Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq'

[J. J.]

She might have meant, "The Crown."

I can understand an American making that mistake.

[J. J.]

She might have meant, "The Crown."

I can understand an American making that mistake.

I find it very likely that an American can make a mistake. Doesn't make it sound any less ridiculous.

She could have said "the government," but that would a different connotation in the US.

[J. J.]

I'm noticing a pattern with J. J. defending every inane thing that should be indefensible which is quite similar to his inability to own up to any erroneous statements or predictions he makes...

No, I would have said "The Crown," or "Her Majesty's Government," or "Her Majesty's Armed Forces."  Getting the terminology wrong, however, does mean that Palin (Sarah or Michael) actually thinks that Elizabeth II, takes off her crown, puts on a helmet, and leads troops into battle (well, not since George II).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ignorance of the terminology, which she shares with most people, does not mean that she doesn't understand that the Queen does not make military decisions.

[J. J.]

J.J., did you read the article? It says Sarah said she would talk to the Queen in order to influence government policy.

And she may have meant "the Crown" and used the wrong phrasing.  The article doesn't say anything about talking to the Queen to influence "the government."  She would, obviously, would talk to "the Crown," to influence government policy; "the Crown" is the government in a corporate sense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm saying she's wrong in phrasing.

[J. J.]

You mean it's not really Her Majesty's Armed Forces?

No they aren't, in the sense that she has no control over when and where they are deployed. Palin was mistaken about this very basic point, and while it may be fine for the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska to be unaware of the role that the monarch plays in the government of one of America's most important allies, it's not at all fine for the Vice President of the United States to be unaware of this.

Actually it is "Her Majesty's Armed Forces," though the person of the sovereign has no role in policy:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Armed_Forces

I think Palin meant to say "the Crown," i.e. the government of the day (the politicians supported by a plurality of the Commons) that exercises the royal prerogative.

[J. J.]

You mean it's not really Her Majesty's Armed Forces?

No they aren't, in the sense that she has no control over when and where they are deployed. Palin was mistaken about this very basic point, and while it may be fine for the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska to be unaware of the role that the monarch plays in the government of one of America's most important allies, it's not at all fine for the Vice President of the United States to be unaware of this.

Actually it is "Her Majesty's Armed Forces," though the person of the sovereign has no role in policy:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Armed_Forces

I think Palin meant to say "the Crown," i.e. the government of the day (the politicians supported by a plurality of the Commons) that exercises the royal prerogative.

The woman's a doofus...accept it and move on.

I think that is a difference between an American misusing the terminology (which still makes her a doofus, BTW), and an American thinking Elizabeth II is the political leader of the UK who makes policy.

I can remember a post from one your fellow countrymen, er, excuse me, "mates," Hugh, about "gridiron."  I've never heard American football called that by anyone in the US, but that didn't make him an idiot for using the term wrongly ("gridiron," can refer to the field on which the game is played).

And "mate," has a very different connotation that how you would use it.  That doesn't make you an idiot either.

[J. J.]

I think that is a difference between an American misusing the terminology (which still makes her a doofus, BTW), and an American thinking Elizabeth II is the political leader of the UK who makes policy.

Why do you seem so convinced it wasn't the latter in Palin's case?  That's by far the likelier scenario.

She didn't say that she'd invite the Queen over or she'd be meeting with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, or that she'd sit down with the Queen.  The quote was "continue to have an open dialogue" with the Queen.

[J. J.]

Oh, so she wanted to have a conversation with the Queen.  Totally different.

An open dialogue with the Crown, would make sense.   If I wanted to talk to Elizabeth II, I wouldn't use the word "dialogue."

Sorry, but it takes more than a little bit of morphing to change "continue to have an open dialogue" with the Queen (presumably meaning the Crown), into "Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq."

[J. J.]

'The Crown' is a formal term that is archaic in everyday usage.

And it appears in my less than 30 year old college textbook.

If you use the term "the government," what is generally meant by that?

[J. J.]

And it appears in my less than 30 year old college textbook.

I would expect formal terms to appear in textbooks. They have a habit of doing that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Either the government of the day in a political sense, or central government in general (including civil service functionaries).

In the US, "the government" almost never refers to the "government of the day."  It refers to all aspects of the governing body, down to the local level and would include low level civil servants, like the clerk at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

I think Palin just used the wrong word.  And yes, she should be criticized for that, but let's morph it into 'Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq.'