Green potatoes and bargains, that is.
You know, the number of things that I find myself complicating really grows rather large. I've made the supermarket my latest paramour; commerce, especially banal commerce, is ever so thrilling and complicated. You know that crazy guy who walks around the supermarket a lot, talking to himself, looking at things, putting them away, then coming back, going away, and eventually leaving either purchasing a) tubers b) dairy product or c) nothing? I'm that guy.
The economic and moral opportunities (starvational challenges, more like) presented to me in supermarkets are somewhat absorbing. I've stood in front of a dairy section for about half an hour once, debating silently, and sometimes not so silently, what kind of soy juice to buy (if indeed, anything at all is purchased).
Minor changes to the place. I'm wondering what to do as regards archives; given that i've got more visitors to this place (hullo!), I'm thinking about changing the availability of archives. However, that seems to involve a bit too much effort on my behalf, and frankly, at time of printing (how marvellously quaint), I don't care. My one advice is not read too far back, lest you wish your senses assaulted.
Goddamn, I was emo back then. And a terrible writer. That must be how Goethe felt.
I kid, I kid. I'm sure Goethe was better than that. He was German, and I am not.
Resource-rich: or the intoxication. I like it when money is given in physical form. I love the rich (entendres abound) corporeal feel, the usefulness of its instrumentalism. It even distracted from thinking about those sexy kids...
For about 10 seconds. Then it came back.
I think i've had a long day, though I very much doubt it. I'll say this much: smart people are rad. Maximal trust signals maximal return, though i'm inclined not to play that with an economics student. Or me.
I have something else (to my standards, oddly disturbing. I'll venture that others probably find it confusing, but not dangerous. It's funny that things that are truly disturbing and dangerous is what I indulge in, and I refuse to give these up. Yet, i'll gladly embark on half-hearted crusades [A weak Pope, you see] to eradicate my more wholesome desires) to write about. It's about a little encounter I had with tomatoes.
This week sure has me with a lot of run-ins with the nightshade family.
I've said too much, and not all of it well enough. I'll be good.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Saturday, April 05, 2008
Shit be going down in Harare, Sir
Good news!
Mugabe (and his party, more accurately) recently lost control of Zimbabwe's parliament, ceding control to the MDC. Huzzah! Now, i'm not one to get theological on you, but may he rot in Hell. Depressingly odious man.
In other news, my philosophy of law lecturer (The awesome Rick Benitez, or rb, for short [NB: his abbreviation, not mine]) actually used the word theosophical in class! Properly, even! The heart sings.
Mugabe (and his party, more accurately) recently lost control of Zimbabwe's parliament, ceding control to the MDC. Huzzah! Now, i'm not one to get theological on you, but may he rot in Hell. Depressingly odious man.
In other news, my philosophy of law lecturer (The awesome Rick Benitez, or rb, for short [NB: his abbreviation, not mine]) actually used the word theosophical in class! Properly, even! The heart sings.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
He spoke the words into his lips
what happened
There exist, in the course of human life, innumerable little verities that are deeply vexing to one's person that nobody mentions. To mention them would be a moot point; it would be as if to get annoyed at the sky being blue or grass being green.
However, these lilliputian bastards can build up to the point wherein you just want to go, 'Goddamn, I am so fucking sick and tired of the sky being blue or grass being green all the goddamn time.'
A better question would be probably be to ask, 'What are verities, and what are not?' But that's a different question, for a different night.
There exist, in the course of human life, innumerable little verities that are deeply vexing to one's person that nobody mentions. To mention them would be a moot point; it would be as if to get annoyed at the sky being blue or grass being green.
However, these lilliputian bastards can build up to the point wherein you just want to go, 'Goddamn, I am so fucking sick and tired of the sky being blue or grass being green all the goddamn time.'
A better question would be probably be to ask, 'What are verities, and what are not?' But that's a different question, for a different night.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
David Gerrold (Marker)
"We don't necessarily want accurate maps, we want useful ones. But accuracy is extraordinarily useful."
