Speaking of "royalty"...I've lived in the USA (for ten years), and I've frequently visited the USA, and I can state this:

The status of the President in the USA is far closer to "royalty"...or to a sort of demigod...than is the status of the Queen in countries such as England or Canada. Is there a day when his face is not in the media, making some grand statement of dire importance?

Americans are obsessed and fixated upon their chief executive to a point that I consider unrealistic and dangerous. He accordingly has tremendous power and influence on people's minds.

This is not the case with the Queen of England or with the other old monarchies in countries like Holland or Spain or wherever else in Europe you could choose to mention. They are merely affectionately regarded holdovers of an old and familiar tradition...not political powerbrokers, and their faces are just occasionally in the media, since they really hold little or no power.

Therefore, who has "royalty" with teeth? I submit that the USA does. (And so does Iraq, ironically.) Fortunately, the "king" of the USA is retired after 4 to 8 years of omnipotent and grandiose one-man rule, but then, by golly, along comes another one, and the whole damn thing starts all over again! Your "kings" are also supposed to get the approval of Congress before going to war, but they have gotten around that repeatedly by fighting wars without declaring war officially. When is a war not a war? When Congress won't come onside. Clever, clever...and unscrupulous.

"Hail to the Chief!" (Hail Caesar!)

- LH