 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen!
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 04:33 AM After 70 years on the throne Her Majesty The Queen still radiates joy. It’s impossible to watch this lovely moment without a big grin. God save the Queen, long may she reign. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 04:41 AM Well I can endure all the hoo-ha without breaking a grin. You'd think there was nothing else going on in the world. I can't look at Camilla without thinking about the disgraceful way that the firm treated the naive Diana. All highly disreputable, and the Queen played her part in it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 Feb 22 - 05:12 AM The sooner that Disney take over the management of the Royals, the sooner we will all start to benefit from them :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:12 AM Frankly, my dears, I don’t give a damn… |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:12 AM A great number of people disagree with you I'm afraid! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:18 AM I think an awful lot more are like Dave... I still have my "Stuff the Jubilee" badge from 1976/1977 (her silver jobbie) which I wore with pride. I accidentally left it on when Mrs Steve and I saw the priest just before our wedding and got a funny look. (Yes, I still hadn't shaken off all the Catholic nonsense...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Donuel Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:57 AM Queen Camilla will be a hoot. Long live the Camel |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 07:27 AM I don't care what you lefties think, I look forward to all of the celebrations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Raggytash Date: 06 Feb 22 - 07:33 AM Some of us have more self respect than to be so syncophantic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 08:11 AM Camilla has worked tirelessly for the Queen & without drama or running to the media. She deserves this & its a fitting gesture from the Queen to mark her Jubilee |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Feb 22 - 09:29 AM Platinum seems a boring sort of Name for a jubilee, compared to Silvrt, Gold or Diamond. I'd not be surprised if she's still here for an 80th - that would be an Oak Jubilee. In an odd way that sounds a lot more stylish than Platinum. Maybe they'd plant lots of trees to mark it. Charles would like that. I've never understood why it is that a reigning King's partner is Queen, but a reigning Queen's is never a King. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 Feb 22 - 09:43 AM Camilla will be Queen Consort so they say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 10:06 AM Well she was certainly "consorting" with Charles in a rather intimate manner before and after he married Lady Di. Diana knew it but went ahead, in her naivety, with the doomed marriage anyway. Charlie Boy apparently told Diana that he wasn't prepared to be the only Prince of Wales in history never to have had a mistress. The Queen knew all about it and Phil The Cheeky Greek actually encouraged Charles to have the affair. So these are the people using our money to live entitled and disreputable lives, away from most decent people's sense of what is moral. Good luck to you sycophants. You must be the same kind of people who think that Boris is just a bit of an OK Jack the lad.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 06 Feb 22 - 10:17 AM Bully for the Queen. I'd like to see you naysayers do *any* public job for 70 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Feb 22 - 10:22 AM It seems suitable to find that kind of news via Yahoo. “Queen consort” is a title given to a woman who becomes queen via marriage to the king, while Queen Elizabeth, who became Queen at 25 when her father King George VI passed, is known as queen regnant. "Regnant" looked like a typo, but I guess not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 11:09 AM King George VI didn't pass, he died. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Charmion Date: 06 Feb 22 - 11:47 AM Medieval law, not parliamentary rules, Stilly. Parliament merely codified an inheritance system that dates from the Norman conquest. When her father took the throne, Princess Elizabeth (as she then was) became the "heir presumptive", to be pushed aside automatically if her parents ever had a male child. For the record, Britain abolished the preference for male heirs only a very few years ago. In the first scene of Shakespeare's "Henry V", the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely have a learned discussion of Salic law, in which "mulieres ne succedant" [women don't inherit], and how it bars Henry from being King of France because his right to the throne comes from his mother. The same law was responsible for the civil war that broke out after Henry I died. He had named Matilda, his only surviving child as his heir, but the nobles who ran England preferred her cousin Stephen of Blois -- cue the Anarchy. Of course, this issue was topical in Shakespeare's own time because of, y'know, Good Queen Bess, and her obvious reluctance to marry and have children. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Charmion Date: 06 Feb 22 - 11:51 AM As a Canadian, I approve of the Queen and would rather have Charles as her successor than any politician currently treading the boards. The monarch as Head of State is one of the factors that make Canadian politics less than entirely poisonous. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Feb 22 - 11:52 AM Take it up with Yahoo, I just quoted it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Feb 22 - 12:07 PM Rules about such tihings get adjusted, and presented as being traditional even when they've only just been invented . The term "Queen Consort" has never been used for ay previous partners of Kings. Nor has Princess Consort. Prince Albert was the only partner of a queens regnant to be known as Prince Consort, and of coirse Philip never had the title. ……………. Actually, in some ways I'd be more inclined to use the expression "naive" of Charles rather than Diana. But I've never really got itnto Palace gossip. I tend to see them as part of the landscape of this strange country. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 12:16 PM "Take it up with Yahoo, I just quoted it!" Sounds like some kind of quaint political correctness! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Convolutions to HM The Queen! From: Donuel Date: 06 Feb 22 - 12:43 PM Sounds like quaint PC? We have to look past your presentations to find rhyme or reason. Even then there is less than could be. Judge not lest... Such vehemence regarding a public relations job, jeesh. I would add there is quantity and a PC quality to Elizebeth's job. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 12:55 PM He died, that's what you do when your life comes to an end. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: leeneia Date: 06 Feb 22 - 01:11 PM Interesting question: if the UK got rid of the royal family, how much money would be spent expunging the word Royal from institutions - new letterhead, new websites, new laws, new street signs. In one generation, how many records would become hard to find because new scholars don't look up the Royal Society (say) under R? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 01:16 PM "Job," Mrrzy? Y'mean, being carted around in luxurious transport paid for by someone else, having servants that do everything for you, walking up and down lines of cheery people all waving plastic flags, sitting there looking bored in services and ceremonies, reading a speech once every now and again to open parliament, reading another one from an autocue after Christmas dinner? That kind of a "job?" The Queen and her entourage of hangers-on, aka her dysfunctional family (who we all pay for), are at the very top of the pyramid of unearned privilege. Not too far down that pyramid are the elite public schools. One of those is called Eton, many of whose pupils are taught that they are born to rule. Those pupils include David Cameron and Boris Johnson, and quite a few of the other entitled toffs that run the country. They are the products of that pyramid of entitlement. Always worth remembering. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 01:18 PM Well, leeneia, we could pay for it by ceasing to pay them millions in taxpayers' money and making them do honest jobs instead. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: meself Date: 06 Feb 22 - 01:38 PM "The monarch as Head of State is one of the factors that make Canadian politics less than entirely poisonous." Agreed. I've come to appreciate our peculiarly indirect, ambiguous, and at times confusing type of nationhood, with our Head of State enthroned on the other side of the ocean, and having as little to do with us as possible. I miss the days when the status of our specifically-Canadian flag - the Red Ensign - was uncertain, and O Canada and God Save the Queen competed quietly for national-anthemhood, and overt displays of patriotism were a little embarrassing. And we were "the Dominion of", the meaning of which few if any understood, but it sounded grand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: robomatic Date: 06 Feb 22 - 03:31 PM When Britain really ruled the waves, in good Queen Bess's time, The House of Peers made no pretense, to intellectual eminence Or scholarship sublime Yet Britain won her proudest days In good Queen Bess's glorious days. When Wellington smashed Bonaparte, as any child can tell, The House of Peers throughout the war, did nothing in particular And did it very well. Yet Britain set the world ablaze In good King George's glorious days And while the House of Peers withholds its legislative hand, And noble statemen do not itch to interfere in matters which They do not understand. As bright will shine Great Britain's rays as in King George's glorious days! (done from memory) God Save the Queen! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 06 Feb 22 - 03:38 PM And well done to Borehamwood (where I lived 1955-69) for beating Bournemouth in the 4th round of the FA Cup!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 03:47 PM Yes indeed, that was excellent. Now they have to go to Merseyside to play Everton. On that same evening they will hear You'll Never Walk Alone resounding from nearby Anfield as Liverpool slaughter Norwich. Let's hope Borehamwood prevail. After all, as Bill Shankly (aka God) once said, there are two great teams on Merseyside: Liverpool and Liverpool Reserves... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 05:48 PM And Borehamwood have made it to the fifth round of the Cup without conceding a single goal in five matches played! The sort of fairytale that the insipid royals could never manage! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:04 PM In regard to Royals and football. Rest assured Prince Andrew will never get a game for Raith Rovers now!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:38 PM The idea that your choice of constitutional settlement would depend on companies having or not having to change their stationary is a new one! How many companies would this even involve?? Not that many I imagine in the scheme of things and for those who do have a Royal prefix..... Will they all use pre headed paper?? Surely many, I imagine even most companies, would only need to amend their PDFs for their headed paper. It is the 2020s ?? Why would they even need to change the name. Because of their history I could imagine they might keep it. After all the Kings Own Scottish Borderers kept that title for decades when there was no king. There would of course be some costs but hardly a deal breaker. Companies regularly upgrade or change their stationary etc. Why would road signs need to change??? That would affect very few surely? Honestly don't think stationary costs would be a major factor. No way it would be an issue with this monarch anyway as she is too popular and has aye been there. However popularity, maybe after an initial honeymoon, may well take a drop with Charles and Camilla. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Nigel Parsons Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:45 PM The Queen and her entourage of hangers-on, aka her dysfunctional family (who we all pay for), are at the very top of the pyramid of unearned privilege. Not too far down that pyramid are the elite public schools. One of those is called Eton, many of whose pupils are taught that they are born to rule. Those pupils include David Cameron and Boris Johnson, and quite a few of the other entitled toffs that run the country. They are the products of that pyramid of entitlement. Always worth remembering. "Who we all pay for" No! Apart for the fact that (if the argument was true) it would be "for whom we all pay" We do not 'pay' for the royal family.Royal Finances |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 06:47 PM Paper with royal heading could be recycled as toilet paper. That would recoup at least some of the money we've wasted on the firm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 07:00 PM "Who we all pay for" is perfectly good standard English. Sorry to have to apprise you of that, Nigel. You'll be telling me next that I can't tell you that the Great Storm of 1987 decimated areas of Epping Forest.... As for the regal finances, I note the totally unbiased nature of your source. Bwahahaha! In fact, if you go back far enough, all the royal land holdings and property were stolen from the people, no less that Robert Mugabe's amazing palace that was so lavish that it threw Zimbabwe into poverty. I know that the modern royals can't help that, but the very least they could do is to act with a bit more humility and refuse to take any more taxpayers' money. I doubt that such a move would pitch them into food banks or force them to huddle round one-bar electric fires. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Feb 22 - 07:01 PM I've never been too impressed by the idea that dispensing with the Queen would have any effect upon the hierarchy in this country. Look at the other countries all around us. In fact in Europe the ones that appear to be less cursed by that are more likely than not to have royals - I'm thinking of Scandinavia and the Netherlands. I suspect they could likely get shot of the royals up in Scotland when they go independent, thugh I wouldn't bet on it. But in England I can't see it happening. And it wouldn't do a thing to get rid of the distorsions to society Steve catalogued. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 07:12 PM Not sure about that, Kevin. The earthquake that removing the royals would create would have the rest of the establishment quivering in their fur-lined boots at the very least. Still, we know it won't happen, unless some terrible revelation about Charles emerges, but it's fun contemplating it. Does he still talk to his weeds and conduct Beethoven in front of his bedroom mirror? Does he still believe that expensive solutions containing no ingredients bar water can cure diseases? And has he finally ditched his ambition to be one of Camilla's t*amp*ons? Does he still wear built-up shoes due to his inferiority complex about his small stature? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Feb 22 - 08:56 PM I suspect Charles may be quite a popular king. A very Wodehousian monarch. Sort of a royal Lord Emsworth, but with a touch of melancholy. Eccentricity surely counts as right at the top of those British Values people go on about. I can't see why the real establishment would worry for a moment if the monarchy got disposed of - in fact if it ever happened it would probably be the work of the establishent of the day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Feb 22 - 08:59 PM As I said, a fun topic. No more than that! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 07 Feb 22 - 08:09 AM I can't see why the real establishment would worry for a moment if the silly lefties got disposed of!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Feb 22 - 08:44 AM I wouldn't call the royals silly leftists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 07 Feb 22 - 10:37 AM Yes, job. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Feb 22 - 11:38 AM Or sinecure? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 07 Feb 22 - 12:41 PM Re what would happen to the Royals should Scotland go independent. The official line just now is that it is not in the discussions. It is the 1707 Union of Parliaments that is in question. It is true that a Republican stance is a bit more popular in Scotland than in the UK as a whole - and a bit higher again among SNP voters than Scots in general. However there would be enough of a support for the monarchy among Yes supporters and waverers for it to cloud the issue - so the official line is that the monarch would remain monarch of an independent Scotland. So we'd share a monarch with the rest of the UK just as we did between 1603 and 1707. Saying that though yes I imagine if Indy was secured then there would be a move by some to campaign for an elected Head of State instead. Probably on the Irish model. It wouldn't be a guarantee that folk would plump for that though. There are plenty royalists here too - just not quite as many as down south. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Feb 22 - 01:39 PM In the unlikely event that England abolished the monarchy , I suspect that would strengthen the feeling that Scotland should retain it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Charmion Date: 07 Feb 22 - 04:02 PM Hardly a sinecure, Steve. I get that you feel particularly bolshy on this issue, but you have to admit that they put up with an awful lot of guff that us commoners don't tolerate, starting with massive invasion of privacy. You couldn't pay me enough to endure the constant prurient criticism of the most personal choices that I see in the UK news media. Only the second-line royals like Princess Anne and Prince Edward can avoid even some of it. King Olav of Norway used to ride the tram out to the suburbs of Oslo to go skiing. The past is a foreign country ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Feb 22 - 04:17 PM Another way of looking at it, Charmion, is that they milk the media to death to suit their own agenda. Maybe you have to be here. I'm not bolshie either. Just telling it like it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Feb 22 - 01:47 PM I'm pretty sure they'd much prefer it if the media generally ignored them. As would I. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Feb 22 - 05:28 PM Come along now, Kevin. They need the media like I need food and drink. They would be nothing without the tabloids. Oh, and Nicholas Witchell. And the occasional story of family dysfunction does them no harm whatsoever. It keeps them on the front page. Even Diana couldn't dint them, though she did come close. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 08 Feb 22 - 06:01 PM One does wonder about Witchell. I used to think what on earth has he done wrong to get lumbered with that gig? When he could have been reporting on many different and interesting news stories. Now though hey, he is way past pension age and still clinging on! Maybe waiting on to be the face of the story when she dies??? She might outlive him yet though! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Feb 22 - 06:19 PM I can't see any advantage to them from the the tabloid media's obsession. Other very rich people seem to get along happily without that kind of attention. The occasional ceremonial occasion, like Presentation of the Colours ,or the Tourist stuff like the Changing of the Guard, and the trickle of Royal Visits to hospitals would be quite enough. The tabloid gossip rubbish, I cannot imagine why they can benefit from, still less enjoy.. My impressionis that most of the other royals in Europe don't have too much of that, and don't miss it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Feb 22 - 06:38 PM I've either bought or subscribed to the Guardian for fifty years. Until recently, in "know thine enemy" mode, I'd get a free Daily Mail with my My Waitrose card, about once a fortnight. The coverage of the royals, and the dissing of the ones who fall by the wayside (unsurprisingly frequent) is legendary. They'd be nothing without the metaphorical front page. Try it and see, but hold your nose. Sadly, the free paper with a ten-quid spend is coming to an end this month. The Mail is the royals' best friend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Feb 22 - 06:40 PM Nicholas Witchell, surprisingly, is only 68. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Feb 22 - 07:06 PM No, I can't see the benefit, Steve. Yes, it keeps them in the public ete andso forth, but where's tge good of that. If the only public appearance of the royal family in 2020 had been the Queen's Vera Lynn broadcast, and Prince Philip's funeral with the Queen on her own, that would have been quite sufficient to remind people they are still there. Especially with all the replays the latter has got thanks to Boris's party problems. What more is needed, from their point of view. Not from the tabloids who revel in working over real or fancied royal family squabbles, keeping us up to date about princes on the loose getting into scandals. You might say they deserve it, but they hardly benefit from it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Feb 22 - 07:58 PM Reminding people that they're still there won't serve them. They need to be in our faces and they are, being in the news all the time (a platinum year means mentions every day for months). There's been almost more coverage in recent weeks of our virtuous Queen removing this, that and the other privilege from Andrew than there has been about him and his misdemeanours. Not long go it was all about Harry and Megan being distanced by the others. Now it's the Queen making irrelevant statements about what she wants Camilla to be called (yes, that same Camilla who connived in the cheating on Diana even before the infamous waste-of-money royal wedding). Gosh how many column kilometres has that received... We will be ceremonied to death in the next few months. This goes on and on, and it suits them down to the ground. Diana almost did for them, but only by getting killed in a crash. It's a perennial and eternal saga, they love it (so do millions of the more unthinking elements of the public, unfortunately), and they need it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Feb 22 - 09:56 PM Can't really rate those things as "milking the media". They just happen, and the media make a big thing out of it. No doubt they enjoy much of it, but it wouldn't matter if they loathed it. The rest of the stuff in between they just have no option but to endure -, like the Queen has to endure having a session with Boris Johnson every week. Though I imagine that's not as bad as Margaret Thatcher must have been. Boris can be quite enteraining, as in his Have I Got News For You days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 08 Feb 22 - 11:39 PM At least he doesn't give her unsolicited backrubs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: The Sandman Date: 09 Feb 22 - 01:45 AM Andrew