Waaaagh, he gets it. Can you believe this is also the guy who wrote The Trouble With Tribbles?! Crazy Awesome. Will obtain novels to read.
Waaaagh, he gets it. Can you believe this is also the guy who wrote The Trouble With Tribbles?! Crazy Awesome. Will obtain novels to read.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Humorous Errata
Let us whack mightily upon our enemy as the oaken staff assaults an unwary pinata! All for the chocolatey treasures within!
This time I'm with you 100 percent, Javier.
I don't want to imagine the amount of time and effort required to produce this. God Only Knows..
This time I'm with you 100 percent, Javier.
I don't want to imagine the amount of time and effort required to produce this. God Only Knows..
This quote nearly made me cry
In 1784 the provision banning slavery was narrowly defeated. Had one representative (John Beatty of New Jersey), sick and confined to his lodging, been present, the vote would have been different.
"Thus," Jefferson later reflected, "we see the fate of millions unborn hanging on the tongue of one man, and heaven was silent in that awful moment."
"Thus," Jefferson later reflected, "we see the fate of millions unborn hanging on the tongue of one man, and heaven was silent in that awful moment."
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Mary, carry your shame
Well past all those eyes across the avenue
Running across this (This actually came up in a Boston Legal episode as well, so go figure), I came across some interesting legal trivia, more specifically relating to the Roth v. United States case. It's a somewhat important case in First Amendment law, and it's a sweet interpretation too, from the wonderful Mr. Brennan:
Reading on, I was strangely confused that there were dissenting opinions on such a smart ruling. Turns out, the dissenters (Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas) argued the ruling didn't go far enough; they argued that the First protected all obscene material. Impressive, yes?
Additional trivia: Heterochromia is nifty.
Also, if you're interested, Slate is hiring general question answerers.
Running across this (This actually came up in a Boston Legal episode as well, so go figure), I came across some interesting legal trivia, more specifically relating to the Roth v. United States case. It's a somewhat important case in First Amendment law, and it's a sweet interpretation too, from the wonderful Mr. Brennan:
Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but more strictly defines what is considered "obscene".
Reading on, I was strangely confused that there were dissenting opinions on such a smart ruling. Turns out, the dissenters (Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas) argued the ruling didn't go far enough; they argued that the First protected all obscene material. Impressive, yes?
Additional trivia: Heterochromia is nifty.
Also, if you're interested, Slate is hiring general question answerers.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Pushing the fat man
And why apparently now I have trouble doing it.
Traditional trolley case: Oncoming trolley. Lever for you. If you pull, kill 1 save 5. Do nothing, kill 5 save 1.
The fat man case: Trolley oncoming. Pushing fat man will stop trolley saving 5 lives, but kill the fat man.
Consequentially, the cases have the same effects. 1 down, 5 up.
But why I can't push the fat man is this: I actively participate in his death. With the traditional trolley case, the one person on their own on the tracks has assumed some element of risk by being on the tracks; (regardless of whether they've actually assumed responsibility for taking said danger). However, with the fat man, I take his position from a level that has no risk to one that is actively fatal towards him.
Musing about deontological rights. Wonder if this intuition matters all that much. Wonder what Caroline would say about this...
Traditional trolley case: Oncoming trolley. Lever for you. If you pull, kill 1 save 5. Do nothing, kill 5 save 1.
The fat man case: Trolley oncoming. Pushing fat man will stop trolley saving 5 lives, but kill the fat man.
Consequentially, the cases have the same effects. 1 down, 5 up.
But why I can't push the fat man is this: I actively participate in his death. With the traditional trolley case, the one person on their own on the tracks has assumed some element of risk by being on the tracks; (regardless of whether they've actually assumed responsibility for taking said danger). However, with the fat man, I take his position from a level that has no risk to one that is actively fatal towards him.
Musing about deontological rights. Wonder if this intuition matters all that much. Wonder what Caroline would say about this...
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Beetroot dip motherfucker
Do you stock it?!
