# The next GG?



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Avoiding the politics of the whole thing, I found this interesting. There is a facebook group supporting Preston Manning - he has about 500 or so fans so far. William Shatner has over 10,000.

Edit: update, Bill is up to over 22,000.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

He's even got Spock's endorsement - Twitter / Leonard Nimoy: @WilliamShatner Bill: You ...


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

yeah..I got bill on facebook...it's to funny.. But Shatner as a Politician would be SO much more entertaining then the "bored out of my mind" Harper..hehhe


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Shatner would be wrong on many levels, not least of which his citizenship is as much lip-service as fact. As a running joke, this proposal is stupid, no matter that some will actually consider it worthy. Being an actor is not much of a qualification in my opinion. Having lived most of his life outside of Canada won't endear him to many either. Endorsement by non-Canadians is worthless. As for what he thinks of the monarchy, or the Queen specifically, we don't really know, do we?

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Mooh said:


> . As for what he thinks of the monarchy, or the Queen specifically, we don't really know, do we?
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


I don't think we really know what most* Canadians* think about the monarchy or the Queen. On that point I think Bill's in pretty good company.

Shawn


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

I guess you don't understand it's actually met as a Joke right?....



Mooh said:


> Shatner would be wrong on many levels, not least of which his citizenship is as much lip-service as fact. As a running joke, this proposal is stupid, no matter that some will actually consider it worthy. Being an actor is not much of a qualification in my opinion. Having lived most of his life outside of Canada won't endear him to many either. Endorsement by non-Canadians is worthless. As for what he thinks of the monarchy, or the Queen specifically, we don't really know, do we?
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Guest (Apr 24, 2010)

al3d said:


> I guess you don't understand it's actually met as a Joke right?....


I support Shatner as GG, rather seriously. He's as qualified as say...an author or a journalist. Which is to say: the position requires no real qualifications whatsoever.

So: Shatner for GG!


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

iaresee said:


> I support Shatner as GG, rather seriously. He's as qualified as say...an author or a journalist. Which is to say: the position requires no real qualifications whatsoever.
> 
> So: Shatner for GG!


 .
he made a video post on his site saying it was taken all in good humor basicaly..but EVEN if it was for reall..could it be worst then REAGAN!....Arnold?..or even the Wrestler as a senator?.....FULL SPEED AHEAD MR, SCOTT...


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

In this case I'm thankful the Governor General is not selected by the public.


Captain Kirk?!?!

Are you shitting me?

Even a political appointee selected by George W Bush-North has to be more suitable than Shatner.

At least pick a hottie like our current and previous GG.

Whether it's s figurhead position or not, it would be a huge emparrassment to Canada to have a farsical character like Shatner as GG.

As for it being intended as a Joke, I think you might be surprised how many people would disagree. After all, they DID elect Arnold as governor of California and Jesse "The Body" Ventura in Minnesota.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

90 minute throne speech by Shanter.... yikes..... ummm Milkman Harper hasn't been able to pick very good hotties


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

al3d said:


> I guess you don't understand it's actually met as a Joke right?....


Did you actually READ my post? "As a running joke, this proposal is stupid, no matter that some will actually consider it worthy."

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Rugburn said:


> I don't think we really know what most* Canadians* think about the monarchy or the Queen. On that point I think Bill's in pretty good company.
> 
> Shawn


But the GG is the Queen's representative in Canada, so it's pertinent. 

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Mooh said:


> But the GG is the Queen's representative in Canada, so it's pertinent.
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


Yeah, I'm sure Michel Jean dreamed of working for the Queen of England as a little girl growing up in Haiti. Hell, Shatner was a Shakespearean actor at the Stratford Festival. The Queen's English in all it's resplendent glory. God save the Queen, jolly good show, and what a lovely bunch of coconuts. LOL

Shawn.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)




----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

*GO BUBBLES!!*

* He knows whats important!*

* [video=youtube;H0YJrduz6LM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0YJrduz6LM[/video]*
* YouTube - bubbles from trailer park boys liquor and whores*​
After all, what is politics without them?


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

Michelle Jean is basicaly money spending B***** any clue how much she is spending in a single year?...more then ANY politician we ever had.


----------



## bagpipe (Sep 19, 2006)

I think we should abolish the position, and abandon support for someone else's monarchy. Who should I speak to about this ?


