1998 Majesty info?

In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:34:23 +0800

Aesop's Fables.

See http://www.elook.org/literature/aesop/fables/156.html


The Frogs were living as happy as could be in a marshy swamp that just
suited them; they went splashing about caring for nobody and nobody
troubling with them. But some of them thought that this was not right,
that they should have a king and a proper constitution, so they determined
to send up a petition to Jove to give them what they wanted.

"Mighty Jove," they cried, "send unto us a king that will rule over us
and keep us in order." Jove laughed at their croaking, and threw down
into the swamp a huge Log, which came down splash into the swamp.

The Frogs were frightened out of their lives by the commotion made in
their midst, and all rushed to the bank to look at the horrible monster;
but after a time, seeing that it did not move, one or two of the boldest
of them ventured out towards the Log, and even dared to touch it; still
it did not move.

Then the greatest hero of the Frogs jumped upon the Log and commenced
dancing up and down upon it, thereupon all the Frogs came and did the
same; and for some time the Frogs went about their business every day
without taking the slightest notice of their new King Log lying in
their midst.

But this did not suit them, so they sent another petition to Jove,
and said to him, "We want a real king; one that will really rule over
us." Now this made Jove angry, so he sent among them a big Stork that soon
set to work gobbling them all up. Then the Frogs repented when too late.


The moral being that energetic heads of state with an agenda are maybe
not so good an idea...

Zebee

 

Theo Bekkers wrote:

Great idea!

regards,
CrazyCam (although every second day might be a bit OTT)

 

The one is supposed to protect us from the excesses of the other.

Frankly, I'm not too convinced about the people electing a pres, but I'm
certain I don't want pollies picking one.

The inherent random selection which brought us Lizzie, is, as I have
said before, more preferable to me than a politician's choice.

GG's are a pollie's choice, and we've had a mixed bag, haven't we?

regards,
CrazyCam

 

JL wrote:

Aye, it hurt me too. :-|

OK by me.

We have John Howard as PM and you ask that?

Folk like Marie B. are fairly thin on the ground. :-|

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Hehe. I somehow missed out on Aesop's fables. Possibly because of my age on
entering the English language. My early reading years and verbal stories
related to the Brothers Grimm and Anderson. Never learnt the English rhymes
like Baa, baa black sheep, little Jack Horner and all those.

Theo

 

If it hadn't been for Kerr, most Aussies wouldn't know the position had any
relevance to government.

Theo

 

Don't see what was creative about the snipping, I think he is speaking a
clear truth, but OK I can see there could be a bit of wear and tear on
gun barrels, will every third day do ? A third every third has a nice
ring to it.

JL

 

Dead presidents are worth more though

G-S

 

I would support a head of state with executive power who is also the head of
the executive arm as long as he cannot be from whatever party is in
government at the time. Give them a power of veto and that'd really slow
the buggers down passing legislation!

G-S

 

I said direct election, not representative election... no silly bugger would
_directly_ elect Little Johnny (would they?)

(just assuming here that most people who did vote liberal voted that way
despite him, not because of him, but I may be wrong.)


G-S

 

That's why I'm in favour of the upper house of review 'system', it slows the
buggers down and sometimes completely stops them actually doing something.

Notice how much more angst the goverment causes when they don't have to
worry about the upper house...

The less they do, and the longer it takes to do it the more effective they
are

G-S

 

In aus.motorcycles on 21 Mar 2006 06:54:08 +0100

Indeed. But I cut and pasted as I found, not being bothered finding a
better version.

Zebee

 

No it's not!

GB, being deliberately disagreeable.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 20:29:42 +1100

Only if I get to sniff the vapours and eat the mushrooms...


Zebee

 

"Well, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power
just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!"

GB

 

OK, so we just shoot them every second day until they're dead,
and then move on to the next one. How does that sound?

GB, day one: left foot, day two: right foot, day three: left
shin...

 

The thing about Lizzie is that while inherent random selection
brought her to us, by the time of her Coronation she'd had a
thorough edumacation in what was expected of her. Similarly, old
Big Ears has been brought up as a Royal and he knows, inherently,
what is expected of him and how to behave. Same goes for his
children, his siblings, etc, etc.

This is what I mean when I say that Australia cannot produce a
suitable Pres. No-one here has had that upbringing, I doubt that
we could find a single one that knew when to keep its mouth shut,
much less when not to open it.

There's something quaint in the constitution about it being
Her Majesty's appointment on the advice of the Prime Minister.
So yeah, it's the pollie's choice. That Hollingworth bloke
was a great choice, wasn't he! Want a bit of illicit sex covered
up, he's your man!

GB

 

My favourite reason for keeping the GG is the dissolution power.
I've never really understood why folks go on and on about the
Kerr/Whitlam dissolution (though the press prefers the term
'dismissal'). That was just one of six times that its happened.

Anyway, I digress. If somewhere in amongst all the sillyness
that changing the letterheads to read "Republic" involves, the
dissolution power is removed of even weakened, then we're fucked.

"Well may we say God Save the Queen, because nothing will save
us if the GG doesn't have the power to dissolve both houses of
parliament as and when required"


The republicans will leap in to say that I'm trying to divert
from the argument... I ask them to explain how a popularly elected
B-Grade actor (or swimmer - President Thorpey anyone?) will
grow the balls to invoke the one significant power that they
have?


GB

 

In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:36:30 GMT

The problem with simple election is money. You need a lot of it. And
that means parties and machines and payback.

If the shortlist to vote from was people with demonstrated ethics and
guts maybe, but I have no idea how you would construct such a thing.

I don't want them using that power unless there really is no other way
though. Would Sir William Deane have behaved as Sir John Kerr did?

Zebee

 

I'll bet any money that you haven't applied the 'tears' method
of gaining an exemption yet. Why, you probably haven't even
complained to the Vice Chancellor yet!!!

GB