On 2010-09-24 22:45:28 -0500, Duggy said:   
   > On Sep 25, 4:37 am, "John W. Kennedy"    
   > wrote:   
   >> On Sep 23, 7:40 pm, Duggy  wrote:   
   >>    
   >>> On Sep 24, 9:28 am, "John W. Kennedy"    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>    
   >>>> The UK head of state isn't the executive.   
   >>    
   >>> The head of state is part of the executive.   
   >>    
   >>> All legislation needs to be confirmed by the head of state.   
   >>    
   >>> Sure, it's just procedural these days, but it's still done.   
   >>    
   >> Oh come now, that's sheerest, collectable-grade goalpost moving.   
   >    
   > It's the definition of the executive.   
   >    
   > The English Queen has 3 years to veto any Australian law made by the   
   > government.   
   >    
   > That's executive power.   
   >    
   > She doesn't and she won't... but the power exists.   
   Off topic, but you *could* have left the commonwealth as the Irish    
   pretty much did. But you can take that step if a future monarch attempt    
   to assert power...   
   -K, who isn't going to compare the Australian situation with the US    
   situation pre-1776 because the British situation then was so different.   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32   
    * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)