Surprisingly, not really. Strange, really, that one would only find such few choices of beetroot/beetroot-themed dip in the wonderful world that is the Western marketplace today.
Have taken a liking to dips and bread recently. I don't know what hasn't possessed me to do so till now. Crazy, n'est-ce pas?
I don't know whether that's grammatically correct. More to the point, I don't care.
That was one of the things I find seriously frustrating about learning other languages. Fundamentally, grammar structures can be seriously, seriously different (e.g. My name is example vs. I am(je, itself conjugated)) named/appended(m'appelle) example) and native speakers are completely used to it. What may sound strange is basically culturally conditioned.
In other words, lots of memorisation. Frustrating, nevertheless.
This was inspired by late-night SBS and kittens. In a french movie, obviously.
Surprisingly, not really. Strange, really, that one would only find such few choices of beetroot/beetroot-themed dip in the wonderful world that is the Western marketplace today.
Have taken a liking to dips and bread recently. I don't know what hasn't possessed me to do so till now. Crazy, n'est-ce pas?
I don't know whether that's grammatically correct. More to the point, I don't care.
That was one of the things I find seriously frustrating about learning other languages. Fundamentally, grammar structures can be seriously, seriously different (e.g. My name is example vs. I am(je, itself conjugated)) named/appended(m'appelle) example) and native speakers are completely used to it. What may sound strange is basically culturally conditioned.
In other words, lots of memorisation. Frustrating, nevertheless.
This was inspired by late-night SBS and kittens. In a french movie, obviously.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Breaking the law shouldn't be a crime.
Well, not all the time.
Or: A plausible defense against random fellatio on the street?
For you see, as per Shaw's riposte ("Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.") to the golden rule, (of which there exist many formulations; the most trite being "He who has the gold, makes the rules" to the more conventional "do to others what you would have them do to you") a more holistic approach to the ethic of reciprocity is required.
A better approach may in fact involve doing unto others as you would think they would want done to them. This helps avoid the differing tastes problem, but yet it overlooks a crucial fact: the lack of easily obtainable information as regarding taste.
This is where the random fellatio on the street comes in (that was a terrible pun). I have it on highly, highly reputable sources that this problem is reaching epidemic proportions. It most likely is the single greatest threat to our productivity (working families) and the glorious new epoch under the RUDDVOLUTION (Party policy dictates it must always be in bold, and always in capitals. Because that is the nature of this change.)
Now, how best can we balance the ethical dilemma of allowing the freedom of random fellatio on the street, with the dangerous possibility of it spiralling out of control? Simple: Large enough data sets. I propose that their be a nationwide census of random fellation, in order to determine whether, we, as a nation, are prepared to abide and tolerate random strangers giving us oral sex. It will be a taxpayer-funded revolution of epic proportions.
And of course, the revolution will be televised.
Or: A plausible defense against random fellatio on the street?
For you see, as per Shaw's riposte ("Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.") to the golden rule, (of which there exist many formulations; the most trite being "He who has the gold, makes the rules" to the more conventional "do to others what you would have them do to you") a more holistic approach to the ethic of reciprocity is required.
A better approach may in fact involve doing unto others as you would think they would want done to them. This helps avoid the differing tastes problem, but yet it overlooks a crucial fact: the lack of easily obtainable information as regarding taste.
This is where the random fellatio on the street comes in (that was a terrible pun). I have it on highly, highly reputable sources that this problem is reaching epidemic proportions. It most likely is the single greatest threat to our productivity (working families) and the glorious new epoch under the RUDDVOLUTION (Party policy dictates it must always be in bold, and always in capitals. Because that is the nature of this change.)
Now, how best can we balance the ethical dilemma of allowing the freedom of random fellatio on the street, with the dangerous possibility of it spiralling out of control? Simple: Large enough data sets. I propose that their be a nationwide census of random fellation, in order to determine whether, we, as a nation, are prepared to abide and tolerate random strangers giving us oral sex. It will be a taxpayer-funded revolution of epic proportions.