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Of course people will vote for Shatner, as a joke anyway--and some will vote for him as a comment on politics.
Some will be voting for Capt Kirk.

Manning would be a better choice form a practical view point, but that and whether we need a GG is kind of going into the no politics rule-discussing Shatner for GG is entertainment.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Well, nothing political, Manning is someone who I would like to see experience fatal break failure, and I would vote for the Road Runner before voting for him.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

You don't vote for GG (In my head I'm doing that like the line in Monty Python & the Holy Grail-"You don't vote for kings")


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Robert1950 said:


> *The next GG?*
> 
> Avoiding the politics of the whole thing, I found this interesting. There is a facebook group supporting Preston Manning - he has about 500 or so fans so far. William Shatner has over 10,000.
> 
> Edit: update, Bill is up to over 22,000.


*The next GG?*

I never knew that Preston Manning and William Shatner were Guitar Gurus. Are they more into Acoustics or Electrics?


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Well... in all actuality, William Shatner IS musical, has been involved with, and has made and recorded music. 

[video=youtube;KM6pYG1DQ4s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM6pYG1DQ4s[/video]
YouTube - William Shatner's Beatnik Cafe - I Can't Get Behind That
[video=youtube;NN3MGN899yE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN3MGN899yE[/video]
YouTube - William Shatner-Rocketman​ 

I cannot think of anything nice to say about Manning so I will just shush....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

shoretyus said:


> 90 minute throne speech by Shanter.... yikes..... ummm Milkman Harper hasn't been able to pick very good hotties



That's not a surprise to me. I'll stop now in order to stay within the no politics rule.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

bagpipe said:


> I think we should abolish the position, and abandon support for someone else's monarchy. Who should I speak to about this ?



I agree. With all due respect to where we came from, it's time to step into the modern world.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

i rather stay in the Commewealth then become the 53rd US State.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Commonwealth of Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

People see Canada as some sort of insulated chunk of dirt. What we are is part of a family of some 50+ countries that share a common history, and by that common history have cross territorial legal rights. We also share not just that common historic government, but law, language, arts, sports, and a common interest in how we preserve our history.

Being a part of this family does have the titular head being the Queen of England, as relevant or irrelevant as she may be personally be, having her as the common point allows this union of friendships to exist. Having no power to remover her, or influence her, or countermand her, allows this friendship to exist without corruption by outside influences. The Queen will never have to fight about advertising debacles or air buses or golf courses.This makes the Commonwealth of Nations very stable, outside the regions of influence peddlers and lobbyist. The far more powerful truth that people do over look in pointing at The Queen and saying "we should do away with her" is that she could die today, and not be replaced, and nothing will change. She is literally a figure head, her physical reality is not needed, it is the ideology of shared history and interests that bind the nations together in friendship not rule or dominance or subservience, but friendship that the GG represents.

So, no, I would not support the idea of cutting off our nose to spite our faces.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

He now has 31,000 facebook fans.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Robert1950 said:


> He now has 31,000 facebook fans.


He has just slightly out-distanced me by 29,999 but after my last reply to my niece (who was my one) that one may be lost too.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)




----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Robert1950 said:


>


Hey--why not?
I'd support that.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

zontar said:


> Hey--why not?
> I'd support that.


Makes a lot more sense than Captain Kirk. After all, he's spent his life singing about his love for Canada.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

If we must go the celebrity route...Bruce Cockburn.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I think that if I was with the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan or wherever, and William Shatner came for a site visit, in the capacity of GG, I might take some amusement out of it. But as a sign that my government is behind me and respects my personal sacrifices, I think I would be insulted.

The other thing that one needs to consider for GG is that the individual selected cannot have ANY difficulties with impulse control. Impartiality has to be the rule of the day, 24/7. This is not Mr. Shatner's strong suit. But again, I accept it was a joke nomination.

As much respect as I have for Preston Manning (and I separate him from those who surrounded him in the Reform Party), the GG's office must not only *BE* nonpartisan (which Mr. Manning is quite capable of being), but be* perceived *as nonpartisan. I think it would be hard, given his political history, to pull that off. Roy Romanow might be a good choice.

