[QUOTE=Default the Magyar;2237639]So, your main gripe with the U.S Republic, and others I assume, is the divisive politics it creates? [quote]

Yes.

Are you also advancing the idea of more power for a Monarch in state affairs?
If it becomes necessary, sure. Naturally, these powers will be limited strictly and defined by the legislature.

To what standard would you hold the Monarchs actions as being within the interest of the nation?
Well, pretty self explanatory. If they Monarch is using tax money to host large parties and build private castles, then they are obviously acting in their own interests.

I would add that divisive and utterly corrupt politics are also part of Constitutional Monarchy, along the Westminster line at least.
All governments are more or less corrupt.

I also doubt would be solved by Republicanism, but I don't agree (I don't know if you do either) with increased Monarchical power, simply more power for the Lords, the upper house and stricter control over that den of rats in the Commons.
I'm not quite familiar with how the British houses work. A monarch can create a cultural image and represent his or her nation, a monarch is someone I can rally behind without party affiliations. With a president, it's more of a "I'll be here for a couple of years trying to enact bills MY party wants me to, then someone else can do it. And we'll keep doing it until the other party get's in, and then they'll do it too."