And of course, the revolution will be televised.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
I'll get the plates out, cause you got served!
Yeah, we gotta drop these fools!
Rawk!
Advance wars: Dual Strike is freaking awesome. When somebody actually says owned in the game, awesome.
You know how the DS is basically full of jangly, fun pop? Dual Strike is that kickass exception. The music alone could be keep me going for days, not to mention the life-addicting gameplay. Lots of uptempo, dance-esque, surprisingly layered percussion, with scratches thrown in places for good measure. Atleast one other person agrees with me, as I'm downloading the torrent of the music of him/her as I write this. Hopefully, they'll agree with me for atleast the next 4 days, or however long the damn things takes to finish.
More to say on the DS itself, but I've got atleast a metric weeks of astonishment loaded on it currently, and my head is near asplosion point. So look out for that!
Rawk!
Advance wars: Dual Strike is freaking awesome. When somebody actually says owned in the game, awesome.
You know how the DS is basically full of jangly, fun pop? Dual Strike is that kickass exception. The music alone could be keep me going for days, not to mention the life-addicting gameplay. Lots of uptempo, dance-esque, surprisingly layered percussion, with scratches thrown in places for good measure. Atleast one other person agrees with me, as I'm downloading the torrent of the music of him/her as I write this. Hopefully, they'll agree with me for atleast the next 4 days, or however long the damn things takes to finish.
More to say on the DS itself, but I've got atleast a metric weeks of astonishment loaded on it currently, and my head is near asplosion point. So look out for that!
Sunday, January 27, 2008
We should shine a light on, a light on
And the book of right-on's right-on, it was right-on
I WANT ONE
Good couple of days. BDO was somewhat subdued (why Bjork why), joanna was awesome to the max.
A coupla weeks ago, talking things over with Oliver and some of his fairly rad friends, topics inevitably turned over to why people suck/knowledge about things. Some people sort of said that if they don't know something about something, they just tend to sit quietly and let it pass over their heads.
I do not. I mentioned that if I don't know something about something (and it sufficiently piques my curiousity) I will go and research the shit out of it. I will read as much possible and learn about the damn topic within a reasonable (what's reasonable you say? I'll let the courts decide on that) period of time. The funny thing is, I remarked, even after spending all that time and effort learning, i'm usually not that much better[less confused/more decided] off then when I started.
Which brings me to my question: Why am I such a damn fool?
Much unlike this one, who's probably one of the my favourite people ever. It makes me cry when you learn about that much goodness.
On a side note, that has to be one of the most entertaining wiki articles I've ever read. I actually want to read it the entire way through and not just skim/skip parts of it; i've read it multiple times and still find it engrossing. Kudos to the person/s who collaborated on it. I'm sure Erdos would appreciate it.
I WANT ONE
Good couple of days. BDO was somewhat subdued (why Bjork why), joanna was awesome to the max.
A coupla weeks ago, talking things over with Oliver and some of his fairly rad friends, topics inevitably turned over to why people suck/knowledge about things. Some people sort of said that if they don't know something about something, they just tend to sit quietly and let it pass over their heads.
I do not. I mentioned that if I don't know something about something (and it sufficiently piques my curiousity) I will go and research the shit out of it. I will read as much possible and learn about the damn topic within a reasonable (what's reasonable you say? I'll let the courts decide on that) period of time. The funny thing is, I remarked, even after spending all that time and effort learning, i'm usually not that much better[less confused/more decided] off then when I started.
Which brings me to my question: Why am I such a damn fool?
Much unlike this one, who's probably one of the my favourite people ever. It makes me cry when you learn about that much goodness.
On a side note, that has to be one of the most entertaining wiki articles I've ever read. I actually want to read it the entire way through and not just skim/skip parts of it; i've read it multiple times and still find it engrossing. Kudos to the person/s who collaborated on it. I'm sure Erdos would appreciate it.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
A recap, of sorts
Saturday January 5 (All subsequent days are in chronological order)
Brian Wilson at the Domain. It was grand. Must remember to marry woman in polka dot dress. Watch out for (potential) husband.