There are a number of people who have established themselves by their long track record of public service in one form or another, and their ethical stance, but you have to keep in mind that they might easiy turn it down (as Jean Beliveau did), simply because the role can be quite draining with respect to the constant travel and official activities. Of course, to officiate at things like Parliamentary or Senate activities, Canada Day, and francophone events, they need to be acceptably bilingual. Someone from the West would be nice. Phil Fontaine, maybe?


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Not that I care any more or any less than I ever have as to who becomes our next GG, I think people are confusing the entertainer in Mr.Shatner with the man. He's a published author, TV and film producer/actor/screenwriter, narrator for many documentaries, and a spoken word master. I wouldn't mind being that kind of "buffoon". How was Adrienne Clarkson so much better quallified? Oh yeah. she writes "important" stuff, not that silly sci-fi $hit. Not that I think Mr.Shatner is interested , but I don't feel his appointment would dishonour the position.

Shawn.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Mooh said:


> Shatner would be wrong on many levels, not least of which his citizenship is as much lip-service as fact. As a running joke, this proposal is stupid, no matter that some will actually consider it worthy. Being an actor is not much of a qualification in my opinion. Having lived most of his life outside of Canada won't endear him to many either. Endorsement by non-Canadians is worthless. As for what he thinks of the monarchy, or the Queen specifically, we don't really know, do we?
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


I agree, it would make a mockery of the whole thing! But I guess that's the point! I nominate Mike Duffy!


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

To let the mockery continue,...


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Robert1950 said:


> To let the mockery continue,...


Well Edith Prickley once dated Pierre Trudeau--at least on SCTV she did.
That could gve Guy the appearance of being partisan.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

you just nailed my feeling exactly.



Rugburn said:


> Not that I care any more or any less than I ever have as to who becomes our next GG, I think people are confusing the entertainer in Mr.Shatner with the man. He's a published author, TV and film producer/actor/screenwriter, narrator for many documentaries, and a spoken word master. I wouldn't mind being that kind of "buffoon". How was Adrienne Clarkson so much better quallified? Oh yeah. she writes "important" stuff, not that silly sci-fi $hit. Not that I think Mr.Shatner is interested , but I don't feel his appointment would dishonour the position.
> 
> Shawn.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Mr. Shatner now has 42,000 Facebook fans supporting him for GG.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Well now Facebook attention has turned to none other than Marg Delahunty, Princess Warrior: CBC News - Arts - Mary Walsh for Rideau Hall: Facebook fans

Cripes, what next, Corey Hart? Nicholas Campbell? Justin Bieber? Monty Hall? Pinball Clemons?


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

mhammer said:


> Well now Facebook attention has turned to none other than Marg Delahunty, Princess Warrior: CBC News - Arts - Mary Walsh for Rideau Hall: Facebook fans
> 
> Cripes, what next, Corey Hart? Nicholas Campbell? Justin Bieber? Monty Hall? Pinball Clemons?


I bet she could do it justice...

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

mhammer said:


> Well now Facebook attention has turned to none other than Marg Delahunty, Princess Warrior: CBC News - Arts - Mary Walsh for Rideau Hall: Facebook fans
> Cripes, what next, Corey Hart? Nicholas Campbell? Justin Bieber? Monty Hall? Pinball Clemons?


...don cherry?


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Wow!! All this concern over the "wrong" people being touted for the position of GG. Where's the Rock n' Roll attiftude in that? Must be some kind of *"Baby Boomer"* thing I don't understand  :sport-smiley-002:

Shawn.


----------



## six-string (Oct 7, 2009)

the only thing wrong with this is the absolutely obscene amount of taxpayers money wasted to continue to support this "figurehead".
the army of bureaucrats and wetnurses required to prop up the charade of a monarchy and its subordinate governor generals far outweigh the benefits.
basically the governor general holds a lot of very expensive dinner parties for visiting V.I.P.s and hands out meaningless awards to anyone who will accept them. just like the queen does. Elton John a knight? gimme a break.
other than that, the primary job is to sit in the HOC and read some propaganda from the ruling party once a year and attend some flag waving events.
the monarchy is an anachronism that harkens back to a time of imperialism and domination by military might. it reinforces outmoded ideals of class structure, racism, sexism, and elitism. 




keeperofthegood said:


> Commonwealth of Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> People see Canada as some sort of insulated chunk of dirt. What we are is part of a family of some 50+ countries that share a common history, and by that common history have cross territorial legal rights. We also share not just that common historic government, but law, language, arts, sports, and a common interest in how we preserve our history.
> 
> ...


