She bowed instead of curtsied! Prepare my fainting couch immediately, I am about to have a spell!

/grasps powdered wig

Did she serve Vegemite to the queen?

Fark you Obama, see what you started?

She's being repressed!!!!

Truly, history's greatest monster.

I'm sick of heads of state bowing to royalty. fark royalty, I don't care if it's this lady or Obama doing it, bowing and genuflecting to these inbred twats is disgusting. Nobody should legitimize their crap. Whether it's some backwards jackoff from Saudi Arabia or Dubai or England, no head of state should show any sign of submission to any royalty.

MurphyMurphy: Fark you Obama, see what you started?

Clearly Obama should have curtsied instead of bowing.

Well, in all fairness it was hot enough to boil a monkey's bum.

/The Queen's a good sheila, Bruce, and not at all stuck up.

LectertheChef: I'm sick of heads of state bowing to royalty. fark royalty, I don't care if it's this lady or Obama doing it, bowing and genuflecting to these inbred twats is disgusting. Nobody should legitimize their crap. Whether it's some backwards jackoff from Saudi Arabia or Dubai or England, no head of state should show any sign of submission to any royalty.

Well, technically I think the Head of State for Australia is legally required to show deference to the Queen.

/that shait don't fly here in Amuricah though

jaylectricity: What the fark has the Queen of England ever done to deserve respect besides sit around and look pretty tidy.

She's head of State, not just of the United Kingdom, but also of Canada, Australia, and a bunch of other places. Technically, she's still higher up in the Australian government than the PM.

But the PM is head of government, so her status is high enough that she shouldn't have to bow to the Queen. Or wear a hat. I'm wondering if Margaret Thatcher did either.

Sabyen91: Off with her head! Oh, we are just figureheads being paid to play a part because of who our parents are? Dammit! Well, give her a wet willy!

Um... if you insist

timswar: Well, technically I think the Head of State for Australia is legally required to show deference to the Queen.

Curiously, there seems to be some question about who the Head of State in Austalia is.

The PM is Head of Government.

/The US President is both, which is why we get confused.

LectertheChef: I'm sick of heads of state bowing to royalty. fark royalty, I don't care if it's this lady or Obama doing it, bowing and genuflecting to these inbred twats is disgusting. Nobody should legitimize their crap. Whether it's some backwards jackoff from Saudi Arabia or Dubai or England, no head of state should show any sign of submission to any royalty.

You forgot to add... America! Fark yeah!

I'm familiar with the curtsy....

But what is up with the hat thing? What dress code is that?

Are people going to formal events in evening gowns and such expected to wear a hat?

cuzsis: You forgot to add... America! Fark yeah!

Since the article keeps mentioning the PM's "republican" beliefs, it should be noted that means, government by the people instead of a monarchy, not USA Republican.

Believe it or not, they're basically calling the PM a leftist.

She's a good sheila Bruce, and not at all stuck up.

It's our own little local attempt at a poutrage machine.

The_Sponge: Dwight_Yeast: She's head of State, not just of the United Kingdom, but also of Canada, Australia, and a bunch of other places.


One more reason to appreciate the American Revolution.

I rather like the Queen much more than our latest batch of presidents...

She seems a decent person who is very committed to doing her best at her "job". She also carries a great deal of class.

Her day, even at her current age, is probably busier than most average working adults.

justGreg: She's a pretty nice gal, but she doesn't have a lot to say.

/she has however outlived half of the Beatles

Half of The Who too.

Genevieve Marie: It's generally the people that work for her that have collective heart attacks.

My last protocol officer had previously worked in Buckingham palace. She made a priceless facial expression when I described my role in Iraq as "ablative meat shield."

Genevieve Marie: Dwight_Yeast: timswar: Well, technically I think the Head of State for Australia is legally required to show deference to the Queen.

Curiously, there seems to be some question about who the Head of State in Austalia is.

The PM is Head of Government.

/The US President is both, which is why we get confused.

Exactly. And while I understand all the arguments against inherited privilege, I will say that I think there is a benefit to having someone who acts as head of state who isn't advancing an ideological agenda. The Queen is not allowed to take sides in politics- and as a result, when Britain and the commonwealth is represented at state functions, they're represented by someone who doesn't represent an ideology. There's some benefit to that.

And as for what the Queen has done to show respect- she's been the head of state since she was 25 years old and she's now 84 and still carries out a ridiculous workload.

There is value in continuity.

Genevieve Marie: The WindowLicker: Genevieve Marie: It's generally the people that work for her that have collective heart attacks.

My last protocol officer had previously worked in Buckingham palace. She made a priceless facial expression when I described my role in Iraq as "ablative meat shield."

Heh. Awesome.

It was the same conversation in which I told her that President Karzai's purple hat and animal print jacket looked "pimping." I can't remember which got a better response.

IronMdn: Hey, She is a nice looking gal. I would not mind some time with that......

Eh, watch some video of her, and you wouldn't. Hell, I generally support her, but her voice and mannerisms irk the hell out of me.


