Constitutionally, we are also a democracy. Constitutionally, we are, in fact, a democratic republic. The U.S. Constitution creates democratic processes for representative government.
Indeed, all these things are irrelevant, because, (1) the terms “republic” and “democracy” do not have single meanings either in society or in law, (2) the notion that “we are a republic, not a democracy,” besides being untrue, has absolutely zero legal or constitutional relevance, (3) the U.S. Constitution does not anywhere refer to a “head of state,” and (4) I specifically referred to the “democratic spirit,” which is not definitionally tied to the constitution.
No the point of my post was to emphasize how stupid your post was. I’m not angry at you just mildly annoyed at your bullshit. When Michael Moore did the same thing it was just as stupid. We have a volunteer military and they are both adults who can join or not if they choose. They shouldn’t be pressured to join because of their father. They shouldn’t be looked down on because they didn’t join any more than my brother or sisters for not joining. They are free to find their own path. If one or both of them did join I would think highly of them but I don’t think badly of them now. I can see criticism of someone like Cheney. I could see criticism if there was a draft and they kept getting deferments. But your post was complete bullshit.
Except that of practically every PM who has served her and noted the depth of her political and constitutional experience and the soundness of her advice.
Remember that fellow who broke into her bedchamber a few years back and chatted with her a while? Holy mackerel, that must’ve been a helluva conversation.
Do you think, perhaps, the drawing down of the British presence in Iraq, more or less despite the wishes of the PM, might have something to do with this?
(I like a little story from the biography of C H Upham, VC*, who apparently spent a long time chatting with the then Queen, HM Elizabeth the Queen Mother as she became, on the occasion of his double investiture. Someone asked what on earth they found to say to each other, and Upham just said that she knew more about horses than anyone he’d ever met, and that’s what they’d been talking about.)
But…the whole OP consists of someone taking a shot at a royal despite the fact that said royal DID join the service and IS going to deploy. If service is noble – which you assert – and taking cheap shots at children of politcal figures is bullshit – which you also assert – then why aren’t you calling bullshit on the OP?
That was the point of my post.
If it’s because you like one political figure but not the other, THAT’S bullshit. If it’s because you can’t understand the parallel, I don’t know what more to say.
It’s a little bit of a different situation, though…Prince Harry isn’t a political figure, exactly, but he IS a member of the royal family, and subject to the priviliges and duties of such. The Bush twins are only relatives of an elected official, and therefore are nothing but private citizens.
ETA: Not that I approve of taking potshots at Prince Harry…I am impressed that he has committed himself to military service.
I didn’t call bullshit on the OP because I don’t feel the need to comment on every post in every thread I read. I have opinions on what he wrote. I chose to comment on your bullshit.
The whole idea of whether the Prince should go to Iraq is a completely different issue than what I commented on. He may be a target. His presence may cause more casualties to British troops than if he didn’t go (I’m not sure if it will happen but it is a valid debate). He was not sheltered from going into military service, neither were the Bush girls. They are all adults who can make their own decisions. Your original comment was stupid and I felt the need to comment on it. That’s all.