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...don cherry?



Over my cold dead rotting corpse.

This is what I like about Canada. We can throw around Canadians with dubious qualities and see their positive points for the position of GG, even if it's just for a laugh,... except for Don Cherry.  

BTW,...


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Robert1950 said:


> Over my cold dead rotting corpse.
> 
> This is what I like about Canada. We can throw around Canadians with dubious qualities and see their positive points for the position of GG, even if it's just for a laugh,... except for Don Cherry.
> 
> BTW,...


Hmm, I think I'll stick with Stompin' Tom...


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...yeah, in retrospect, my suggestion is probably more ridculous than it is humourous.

-dh



Robert1950 said:


> Over my cold dead rotting corpse.
> 
> This is what I like about Canada. We can throw around Canadians with dubious qualities and see their positive points for the position of GG, even if it's just for a laugh,... except for Don Cherry.
> 
> BTW,...


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

six-string said:


> the only thing wrong with this is the absolutely obscene amount of taxpayers money wasted to continue to support this "figurehead". the army of bureaucrats and wetnurses required to prop up the charade of a monarchy and its subordinate governor generals far outweigh the benefits. basically the governor general holds a lot of very expensive dinner parties for visiting V.I.P.s and hands out meaningless awards to anyone who will accept them. just like the queen does. Elton John a knight? gimme a break. other than that, the primary job is to sit in the HOC and read some propaganda from the ruling party once a year and attend some flag waving events. the monarchy is an anachronism that harkens back to a time of imperialism and domination by military might. it reinforces outmoded ideals of class structure, racism, sexism, and elitism.


Whether the GG represents the Crown or Canada is pretty much moot. A great many democracies have a president/prime-minister arrangement, whereby one is the head of government, and the other is the ceremonial head of state. There is a desire to have official national representation at a great many events, some official, and some unplanned (like the Haiti disaster) and quite frankly, the head of the government is too busy with the business of government to attend them. So, as much as people kvetch about how much the GG "costs", it wouldn't take long after abandoning the post before Canadians started bitching about "Hey, how come the PM isn't here? This is *important*.".

That's one side of it. Of course the question of what powers a GG has or should have, and what difference it makes to the exercise of those powers based on who they represent....well that's a whole other thing. For example, the PM presently has to get the GG to agree to dissolve parliament (for what ever reasons, even when the government falls due to a nonconfidence vote). The GG, of course, can _technically_ defer to the Queen, although that has never happened. Were a president-like head of state of a Canadian republic to be faced with a request to dissolve parliament, what would happen? I don't know. I leave that up to the constitutional experts.

Then there is the matter of what would take place if the GG were not technically appointed by the Crown as their representative. If appointed by the PM or Parliament, then how do they resist the will of the government when it's time to do so? If not appointed, then do they get elected? And *IF* they were to be elected, would that process be any more cost effective than simply appointing them the way it is presently done?

Much to ponder.


----------



## bluesmostly (Feb 10, 2006)

six-string said:


> the only thing wrong with this is the absolutely obscene amount of taxpayers money wasted to continue to support this "figurehead".
> the army of bureaucrats and wetnurses required to prop up the charade of a monarchy and its subordinate governor generals far outweigh the benefits.
> basically the governor general holds a lot of very expensive dinner parties for visiting V.I.P.s and hands out meaningless awards to anyone who will accept them. just like the queen does. Elton John a knight? gimme a break.
> other than that, the primary job is to sit in the HOC and read some propaganda from the ruling party once a year and attend some flag waving events.
> the monarchy is an anachronism that harkens back to a time of imperialism and domination by military might. it reinforces outmoded ideals of class structure, racism, sexism, and elitism.


I pretty much hold the same stance as you six-string. 

Like hammer says though, governments still like to have an official representative and spokesperson for non-governmental functions. 

Still, it is fun to look into who actually does own our country. 

My sister worked for the GG for years until just recently. The staff at Rideau Hall is over 150 and they do spends millions every year on their pompous parties and functions. The GG's residence has a stunning art and antique collection BTW. 