Sunday
Spank Rock:
"It's party music." "No consequences." "Just ass-shaking shit." "Why you hating?" "Stop thinking so hard."
Monday
Andrew Bird was great. Really great. I also wish to marry him. He would be a most excellent suitor.
Tuesday
Brian Wilson
GODDAMN FUCKING AWESOME. 25 BUCKS?! Fucking, 25 BUCKS FOR THAT MUCH FUCKING COOLNESS!? Jesus.
Wednesday
Bobs. I love vodka. Makes me feel great. Not even sleepy.
Thursday
Oliviers film. I look forward to Tropfest and his subsequent placings. Should be good. Also, my maelstrom (ignore the damn umlaut) that is my mind produces some nice shit. I keep forgetting just how entertaining I really am sometimes. Effortful though. Maybe, I have something to say on that matter. (Turns out, I don't. Go figure.)
Friday
Fullhouse. Always lovely. Chiquis for poker (Lost. I did well last week, counts?). I hope I don't end up being too much of a dick, even if I'm good at making it something.
Saturday
Jazz in the Domain. Lordy, it was crowded. More than the festival first night.
Sunday
Missed out on tickets to Sufjan. Went to construct instead. "I liked it a lot, despite the fact that it was so abstractly pretentious." (why am I quoting myself now??)
Monday (my birthday)
Slept in. Had a lot of nice pizza. Nice things happened (Support/fuck the police! Drums in the park at 3 in the morn was cool. Really cool. I dig) I wish I could afford good vodka. ALL THE GODDAMN TIME
It could be summed up in one, very unique way:
Suck my battleship/sunk my cock
Brian Wilson at the Domain. It was grand. Must remember to marry woman in polka dot dress. Watch out for (potential) husband.
Sunday
Spank Rock:
"It's party music." "No consequences." "Just ass-shaking shit." "Why you hating?" "Stop thinking so hard."
Monday
Andrew Bird was great. Really great. I also wish to marry him. He would be a most excellent suitor.
Tuesday
Brian Wilson
GODDAMN FUCKING AWESOME. 25 BUCKS?! Fucking, 25 BUCKS FOR THAT MUCH FUCKING COOLNESS!? Jesus.
Wednesday
Bobs. I love vodka. Makes me feel great. Not even sleepy.
Thursday
Oliviers film. I look forward to Tropfest and his subsequent placings. Should be good. Also, my maelstrom (ignore the damn umlaut) that is my mind produces some nice shit. I keep forgetting just how entertaining I really am sometimes. Effortful though. Maybe, I have something to say on that matter. (Turns out, I don't. Go figure.)
Friday
Fullhouse. Always lovely. Chiquis for poker (Lost. I did well last week, counts?). I hope I don't end up being too much of a dick, even if I'm good at making it something.
Saturday
Jazz in the Domain. Lordy, it was crowded. More than the festival first night.
Sunday
Missed out on tickets to Sufjan. Went to construct instead. "I liked it a lot, despite the fact that it was so abstractly pretentious." (why am I quoting myself now??)
Monday (my birthday)
Slept in. Had a lot of nice pizza. Nice things happened (Support/fuck the police! Drums in the park at 3 in the morn was cool. Really cool. I dig) I wish I could afford good vodka. ALL THE GODDAMN TIME
It could be summed up in one, very unique way:
Suck my battleship/sunk my cock
Thursday, January 10, 2008
I think Machiavelli would understand
Life is mostly froth and bubble;
Two things stand like stone:—
Kindness in another’s trouble,
Courage in our own.
END COMMUNIQUE
BEGIN COMMUNIQUE
My boobs aren't cut out for this cold weather. They're too new.
Two things stand like stone:—
Kindness in another’s trouble,
Courage in our own.
END COMMUNIQUE
BEGIN COMMUNIQUE
My boobs aren't cut out for this cold weather. They're too new.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Good Vibrations drive out bad juju
What do you think it's about?
