brogan77 said:
lol you're such a tool sometimes slidey. you google so much shit and then want to argue semantics.
you said wikipedia originally, see...right there:
who gives a fuck if u later edited and put the constitution in, i wasn't referring to that...and the fact remains the queen doesn't decide anymore in practice...she approves.
and if you had've read the wikipedia article properly, you would've seen an entire section on it...see..."Method of appointment"...which goes through all the wanky nuances of it:
argue about the meaning of decides if you want but in the truest sense of the word, the Prime Minister "decides" who the Governor General should be from amongst the suitable candidates and then presents this selection to the Monarch who officially "approves" or "appoints" the individual selected to the position.
Wank wank wank i win the semantics wank.
Um, I switched to the Governor General's site instead because wikipedia isn't 100% reliable as a primary source. Specifically that bit you bolded isn't sourced.
The GG's site says this: "The Governor-General is appointed by The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister."
Which does not really imply your wikipedia-based claim that "the queen doesn't decide anymore in practice...she approves."
I mean, I'm willing to accept that the Queen is somehow constitutionally bound to act entirely on the advice of the PM, but I'm not just going to do so because you have a spack at me not completely adhering to wikipedia's interpretation of things.
Conclusion: cool the fuck off.