The present GG is well liked by all and is not a big spender or tyrant like Adrienne Clarkson (that is how her staff characterized her) and her husband were - they really acted like royalty and always spent millions over budget.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Among those formerly on the payroll at Rideau Hall is the inimitable Ed Lawrence; demi-god to Ontario gardeners: Gardening with Ed Lawrence


----------



## djem (Sep 14, 2006)

William Shatner for GG

Phasers on stun baby!!!!!!!!


----------



## djem (Sep 14, 2006)

al3d said:


> Michelle Jean is basicaly money spending B***** any clue how much she is spending in a single year?...more then ANY politician we ever had.


Exactly. What really pisses me off about her and those who appointed her, is when she dons Canadian military dress. She has no right to don military dress. I'm ex-military (I was a Reg. Force Infantryman with 2RCR from the 'old days') and I would never dream of wearing military dress unless joining the ranks again.

Wearing that uniform, or any part of that uniform, should be reserved to current members and/or vets who saw active duty.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

The Queen and Prince Philip do it, in the role of "management", when inspecting the troops. The GG does it as "management" as well. When she dons non-dress military garb (e.g., visiting troops if Afghanistan) it way well be protocol imposed by the Forces itself, rather than any choice she makes. Anybody what the last male GGs wore when visiting troops?


----------



## djem (Sep 14, 2006)

mhammer said:


> The Queen and Prince Philip do it, in the role of "management", when inspecting the troops. The GG does it as "management" as well. When she dons non-dress military garb (e.g., visiting troops if Afghanistan) it way well be protocol imposed by the Forces itself, rather than any choice she makes. Anybody what the last male GGs wore when visiting troops?


The Princes, I believe, are considered active duty and I can accept that. The Queen, I disagree in allowing her to wear field/dress uniform as with any other non-military gov't official. It's one of thse things that should be earned. I still clearly remember the feeling of getting that first 'cap badge' to wear on the beret. A lot of military drill had to be mastered prior to receiving that cap badge.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Well, I suppose the feeling that the folks who have never been "in the trenches" (literally or figuratively) are not in the same league is something that extends well beyond the military. Plenty of folks in the private sector have a sense of irritation over senior management thattries to be "one of the gang" in some fashion at official events, but has never bothered to come by your work unit and find out what you actually DO.

So, I understand your sentiment. My point was that the GG dons military garb not because it's her choice, but because it's a widely shared protocol. Who initiated that, I have no idea.

Me, I still find it weird to see so many folks here in downtown Ottawa in camouflage. Now, I know that the Candian Forces decided at one point that they could only afford 2 sets of uniforms rather than 3, and I'd rather have them provide enlisted folks with good equipment, decent food, and liveable accommodations than another suit to wear on off-days. But I have to admit that it's a bit weird riding the buses and standing in line at Tim Horton's beside folks who are dressed the way they would be if they were in battle.


----------



## six-string (Oct 7, 2009)

who initiated that?
well it is a fact that up until very recently, the Governor Generals here and in other Commonwealth countries wore military garb, because they were military (or retired military). in Canada that ended with Georges Vanier who was a General long before he was a Governor General. As for the Princes (as much as i believe the monarchy should be abolished) have also been active members of the military. the GG is only a ceremonial commander-in-chief but has no actual authority to issue military orders. what is particularly disgraceful and disrespectful is not merely the donning of military garb by the GG, but the bogus wearing of military issue medals and other awards. Clarkson did this and so has Jean. military medals, ribbons and badges are honours of distinction that are paid for with blood, sweat and personal sacrifice. to have some civilian wearing them as fashion accessories is offensive and dishonours those who have served.


----------



## bobb (Jan 4, 2007)

Interesting that comedians keep coming up in this discussion. After all, Canadian politics and comedy seem to have family ties.

































With that in mind, may I be the first one to nominate Leslie Nielsen for GG.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

six-string said:


> who initiated that?
> well it is a fact that up until very recently, the Governor Generals here and in other Commonwealth countries wore military garb, because they were military (or retired military). in Canada that ended with Georges Vanier who was a General long before he was a Governor General. As for the Princes (as much as i believe the monarchy should be abolished) have also been active members of the military. the GG is only a ceremonial commander-in-chief but has no actual authority to issue military orders. what is particularly disgraceful and disrespectful is not merely the donning of military garb by the GG, but the bogus wearing of military issue medals and other awards. Clarkson did this and so has Jean. military medals, ribbons and badges are honours of distinction that are paid for with blood, sweat and personal sacrifice. to have some civilian wearing them as fashion accessories is offensive and dishonours those who have served.