Past few days have been good, yeah. I finished On The Road. Depends who you ask, yeah.
OR
"Yes! Yes! Yes!"
Je ne sais pas, eh?
It's really sort of that whole concept of craft and creativity. "That's not writing, it's typing."
Methinks someone is jealous.
Andrew Byrd is a wonderful, wonderful man. I still hold to the theory that he stole the throat of a warbler. There exists now, a poor, lonely, quiet, warbler, hoping to whistle.
I think I have some things to write. Facts, even.
Past few days have been good, yeah. I finished On The Road. Depends who you ask, yeah.
OR
"Yes! Yes! Yes!"
Je ne sais pas, eh?
It's really sort of that whole concept of craft and creativity. "That's not writing, it's typing."
Methinks someone is jealous.
Andrew Byrd is a wonderful, wonderful man. I still hold to the theory that he stole the throat of a warbler. There exists now, a poor, lonely, quiet, warbler, hoping to whistle.
I think I have some things to write. Facts, even.
Sunday, January 06, 2008
I would blog right now
But I have to go soon, and I want to watch Whose Line. So, in an imitation of I might consider my favourite medium, this post will be delivered in episodic fits.
(It's aptly ironic the writer's strike is on.)
The title is:
"Good vibrations drive out bad juju"
More to come later!
(It's aptly ironic the writer's strike is on.)
The title is:
"Good vibrations drive out bad juju"
More to come later!
Scientists are stumped
“ The universe is like a safe to which there is a combination. But the combination is locked up in the safe. ”
“ ...Fuck. ”
One of these quotes is real! Can you guess which one?
| Peter De Vries |
“ ...Fuck. ”
| Peter De Vries |
One of these quotes is real! Can you guess which one?
This explains a lot
Maybe not everyone needs a "chain of logical arguments" to convince them that God exists? Or of other things - I don't have any logical arguments to convince me that my husband loves me. Logically, it's just as likely that having and raising children is very very important to him, and he believes that I will be an excellent mother, and so he wants to take good care of me and make me happy so that I will help him raise children. That could, potentially, be indistinguishable from him actually loving me, but still I believe that he does love me.
I don't think I love any of you. It's all just a series of giant coincidences, you sneaky bastards.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Why I love Slashdot and you won't care
On the contrary, the Prime Minister in a Westminster style system has much more power than the President of the USA, because the PM fully controls the legislative agenda.
In the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, laws that spend public money or raise taxes must be accompanied by a "Royal Recommendation". Since the Monarch of each country with respect to the exercise of the Royal Prerogative has been an automaton since at least 1936 (and for hundreds of years with respect to the UK and its legal predecessors), acting only on the advice of the Prime Minister, this means that the PM has a veto on whether Parliament can even consider most important bills. Ireland and India have similar rules, but have (appointed) Presidents instead of a (heridtary) Queen and (appointed) Governor-General.
This is Section 56 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (current version): "A vote, resolution, or proposed law for the appropriation of revenue or moneys shall not be passed unless the purpose of the appropriation has in the same session been recommended by message of the Governor-General to the House in which the proposal originated." The Senate and House of Representatives both have rules and standing orders forbidding the debate of votes, resolutions or proposed laws that may not be passed, and the President or Speaker enforces these assiduously.
Moreover, in all of these countries except the UK, either the Royal Assent can be deferred, or the Proclamation can be deferred, in the event Parliament passes a Bill that the Prime Minister does not want. In the UK, the Royal Assent has been automatic and has not involved the Monarch or the Prime Minister since the early Victorian era; Proclamation is not a feature of the UK system -- an Act of Parliament that receives Royal Assent becomes law immediately (or at a future date fixed in the Act itself). It is pretty clear that if it became necessary, the Prime Minister could constitutionally insist that "the Queen withhold Royal Assent in order to consider the Bill" ("la Reyne s'avisera", is the Norman French formalization), which in practice would mean sending a letter to the Department of Constitutional Affairs and the Clerks of both Houses of Parliament.
