated twenty intelligence agencies that operate above the President? They're known as the Shadow Government / G-Men / Men in Black, etc.
They pull the strings behind the curtains while the "Government" dances on the stage.
But, why would you listen to me, because I obviously, as you say, don't know what I'm talking about, regardless of the fact that I took U.S. Politics in college.
 

Shadow Daeris

New member
Aug 31, 2009
16
0
0
Mcupobob said:
Why do you guys still have a queen, I would be fine with that if she did anything but it just seems she gets to live in a life of luxury for no reason what so ever at tax payer expense.
It's not the queen that sucks the taxpayers money away it's brussels saying we have to pay them money to stay in this EU BS.

i really don't like brussels ._. no offense to anyone from brussels o.o'
 

Flying Dagger

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,344
0
0
punkhead58 said:
i couldn't read this without picturing a crazy man standing in a warm room in a trenchcoat, shouting at the people around him
"THE TRUTH?! YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"
[spoiler = "Spoiler Alert"]
[/spoiler]
 

Earthbound Engineer

New member
Jun 9, 2008
538
0
0
ygetoff said:
Actually the President has just as much power as Congress. A president can block a congressional proposal, just as Congress can block a presidential proposal.
Kortney said:
That's not true at all. The President of the United States has serious, serious power. The President is capable of making many decisions without even bothering with the congress.

He can issue commands that override orders from any general and can override any acts or legislation from any senator or politician in the country.

The Queen/King on the other hand, can't.
Sorry, I replied to the most recent quote, would you mind referring to my previous post?
 

Flying Dagger

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,344
0
0
punkhead58 said:
Flying Dagger said:
[spoiler = "Spoiler Alert"]
[/spoiler]
Very seldom do people reference XKCD. Here's a cookie!
i'm addicted to it, i keep getting reminded of a certain one at work and trying to explain it to the person next to me, but they just give me that confused smile and nod treatment like i'm a crazy person.
 

Flying Dagger

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,344
0
0
Shadow Daeris said:
Mcupobob said:
Why do you guys still have a queen, I would be fine with that if she did anything but it just seems she gets to live in a life of luxury for no reason what so ever at tax payer expense.
It's not the queen that sucks the taxpayers money away it's brussels saying we have to pay them money to stay in this EU BS.

i really don't like brussels ._. no offense to anyone from brussels o.o'
as someone who spent a lot of time studying the EU, i'd ask why...
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
SikOseph said:
Superbeast said:
She has far more influence around the world than any PM will ever have
Yeah, I remember that war that she took us to that resulted in the deaths of 100,000+ Iraqi civilians...
To be honest I was thinking more along the lines that she can *theoretically* dissolve Parliament at any time, and refuse to open it each year.

Of course that never happens (it's kind of an unspoken agreement that she *will* open Parliament each year), but she potentially can.

A Prime Minister can't do that - if they became a dictator then the Queen can dissolve the government and the army will *probably* follow her lead instead of Mr. Psycho. But that's purely hypothetical.
 

Earthbound Engineer

New member
Jun 9, 2008
538
0
0
Mcupobob said:
Ok, I never said America was the best contry in the world and do not belive so, now your ignorance is show by immediately taking ever thing I said out of contex and writing me off as a streotype. All I was asking was why have a queen when parliment makes all the laws? Atleast the president can veto stuff and propose new bills while the queen lives in a palace. Anyways I don't belive that leaders should have to live so luxuryly on at the tax payer expense anyways.
Relax, that last part was a joke. Forgive me for not using forum mark-up to express the tone of my post.

Punkhead58 said:
[sarcasm]
But, none of that matters because:
[HEADING=2]America is the best country in the world and everybody who contradicts that statement is a terrorist![/HEADING]

Damn nationalists....
[/sarcasm]
There, that should clear up the confusion.
 

ChromeAlchemist

New member
Aug 21, 2008
5,865
0
0
Superbeast said:
SikOseph said:
Superbeast said:
She has far more influence around the world than any PM will ever have
Yeah, I remember that war that she took us to that resulted in the deaths of 100,000+ Iraqi civilians...
To be honest I was thinking more along the lines that she can *theoretically* dissolve Parliament at any time, and refuse to open it each year.

Of course that never happens (it's kind of an unspoken agreement that she *will* open Parliament each year), but she potentially can.

A Prime Minister can't do that - if they became a dictator then the Queen can dissolve the government and the army will *probably* follow her lead instead of Mr. Psycho. But that's purely hypothetical.
I don't think the military have a choice in that matter, do they? And isn't it still only her that can declare war?
 

Parshooter

New member
Sep 13, 2009
168
0
0
Pyromaniac1337 said:
Same reason Canada still has a Governor General: We'd be the same as those dirty, smelly French if we got rid of the Queen.
Actually we would have to cut her head off then twice replace her with a dictator

The first causing civil war the next a world war named after that dictator
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
ChromeAlchemist said:
I don't think the military have a choice in that matter, do they? And isn't it still only her that can declare war?
I thought so, but someone said ultimate control rested with the Minister for Defence, so I'm now doubtful.

AFAIK the Queen is still head of the Military, hence she's the one that gets the parades/inspections and not the PM.
 

Pariah87

New member
Jul 9, 2009
934
0
0
Azure-Supernova said:
It's part of our heritage. Also she's a big tourist attraction! Tax payers money yes, but doting tourists will pay stupid amounts for little trinkets, visits to BUCKINGHAM and just about anything to do with the Royal Family.
Just to be pedantic seeing as I have family in Buckingham, very few to no tourists ever go there as it's a small town about a mile long that has nothing of particular interest, a few pubs and a very low down the list University perhaps but that's it. Now Buckingham Palace on the other hand, that's where all the tourists spend their money :p