Google| Subject | Re: Queen mother (of Britain) has died |
| From | paulh |
| Date | 2002-04-02 03:56 (2002-04-02 03:56) |
| Message-ID | <3p3iaucloa4t3vgmdqnen4mk32csid31ro@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.fan.tolkien,soc.culture.australian |
| Follows | David Flood |
| Followups | Donald Shepherd (1h & 20m) Richard K. McPike (7h & 33m) David Flood (17h & 5m) > paulh |
On Mon, 1 Apr 2002 17:53:49 +0100, "David Flood" <NOSPAMmaoltuile@utvinternet.ie>wrote:
David FloodIts hard to know exactly what people were thinking. But I certainly believe that an inability to see what sort of republic we would have was a major cause of the failure. Republicans certainly thought so... in this they were outmanouvered And of course no one trusts the parlimentarians. And I don't trust the Public... or we'd end up with Paul Hogan or Kylie Minogue as our first President. Still not sure why we need a President at all...
"paulh" <aa@microsoft.com>wrote in message news:puhdauot0l664g651kafll5iend6s7clp4@4ax.com...paulhDavid Flood
On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 05:18:20 GMT, spam@nospam.com (AC) wrote:paulhACpossibly others..
I am Canadian, and I can assure you that the head of state is Queen Elizabeth II. The republican movement in Canada is relatively weak and is made up of some infrequently vocal malcontents.
Ah... I didnt realise. Down here the Republicans are quite a bit bigger...but suffered a major defeat during a referendum a year or so ago....
I understand that this was because the republican vote 'split' - the electorate was rightly suspicious of the idea of the parliamentarians electing the President, rather than the electorate (which is the norm elsewhere)
paulh
2002-03-30-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