This is described in Sections 58 (Royal Aseent) and 60 (Proclamation) of the Australian Constitution.
Finally Section 59 of the Australian Constitution uniquely retains the power of Disallowance (it was abolished with respect to Canada and New Zealand, and never existed in the United Kingdom). (It reads: "The Queen may disallow any law within one year from the Governor-General's assent, and such disallowance on being made known by the Governor-General by speech or message to each of the Houses of the Parliament, or by Proclamation, shall annul the law from the day when the disallowance is so made known.")
In effect, these tools represent a Prime Ministerial veto over legislation, available even if the majority of Parliament supports a bill.
Section 59 might actually be used by the new government. It is normally considered a political mistake to do so, but since the campaign dealt with legislation forced through at the end of the Howard premiership, it is plausible that the new Prime Minister can claim an electoral mandate to exercise the power.
In short, the veto powers of a Westminster-style Prime Minister far exceed those of the President, who must veto or not within a short period of time, and whose veto can be overturned by Parliament.
In the Westminster system, the only remedy for Parliament is to refuse to pass the bills the PM actually wants, or to withhold confidence in the government (by declaration of no confidence, or the defeat of a supply bill), which likely would trigger an election. However in that case it is the PM who decides whether to name a replacement, try to secure confidence with a new set of ministers, or set an election date. The Monarch or Governor is expected to act like an automaton in this regard too.
The only two cases in the past few hundred years where this did not happen (King-Byng and Whitlam-Kerr) led to heavy restrictions on the Crown (King-Byng led to the Statue of Westminster, ultimately; Whitlam-Kerr had a less dramatic aftermath but did result in a revision of the rules of the Senate with respect to blocking supply and the convention that the Governor General serves only during the Queen of Australia's pleasure, and that may be tested ONLY through the Prime Minister) and both led to a more or less disgraced Governor-General. In other words, the Prime Minister always wins, especially if he enjoys a majority in the House of Commons/Representatives.
The last British Monarch who refused to act on the advice of the Prime Minister was beheaded.
The last British Monarch who exercised Royal Prerogative without first securing the formal advice of the Prime Minister was forced to abdicate and leave the country.
Since the Prime Minister typically sits in Parliament, can directly influence the progress of legislation within the rules of the House of which he is a member, and enjoys greater party discipline (usually thanks to selecting even junior members of the Ministry from Parliament), these powers are rarely needed. Cohabitation is unusual in Westminster systems; it is commonplace in the USA.
In fact, the President of the USA is much weaker than most heads of government of systems in which a president is given a personal mandate. In France and Germany, for example, the President (or Chancellor in Germany) has greater influence over the process of legislation both formally (various recommendation systems, and stronger vetos) and through the power of patronage appointments.
The President of the USA has enormous power with respect to firing department heads and members of his Cabinet, but is constrained in the upside of patronage since the Senate must approve of most senior appointments. That approval is occasionally embarrassing to the President (and prospective appointees) and may not always be forthcoming, particularly when the appointment is an overt payback to a former member of Congress for showing loyalty in pursuit of a legislative agenda (e.g. John Ashcroft). No such review exists in the Westminster system, or in France, and the legislature's reviews and confirmations in Germany, Italy and Israel (as examples) are tepid to the point of being pro forma.
In fact, I can think of no area in which the President of the United States is formally more powerful than a Prime Minister in any European state other than Liechtenstein. It's just that the exercise of his or her restricted set of powers can be formidable, since the United States is such a large economic, political and military superpower internationally and domestically, so the President seems much more powerful than other executive heads of government.
*sniff* Wasn't that beautiful? How many places do you know can give you an indepth look into the Australian Federal Constitutional law and parliamentary procedure, comparative and historical analysis with other parliamentary systems AND backed up with examples? All in the one, surprisingly easy to understand (atleast for me) breath?
I want to marry Slashdot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)