does not need the Media concentrating on him at the moment, so this other attention is a distraction from which he bernefits |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Feb 22 - 04:13 AM Well the noble Queen has reigned over many a shabby scandal, mostly not of her making (though I'm never sure about Diana....or Harry...) She keeps her inner core safe (Cambridges and kiddies, Anne) and a few peripherals anonymous (Wessexes and, to an extent, Phil The Greek and his big racist mouth, generally just a looming yet silent grouse-murdering presence). We've had Fergiegate, Dianagate, Cheating-Charliegate, anus-horribilisgate, divorcesgate, Andygate, Meghangate...they keep coming and they add flame to the spluttering embers and they never let us forget "the firm." Yet Her Maj shines through the crock of shite like a glistening jewel. She's managed what Boris couldn't - surround yourself with gross inferiors that make YOU shine all the more. He's tried that (he calls them "his cabinet"), but with him you'd achieve more shine on a polished turd. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: robomatic Date: 09 Feb 22 - 02:33 PM Well, again, just for fun. This is by no means scientific, but we have some historical examples of when monarchy was disposed of. One of them is England. It can be argued that that hiccup in orderly transfer of power led to the United States of America, or at the very least, enabled it. More recently it was Russia. The Russian monarchy was overbearing and inefficient. But under it Russia experienced something that might be called technical and economic progress. Under the Soviets. Stalin was more powerful and malicious than any Russian royal ever (Ivan the Terrible never had that kind of power over the entire territory). Similar examples can be found in China, (North) Korea, and of course, Germany. Reminds me of one of the cleverer scenes in "Game of Thrones" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 09 Feb 22 - 06:06 PM Difference in Britain is that democracy is well established as is the system. An elected Head of State would probably have the same largely ceremonial role that the present monarch has. Government itself would not be greatly different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Feb 22 - 08:50 PM Allan is right - it'd be essentialy the system they have in Ireland. But I'd worry that the voters in England would be less wise in their choice than their neighbours in Ireland. I can easily see them going for a celebrity, or a retired politician. Unfortunately David Attenborough is too old to do the job. Actually I suspect they'd very likely go for Prince William The nightmare of course would be if England went down the executive president model of America, Russia and France. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: robomatic Date: 09 Feb 22 - 09:03 PM Well, as an over-proud American I would have felt 'we' were better than that and would never vote for someone dangerously unqualified. Then along came Drulius Geezer. I am reminded of Spike Milligan's line for the Goons. "Old England isn't finished yet! It's finished............. NOW! It's important to note that the FAT EGO who was in office was not the cause, but a bit of effect. We can hope it's temporary, but then we have such contrasting current examples of political sagaciousness as the RNC,Progressives, and the Q. At this point I still like the idea of a written Constitution and a very strong stomach for this side of the pond. Of course your mileage may vary, and you DO have lots more mileage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Feb 22 - 10:26 AM "and the Q" Initially, in the context of this thread, I took it that that meant the Queen. But on reflection, perhaps not. I sometimes wonder if the Decision of the Founding Fathers to preserve the system of having a Monarch in charge, but elected, and with stronger powers than the one in Britain, will ever get recognised as a relic of 18th century thinking in need of being adjusted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 12 Feb 22 - 11:01 AM Personally, I prefer the idea of a benign, benevolent, non-political, ceremonial HoS - the Queen being a good example - to a US-style elected President, but I dislike the ‘hereditary’ element of our ‘Royals’ arrangement. I’d be delighted if we changed the UK’s system completely, to something akin to the RoI’s arrangement - probably a PR system of government with a PM elected by Parliament, and a non-political, ceremonial-only HoS elected by the general electorate. Whilst I have a degree of respect for the Queen as an individual and, to a lesser degree, her immediate family, in this day and age I find the idea of the role of HoS being reserved for members of one grossly over-privileged family, and for no better reason than ‘that’s how it is’, and the inference that the Royals are somehow ‘better’ than everyone else, an insult to the rest of society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Feb 22 - 11:19 AM Well I have no respect neither for her nor the institution, and if it were possible, even less for her dysfunctional family. I refer you to my post of the 9th. The one sensible thing that the Queen has done in the last seventy years, something that neither Charles, Philip nor Andrew haven't managed for themselves, is to keep her mouth shut. Royal controversies are routinely played down by the media, especially the BBC, unless they smell a potential victim such as Meghan. Events such as dressing up as Nazis at parties, being photographed shagging a young woman from behind, the Queen Mother's and Philip's racism, the barefaced unfaithfulness to Diana even on the eve of the royal wedding and Margaret's taxpayer-funded dissolute and alcoholic lifestyle are all conveniently played down. Just think if Jeremy Corbyn had even thought of doing things like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Feb 22 - 11:33 AM Got my noes, eithers and neithers a bit mixed up there... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 12 Feb 22 - 02:15 PM Your prerogative, Steve. I decided some time ago to not allow my shreddies to get wedged up my arse-crack about things over which I have no control - life’s so much more comfortable that way. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Feb 22 - 02:30 PM Oh, I know they'll be there until and beyond the day I go to join the choir invisible. But thank Shankly for free speech, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 12 Feb 22 - 05:28 PM At least they don't dress up as lefties!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Feb 22 - 05:39 PM In an imperfect world there are some things worth getting worked up about, and a lot that aren't. I'd not lift a finger to get rid of the royals, or to keep them. And I skip the gossip about what they are supposed to get up to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Feb 22 - 05:55 PM There's no supposed about it really. In fact, they are so protected that there will be things we know about that were worse than reported and other things that we'll never know about. What's worse, Bonzo, dressing up as a leftie or dressing up as a Nazi? Careful now... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Feb 22 - 07:02 PM "Royal controversies are routinely played down by the media." As Star Wars put it: "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 12 Feb 22 - 07:29 PM Which media? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 13 Feb 22 - 04:19 AM The UK daily newspapers aided by every lefty under the sun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: The Sandman Date: 13 Feb 22 - 05:11 AM Bonzo being dog matic |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Feb 22 - 06:07 AM I like being called a lefty/leftie. In fact, I have a badge that sez "This is what a socialist looks like" and another that sez "This is what a trade unionist looks like." I keep them alongside my EU stars badge, my Dump Trump badge and my 1977 Stuff The Jubilee badge. I also have a Royal Meteorological Society badge and car sticker, seein' as 'ow I'm a member thereof. I can't help that it's called "royal." It was never my idea. Never mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Feb 22 - 01:07 PM Congratulations to the Queen for paying Andrew's legal bills and get him off. The sycophantic newsreader has just said that "he's innocent, not found guilty of anything." So why the big payout to Virginia if he's done nowt wrong?! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 15 Feb 22 - 01:34 PM He has not gotten off yet? I am unclear on that last. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: robomatic Date: 15 Feb 22 - 01:51 PM What does "getting dressed up as a leftie" look like? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: DaveRo Date: 15 Feb 22 - 02:00 PM Whisper it, but the time is right for the Queen to abdicate I hope she doesn't go (either way) before Boris does. I see only 60% of people (in the UK? doesn't say) support the monarchy now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Stilly River Sage Date: 15 Feb 22 - 02:57 PM Learned a lot from listening to the radio during a drive to work today: The queen may not need to abdicate - I just heard that Charles, and then Camilla both tested positive for COVID. Who knows what happens if they infected Mum. Andrew's settlement on the charity of the woman who was suing him apparently doesn't have the usual verbiage about "no admission of guilt" and he's still wanted for questioning in another case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Bonzo3legs Date: 15 Feb 22 - 03:22 PM After 70 years on the throne Her Majesty The Queen still radiates joy. It’s impossible to watch this lovely moment without a big grin. God save the Queen, long may she reign. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Feb 22 - 05:12 PM Well unless she breaks all longevity records she won't be reigning for an awful lot longer. She radiates love of her corgis and very little else. All we can say for certain is that her replacement will be a bloody sight worse. Still, we're stuck with 'em and one has to be calm about that... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Dave Sutherland Date: 15 Feb 22 - 05:40 PM I too am puzzled; how does one dress up as a leftie? I consider myself to have been one for almost sixty years so which of my clothes should I discard in order to preserve my status? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Feb 22 - 05:47 PM Your bowler hat, tuxedo, dinner jacket and brogues, Dave. Alternatively, hang on to 'em all and go incognito... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Allan Conn Date: 16 Feb 22 - 02:44 AM Re DaveRo's post and support for the monarchy at just 60% that is true - but a more important factor is what is the support for an alternative once the Don't Knows and Don't Cares are taken out of the equation. For instance a recent Yougov poll put support for the monarchy at 63% - but support for a republic was much lower at 25%. Likewise Survation recently had support for the monarchy lower at 57% whereas a republic was 29%. So the support for the monarchy is not universal but support for the alternative is still way behind. When broken down in parts then even in Scotland where support for the monarchy is only around 50% that support is still way ahead of Republicanism. I do think though that at least a portion of support for the monarchy will be a fairly soft support. More for the person than the institution so support could be fickle - and approval for the present Queen is way ahead of approval to the heir to the throne. This link shows there is an overall positive rating for the Queen