Well, I get the sense that there are a lot of generals and majors from the old days who never really saw a trench, and sport all manner of medals for things they were tangentially involved in from head office. Not to take anything away from them, but one needs to distinguish between the quantity of colour and glitter on some high-ranking officer's chest, and what they have personally been through or sacrificed. Obviously, there is a loose relationship between medals and participation, but it sure ain't 1:1, the same way that the length of a researcher's or CEO's CV is not 1:1 with the extent of their actual contributions or bright ideas.

I'm not sure GGs *do* wear medals as "fashion accessories", but like you I am mystified as to why people who have obviously not served in the military would wear them, or for what they would have been received. I looked for pics of Romeo Leblanc and could not find any of him in military garb with medals. Is it possible that these are the cumulative medals of the office itself, and not the individual wearing them? In any event, the military garb and medals are not always a part of interaction with the military, as you can see here:








Then there are these weird photos of the Queen wearing medals on an evening gown. What's up with that?:


----------



## bluesmostly (Feb 10, 2006)

the monarchy in all nations have historically been, and still are, commanders in chief of the military orders who _serve _them. 

George Bush Sr, the commander and chief of the American Military, was Knighted by the Queen, (abeit an 'honorary knighthood' as he cannot take on the official title since non-british citizens cannot be knighted and US presidents cannot accept the title - still, the significance of the gesture and protocol are paramount), specifically for efforts in the Gulf War. 

Do the math on that one!


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

bobb said:


> Interesting that comedians keep coming up in this discussion. After all, Canadian politics and comedy seem to have family ties.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A couple of questions:
I realize that Erik Nielsen and Leslie Nielsen are brothers, but what's with the rowan Atkinson baby?

Second-Are you saying joe Flaherty & Jim Flaherty are brothers?
They aren't.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

zontar said:


> Second-Are you saying joe Flaherty & Jim Flaherty are brothers? They aren't.


Yeah, but they're both "Skehhhhhhhhryyyyyy!"

Actually, I ran into Flaherty in my building, and was surprised by how short he is. This was a few years ago, and boy did he loook like he had the weight of the world on his shoulders. He was chatting with the shoe repair guy in the lobby, and when I asked the shoe repair guy later if that was indeed Flaherty, he replied that Flaherty had come to him to repair and restore a pair of shoes prior to an "austerity" budget a year before, and droppd by to chat whenever he was in the building (which houses the Dept. of Finance as well as my employer).


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I still want to know about the Rowan Atkinson baby...


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

al3d said:


> Michelle Jean is basicaly money spending B***** any clue how much she is spending in a single year?...more then ANY politician we ever had.



...sources?

i think she's one of the best we've had.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Well if nothing else, she's hot.

Actually I like her a lot.


----------



## six-string (Oct 7, 2009)

it doesn't matter cause MJ will be gone by September.
first she was appointed by Martin as a Liberal and Harper is not going to miss an opportunity to appoint a Conservative-friendly GG. second, since Iggy started blathering about how great MJ was this past weekend, and lobbying for an extension of her term, that is most certainly the kiss-of-death for her. Harper will get rid of her just frustrate Iggy.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

al3d said:


> .could it be worst then REAGAN!....Arnold?..or even the Wrestler as a senator?.....FULL SPEED AHEAD MR, SCOTT...


a big part of my heart agrees with you on this. the exception being that as much as i didn't want to like him, reagan was actually the last half decent president we had.



al3d said:


> i rather stay in the Commewealth then become the 53rd US State.


in order for that to happen we would have to invite canada to become a state after ratifying 2 others. currently there are only 50 states. 
48 continental + alaska and hawaii. although we have several protectorats (for example, guam) where the citizens there hold u.s. passports and are in fact considered american, they have a seperate government, with no representation in our judicial or legislative branchesand they don't pay taxes or tribute.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Nobody has mention the PR and diplomatic value of the GG. MJ has done quite well in that respects IMO. I remember when Ed Schreyer was GG - I had hopes for him and he was, unfortunately, a let down.


----------