Genevieve Marie: Dwight_Yeast: timswar: Well, technically I think the Head of State for Australia is legally required to show deference to the Queen.

Curiously, there seems to be some question about who the Head of State in Austalia is.

The PM is Head of Government.

/The US President is both, which is why we get confused.

Exactly. And while I understand all the arguments against inherited privilege, I will say that I think there is a benefit to having someone who acts as head of state who isn't advancing an ideological agenda. The Queen is not allowed to take sides in politics- and as a result, when Britain and the commonwealth is represented at state functions, they're represented by someone who doesn't represent an ideology. There's some benefit to that.

I also think that it also stops the PMs from getting big heads about their roles - having to know that they're actually not at the top of the food chain, but two rungs lower (Queen and Governor General), means there's always someone they have to defer to, even if it's only a formality. While it's only a theory of mine, I think it would reduce the sort of atmosphere where the head of government can honestly think "When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal".

The queen doesn't mind. She's a nice sheila and not at all stuck up.

Meh, the queen ain't all that anymore.

These days, to save a few quid, she's all the way down turning off the palatial CFL's.

Surely this is the new PMILF. PM of Denmark, Helle Thorning-Schmidt

The_Sponge:
Dwight_Yeast: She's head of State, not just of the United Kingdom, but also of Canada, Australia, and a bunch of other places.

One more reason to appreciate the American Revolution.

Francis... it's not like she writes our laws. She or her kids show up once in a while for a posh visit, which we spend less on than on some stupid canceled helicopter contract, and they make many people happy and proud.

maddermaxx:
I also think that it also stops the PMs from getting big heads about their roles - having to know that they're actually not at the top of the food chain, but two rungs lower (Queen and Governor General), means there's always someone they have to defer to, even if it's only a formality. While it's only a theory of mine, I think it would reduce the sort of atmosphere where the head of government can honestly think "When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal".

That's actually really well-put. 1 internets to you. In theory, the Queen and her representative the Governor-General could block a PM from doing something wildly illegal, or at least force them to do it so brazenly there would be no way to pretend it was legit.

No Such Agency: maddermaxx:
I also think that it also stops the PMs from getting big heads about their roles - having to know that they're actually not at the top of the food chain, but two rungs lower (Queen and Governor General), means there's always someone they have to defer to, even if it's only a formality. While it's only a theory of mine, I think it would reduce the sort of atmosphere where the head of government can honestly think "When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal".

That's actually really well-put. 1 internets to you. In theory, the Queen and her representative the Governor-General could block a PM from doing something wildly illegal, or at least force them to do it so brazenly there would be no way to pretend it was legit.

Note: all 'you's are general.

Yes. That's exactly why constitutional monarchies like the UK, Canada, Australia, and other commonwealth nations are so inherently stable. So long as the symbolic head of state stays out of politics, you can disagree with the political head of state without being accused of treason/non-patriotism. The political head of state gets to be politicky without inherently breaking the country apart along partisan lines.

The Queen (through the Governor-General) stabilizes our nations, and guarantees the succession from one government to the next, and serves as our rallying point in times of crisis. But she has to be absolutely politically neutral in order to do her job properly.

You think she's not doing anything? She's stabilizing sixteen countries by keeping her political views strictly to herself. You try going even a year without ever hinting at your politics. Try it with paparazzi peeking through your glass fishbowl, hoping you, or somebody you know, will slip up.

She's one tough granny. And it was a great surprise to me (I'm Acadian) to realize the degree to which I've come to respect and value my Queen.

tough tits, Lizzie.

Bowing to the queen doesn't seem like a show of respect, it seems like an acknowledgement that she is somehow superior. A show of respect would be politeness, and that she deserves.

"You see a lot, Doctor. But are you strong enough to point that high-powered perception at yourself? What about it? Why don't you look at yourself and write down what you see? Or maybe you're afraid to."

jaylectricity: What the fark has the Queen of England ever done to deserve respect besides sit around and look pretty tidy.

Well, there's that whole WWII thing that Her Majesty participated in.

/I'd hit the Queen before the PM.

Lord Dimwit: (And yes, the PM is appointed by, and works for, Her Majesty - in theory.)

He/she serves at the Queen's pleasure.

Genevieve Marie: Exactly. And while I understand all the arguments against inherited privilege, I will say that I think there is a benefit to having someone who acts as head of state who isn't advancing an ideological agenda. The Queen is not allowed to take sides in politics- and as a result, when Britain and the commonwealth is represented at state functions, they're represented by someone who doesn't represent an ideology.

Yeah, it's why I like the notion of splitting the head of state and head of government duties here in the States. It would also mean that our head of government wouldn't be constantly tied up with ceremonial duties and would have more time to run the country.

Of course, I'd also like to see us move to a parliamentary system where the head of government could be replaced at any point by the legislature, so I'm weird.

Snapper Carr: MurphyMurphy: Fark you Obama, see what you started?

Clearly Obama should have curtsied instead of bowing.

Don't give him any ideas. I'm about convinced that he'd do it for the LULZ at this point.