of 80% with 51% being very positive. Charles has only a 54% overall positive rating with only 13% very positive. Among the adults only William and Kate come anywhere near the Queen in truth! Harry has only 34% overall positive with only 11% being very positive. Then there is the likes of Andrew with 6% positive about him and only 1% very positive. Again when broken down support in Scotland is lower for all the royals apart from Harry and Meghan - as I suppose maybe they are not so hated because the institution has not got the same support so criticisms of it are not so important. One does feel that maybe after an initial bout of sympathy there could be a major challenge for the royals to retain support when Charles and the even less popular Camilla take the throne. With the Queen there is the "aye been" element. For the vast bulk of us she has always been the monarch since we were born so it is kind of accepted without much questioning by many. https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/mk1br7xert/Internal_RoyalFamily_211124_W.pdf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Senoufou Date: 16 Feb 22 - 03:32 AM I remember when I was very small my mother telling me that the king was dead. And I also remember very clearly watching the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth on the TV at a neighbour's house. Prince Philip was the Chancellor of Edinburgh University where I studied, and I stood in line while he passed along, talking to many of the students. My father (GPO Telecommunications officer) met and talked to Princess Margaret at Kensington Palace, in order to arrange telephone systems there. I've seen HM when she visited Norwich years ago and have arranged celebrations for the Silver Jubilee at the school where I taught. However I'm very surprised that my attitude towards the monarchy has completely changed. I now see it as an anachronism which should come to an end after the Queen has passed away. I can't see the use of them, and rather resent their privileges and enormous wealth. I would never ever curtsy to any human being. They aren't 'elected' and the usual defence of 'they attract tourism' could be continued if all royal residences were opened to the public. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Dave the Gnome Date: 16 Feb 22 - 03:41 AM As tourist attractions they are very low on the lists, Sen. I do have an alternative that I have mentioned before. Hand over the running of "Windsor World" to the Disney corporation. We retain a purely titular monarchy AND they begin to rake in the money for the UK. Win-Win :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Senoufou Date: 16 Feb 22 - 04:25 AM Hee hee Dave, good idea! And I reckon Harry & Meghan would be an excellent choice as Directors/Managers of such a shenanigan. They seem to know all about that sort of world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: meself Date: 16 Feb 22 - 11:24 AM As a Canadian - as I indicated earlier - I'm content with our odd Constitutional Monarchy - but when Justin Trudeau had the swearing in of his government broadcast publicly, I was chagrined to see these serious people, one after another, meekly swear allegiance to not only the Queen but all her heirs, fruit of her looms, etc. I mean, the Queen is one thing - but Charles?? William (okay, so far, so good, but ... )? Harry? And ... whatever, um, 'characters' the following generations produce? Even my mother was embarrassed. I'm not saying that feudalism isn't quaint and charming ... but [insert quotation from the leftist peasant of Monty Python & the Holy Grail here]! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 16 Feb 22 - 12:56 PM Is it just me, or does £12 million seem rather a lot of money to hand over to someone you never met or, if you did, you didn’t shag? Mind you, it’s not really a lot to him when it’s our money he’s handed over, is it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Feb 22 - 01:06 PM Morally speaking, all their money is our money. Of course, they get to spend it on big palaces, servants, playing polo, making horses jump over fences and shooting grouse on huge estates that we have to keep off. No food banks for them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 16 Feb 22 - 01:53 PM All together now… “Oh the grand old Duke of York He had twelve million quid He gave it to someone he never met For something he never did!” I thank yew, I thank yew, I thank yew…! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Feb 22 - 03:54 PM Headline in tomorrow's paper: HUGE QUEUE FORMS AT PALACE AS ANDREW GIVES MONEY AWAY TO PEOPLE HE'S NEVER MET |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Feb 22 - 05:08 PM Oh God, and don't we all just LOVE Nicholas Witchell! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Mrrzy Date: 20 Feb 22 - 08:51 AM By George, she's got it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 20 Feb 22 - 09:08 AM 100 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: gillymor Date: 20 Feb 22 - 09:23 AM Thanks a lot BW, your little ditty gave my nostrils a coffee enema. Lol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 20 Feb 22 - 09:53 AM Pleased to be of service, Gilly! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Feb 22 - 10:44 AM Good job she wasn't one of the tens of thousands of elderly people, just like her, who died when infected people were allowed back into their care homes in early 2020. Few of them made the headlines at the time, and all of them had a little bit more than a mild dose of the sniffles. I wish her a speedy recovery. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Donuel Date: 20 Feb 22 - 11:04 AM Yeah I agree with no special care for royal geriatrics. She's a real old lady of the people and one independant tough bird like ALL the old ladies who had nothing more than the snifles in 2020. In America the elderly died by the refridgerated truckload. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Stilly River Sage Date: 20 Feb 22 - 11:29 AM I guess I get some of my news here at Mudcat. I had to go look it up. Queen Elizabeth is infected with the coronavirus. Maybe the one bonus to Andrew these days is that he is so much out of circulation he's less likely to come down with COVID. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Feb 22 - 06:48 PM Brilliant bit of timing - just as he cancels all the restrictions prematurely, evidently in face of the advice of most experts , in the hope of distracting the public from the fact he's been ignoring them at the height of the pandemic - and the Queen goes down with covid. If she dies, which at nearly 96 is only too likely, that could settle things for him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Feb 22 - 09:01 PM She won't die, at least not of this. The whole thing is total bollix and a sympathy-winner. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Feb 22 - 01:23 AM More distraction and Down-The-Road-Can-Kicking. And the feeble-minded Daily Mail readers will fall for it, exactly as they fell for ‘Take Back Control’ and ‘Get Brexit Done’. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: gnu Date: 22 Feb 22 - 03:05 AM Steve Shaw... eloquent praise indeed. However, I take umbridge at, "grouse-murdering presence". I spent thousands of days over my lifetime in pursuit of Bonasa umbellus with a proper device of death, dispatching over two thousand. And, as implied in the taxonomy, revelled as I ate my fill. URP! Whilst Royals practice killing in a fashion such as their station 'allows', I chased the buggers through the one-by-ones (pines one inch in diameter, one inch apart). That is how commoners of the colonies fed/feed themselves. I am sure Beth would have enjoyed death with me rather than with Royals. Alas, I am a simple commoner of her realm... never to meet... unless she gets her ass over to my camp for a hunt... and leaves her short-ass hounds on the other side of the pond... I hate yappy little dogs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Doug Chadwick Date: 22 Feb 22 - 11:58 AM She won't die, at least not of this. The whole thing is total bollix and a sympathy-winner. That seems to be a bold statement. Do you have access to her medical records? Being fully vaccinated improves the chances of surviving a bout of Covid but is not an absolute protection, even for previously fit and healthy young people. Contracting Covid could exacerbate an existing condition and thus play a part in someone’s demise, even if it is not the main cause. More distraction and Down-The-Road-Can-Kicking. And the feeble-minded Daily Mail readers will fall for it, ............ I would have thought that a frail, elderly head-of-state and her next-in-line contracting a disease which has killed almost 6 million people, world wide, was a newsworthy story in anybody’s book. The idea that things have been exaggerated to allow the government to control the populace seems, pretty much, to be the stance taken by the anti-vaxers. DC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Doug Chadwick Date: 22 Feb 22 - 11:58 AM She won't die, at least not of this. The whole thing is total bollix and a sympathy-winner. That seems to be a bold statement. Do you have access to her medical records? Being fully vaccinated improves the chances of surviving a bout of Covid but is not an absolute protection, even for previously fit and healthy young people. Contracting Covid could exacerbate an existing condition and thus play a part in someone’s demise, even if it is not the main cause. More distraction and Down-The-Road-Can-Kicking. And the feeble-minded Daily Mail readers will fall for it, ............ I would have thought that a frail, elderly head-of-state and her next-in-line contracting a disease which has killed almost 6 million people, world wide, was a newsworthy story in anybody’s book. The idea that things have been exaggerated to allow the government to control the populace seems, pretty much, to be the stance taken by the anti-vaxers. DC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Feb 22 - 12:50 PM Nowt wrong with huntin', shootin' and fishin' by individuals for food, as opposed to sport. But the shooting estates used for sport by the royals and their hangers-on are an ecological disaster. Thousands upon thousands of acres of what should beautiful upland turned into a near-monoculture, burned off at intervals just to suit a single species of bird, destroying most of the other wildlife. The illegal shooting and poisoning of rare top predators that were there a long time before the shooters, the beaters and the grouse. Drastically reducing the moorlands' ability to store carbon and water, in fact turning them into large-scale carbon-emitters. The icing on the cake is that for much of the year, if not all of it, the plebs have to be kept off this stolen land. On one occasion in upper Teesdale, shots were fired over my head when I'd inadvertently strayed on to the margin of a shooting estate. It's eco-vandalism at its worst and it makes that conspicuous eco-warrior Prince Charles into a complete hypocrite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Feb 22 - 08:17 PM She's got a good chance. She's fully jabbed, in fair health its reported, the omicron variant is milder and there are better treatments for Covid, and mother reached 100. But she's 96, and at that age anything can carry you off. "She won't die" is far too strong. Anyway she'll be glad to have a good reason for not enduring her weekly session with Boris. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Congratulations to HM The Queen! From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Feb 22 - 08:26 PM Wanna bet on it? ;-) |
