What's your Stance on America?

[Odin]

Landscape:10+ We still have lots of natural areas and diversity compared to Europe.

People:7 We are very diverse, although religious fundimentalism and some remaining racism takes points off.

Government: 4 I prefer a parlimentary system over a presidential system.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by St Leo

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn Imagine if George Bush were PM of Canada and Canada was a world power... with the kind of authority the PM has here, we'd be fighting 10 wars right now and the world would look something like a crater. As crazy as GWB may seem at times, be thankful he's president of the United States and not President of the USSR or some other theoretical, highly centralized, superpower.

GWB would have lost a Confidence Vote and been toast.

You can't be so sure of that. And I don't mean necessarily GWB, I mean someone like him with the same intentions and motivations.

Or imagine this, that the US has the same political system as Canada where GWB is PM. Imagine GWB has the sole authority to declare war and to enter into treaties and alliances with foreign countries. Would the world be better off, or worse? I say unequivicolly it would be alot worse.

Again, be grateful the US has the system that it has as long as its a superpower. The US government is GWB's worst enemy right now, not anyone or anything else (assuming he's a warmongerer like everyone says he is).

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Odin
Government: 4 I prefer a parlimentary system over a presidential system.

Why? I think its great having a separate executive branch of government. Otherwise it would be like GWB being in control of the executive seat AND congress... ie, an unbalanced balance of power.

[Flinx]

Unless you are an ultra-narrow minded fanatic, this poll is imposable to answer honestly. How can you take the political, economic, social, environmental, and cultural attributes of a multifaceted society, people(s) and country like the United States of America and reduce it to a deliberately ignorant, boorish, overly simplified, argument sparking question like “What's your Stance on America?”

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
You can't be so sure of that. And I don't mean necessarily GWB, I mean someone like him with the same intentions and motivations.

Or imagine this, that the US has the same political system as Canada where GWB is PM. Imagine GWB has the sole authority to declare war and to enter into treaties and alliances with foreign countries. Would the world be better off, or worse? I say unequivicolly it would be alot worse.

I don't know the Canadian system, but I would assume the Prime Minister's authority rests on the support of his party. The whole party would have to be for the war, or the treaty or whatnot. Ironically, in the UK it was because the main opposition party was pro-Iraq war that the UK passed the act of Parliament to allow British troops involvement. If they were against the war the motion would have been defeated due to massive backbench revolt.

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't know the Canadian system, but I would assume the Prime Minister's authority rests on the support of his party. The whole party would have to be for the war, or the treaty or whatnot.

The backbenchers don't have the spine to stand up to the PM, so the PM dictates the policy.

Perhaps if they were to organise they could have taken down one of the majority governments, but party discipline is extraordinarily strong here in Canada.

Unfortunately, we have adopted the worst of both the American and British systems. An American president in the PM, and in the makeup of the cabinet, on a British parliamentary system lacking the formal checks and balances of the Americans.

But things have changed now, and the voters have finally turfed out the Liberals, giving them another chance to rectify things under a minority government.

So we shall see whether any lasting change comes about.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Dauphin


I don't know the Canadian system, but I would assume the Prime Minister's authority rests on the support of his party. The whole party would have to be for the war, or the treaty or whatnot. Ironically, in the UK it was because the main opposition party was pro-Iraq war that the UK passed the act of Parliament to allow British troops involvement. If they were against the war the motion would have been defeated due to massive backbench revolt.

More the party rests on the support of the PM. The Canadian system is often referred to as a "benevolent dictatorship", but there is nothing in writing ensuring that it stays benevolent. But this isn't about Canada, I was merely saying that the US is the best system for containing the authority of its executive, which can be good and bad in a number of ways. However when it comes to dealing with people like GWB, the US system is especially good. This is precisely why he has gone to such lenghts to create things like the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security, to circumvent the fact that his actual authority is so limited. In most other countries (Canada included) things like the Patriot Act and the DHS would be redundant because the government(s) already have most of these powers, wether or not they are regularly exercised.

[JCG]

America is a double-edged sword. Goes for pretty much most of the subjects already considered (anq quite a few that haven't). That's all.

[Dis]

the more I read poly off-topic, the more I hate america. I still voted 10 though . This prison rape thing in Iraq has me very disturbed. I'm beginning to hate my country.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Dauphin
I don't know the Canadian system, but I would assume the Prime Minister's authority rests on the support of his party. The whole party would have to be for the war, or the treaty or whatnot.

Wouldn't, rather, the majority of the party have to be for the war?

[Dis]

I really don't have anywhere to post this since I used my 2 threads.

Bush slams Castro on Cuban sex industry. But little does he know what goes on in Las Vegas.

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/37773|top|07-16-2004::18:47|reuters.html

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Spiffor

There are different tones of capitalism. So far, you are the only rich country (per capita wise) to allow such an immense misery on your territory, and even worse, that finds it perfectly normal - the American dream that everybody is responsible for himself has been twisted into now considering "welfare" as a political swear word

immense misery? Says who?