Yes, Blogging SupposiTory Jojo Blue Like You is probably in uncontrollable sobbing mode since her dreamy Stevie’s Relic from the “Grey Flannel Suit” era of a GG announced that coalition governments were constitutional. She is now thrown in a tizzy.
For example if the opposition parties brought the present Conservative minority government down after years of allowing Gov’t legislation to pass and then presented a coalition agreement to GG Johnston, I would be livid if he allowed them to govern instead of accepting the Prime Minister’s request for an election.
Yes, dear, time to change that tear stained blouse about now. Now that would be an interesting scenario. Just to watch all those Harpercon cheerleaders turn purple would be worth the trouble. The idea of watching Jojo drown another blouse in her tears would be especially fun. However, realistically speaking, if Jojo and the other Harpercon cheerleaders are dumb enough to believe that above scenario would actually ever happen… Whatever. Either way, the very fact that the GG has come out and said he’s been a brushin’ up and a learnin’ and has come to the conclusion that he has no problem with coalition government that is something Jojo doesn’t like, so boys n girls, she is now strongly suggesting that perhaps the GG isn’t qualified to make such an opinion; that perhaps he should consult…get ready for it…Queen Elizabeth of England. It would be “prudent” for him to seek advice from the Queen. Funny! But Jojo, what if the queen agrees with him, or better still, tells him to decide as he sees fit? Would you be satisfied then? My guess is no. Oh Jojo! No one gives a rat’s ass what the queen or anyone in her royal family says. As Gilles Duceppe says, they’re nothing but a drain on tax payers who’ve never worked a day in their lives, nor have they ever paid taxes. I say austerity for them! In fact, time to do away with them!
![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
re: Jojo Blue blah blah;’ Who gives a . . . Says’ Wednesday evening-29-12-2010
Very Poor
These are opinions which. if they are important to you, PERSONaly and if you think that this is a burning “I don’t know what to think about this attention – i.e.; this attention is not on ME”; and I (that is you) do not have enough life history to know that persons n events outside of your OWN TINY experience may give importance to others without that interest n experience affecting your life {skills or situation}, it would be seen as a kindness to others n to their (our) personal pride n experience as well as care n concern regarding history, knowledge n compassion for others not in your sphere of interest, that you accept this n other unwritten requests to consider more time in actually educating oneself regarding persons n facts of history n other worthwhile learning experiences. One needn’t be, nor even be considered, a monarchist to to be deeply insulted by your gross n indecent statements regarding what the monarch recently said in her yearly statement. Personally, I quite enjoyed same.
Perhaps; the writer could wait until s/he passes the present age of the aforementioned personage before coming out with an opinion the next time of this low n guttural stance.
Thank you, and to all a healthy, happy n safe new year ahead . . .
“Do away with them!” Whoa! Your intemperate hyperbole not only left the topic, but also confused it with another issue. Which calls into question your ability to give fair analysis to the matter, that being the Sovereign’s official duty to the Parliament of Canada. When you say that you “don’t give a rat’s ass” about what the Queen has to say, it is unclear whether you are referring to her in her official capacity or if you are dissing the Queen personally. With nothing to distinguish the Queen from everybody else ” who’ve never worked a day in their lives” one wonders therefore if you hold the person, or the office, or both in such low regard.
In any case, your comments appear thoughtless.
The Governor General’s most important job is to ensure that Canada has a government that can legislate. The GG may recognize any number of parliamentary arrangements, depending on circumstances (relative strength of the parties, willingness to co-operate, urgency of legislation, etc.) only as long as legislation can pass by a majority of votes in the House of Commons. The GG will seek to remedy a legislative impasse by asking the House if there is any coalition which can pass the legislation or, failing that, by calling a general election.
The GG is guided by law, precedent and custom and must use judgement and discernment to deal with governments which from time to time request prorogation or use other procedural tactics to slow or stall legislation. This is not simply a “titular” or “symbolic” office that can perform perfunctorily, which is why the technical sovereignty of the Queen is wholly delegated to the GG who in fact (to answer the question) is imminently qualified to entertain a coalition’s claim that it can pass legislation.
Your words are careless because they confuse the personages of the royal family ( who you apparently don’t like ) with the vital office and duty of the Governor General.
ck Reply:
January 1st, 2011 at 10:41 PM
oh brother!
When you say that you “don’t give a rat’s ass” about what the Queen has to say, it is unclear whether you are referring to her in her official capacity or if you are dissing the Queen personally
How about both? Thought that was pretty self explanatory. Maybe next time I’ll try to include pictures.
And spare me the lecture about the GG’s job. I think he knows how to do his own research and gave it much thought before he said that coalition governments are ‘ok’.
That blubbering blogger almost in a scolding tone strongly suggests (snort) that the GG consult the queen on this matter. The queen has no business in our matters, whatsoever.
But, since you’re giving her legitimacy, I think we could guess, given that there is a coalition running Britain at this time. And don’t bring up that it includes the winning party; it could have also been a Labour – lib-dem coalition as well.
BCahoutec Reply:
January 2nd, 2011 at 1:16 PM
What’s the “sage” part about? Guess I’m gonna need pictures, too. And sorry about the lecture.
ck Reply:
January 2nd, 2011 at 6:27 PM
, I used to be in the greeting card business; I used to design them. My signature was “Sister Sage”. I am no longer in that business, but kept the name for my site.
BCahoutec Reply:
January 2nd, 2011 at 8:52 PM
Ahhh. Makes sense, now.