Subject: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Fred McCormick Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:32 AM I've just heard the news and already I feel like throwing up.
|
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: greg stephens Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:38 AM I think she will make a radiant bride. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Maurice Mann Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:40 AM Up the Republic! |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:41 AM I haven't heard a thing (and hopefully never will) |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: olddude Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:44 AM Lizzie got her invite already. I am waiting for mine |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: greg stephens Date: 16 Nov 10 - 11:45 AM I'm afraid we are all going to hear a great deal about this in the months to come, like it or not. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: frogprince Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:05 PM The jaded part of me, burned out on media circuses, asks if this will last longer than Charles and Diane. But, as to "already ready to throw up"? They're a young couple; I hope it works out for them, just as I would hope for the teacher's daughter and the cafe manager's son in the neighborhood; may they have a happy marriage. I fully expect to be more than fed up with the constant overblown media coverage long before the wedding. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Stu Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:09 PM Who pays? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Fred McCormick Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:10 PM I'm torn between hibernating and emigrating. The last time I had to suffer anything as bad as this was in the late 1970s, when sovereign and consort decided they'd been married long enough for the toiling masses to stand them a bumper celebration. I was living in Portrush, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland at the time, an area not without its factions of loyalist Catholic hating dyed in the wool Brits. In fact the town fell within the Rev. Ian Paisley's constituency. The Rev. Ian, as I'm sure you will recall, was in those days a trenchant opponent of papism, republicanism, Irish Free Stateism, and anything else he thought might undermine the rights and freedoms of the good people of God fearing loyalist Ulster. At the back of the house where I was staying, there was a large patch of open ground. For three days solid, a never ending procession of flute bands, pipe bands, concertina bands, loyalists, royalists and dudes in bowler hats and sashes used it to hail forth in stentorian tones about how wonderful it was to be British, and how they were going to banish the evil of popery from the sovereign sacred province of Ulster forever. My ears are still ringing at the memory. Spending cuts? Who said anything about spending cuts? How much is this little shindig going to cost anyway? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Donuel Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:18 PM I wish her many years of happiness, a great many palace intrigues and countless questions surrounding her untimely death. English Queens seem to have the worst track record throughout the centuries. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:24 PM 'Leader of the Labour party Ed Miliband said "the whole country will be wishing them every happiness"'. BBC News····· Apart from one curmudgeonly McCormick or McCormack or some such··· Always one, isn't there! ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: mandotim Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:39 PM Anybody been offered the reception gig? They're going to be busy though; book the cathedral, book the palace for the reception, book the courtroom for the divorce... |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MMario Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:49 PM on *THIS* side of the pond we've already been hearing about this for six years..... |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:52 PM Where are MGM, Fred Astaire and Jane Powell when we need them? Well, we do know where Mr. Astaire is, more or less. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:53 PM book the palace for the reception, book the courtroom for the divorce... === Oh, teeheehee Tim; aren't you a one! ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email) Date: 16 Nov 10 - 12:58 PM The taxpayer will have to put their hand in their pocket again I see. The Queen heads the most expensive Royal Family in Europe. The British taxpayers have to pay more for the Royal Family than those in seven other leading constitutional monarchies, even though the Queen's Civil List payment has been frozen for the past 20 years. Buckingham Palace should take a share of the burden we all face, some public services face budget cuts of up to 25 per cent. The Royal family cost us £41.5 million last year, that makes them Europe's most expensive.It was followed by the Dutch monarchy on £33.8million, the Norwegian on £23.9million and the Belgian on £11.7million. The British royals ran up a bill to taxpayers four times that of their Danish and Swedish counterparts and almost six times that of the ruling families in Spain and Luxembourg. The Royal family are NOT a tourist attraction. The vast majority of tourists don't get to see them. Tourists DO come to see our historic buildings and amazing countryside. The Crown Estates do not belong to the royal family, therefore the income from them is not theirs to keep. We all face severe cutbacks, maybe they can lead by example and refuse public handouts. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: John MacKenzie Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:12 PM Hi there |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: G-Force Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:13 PM Well, at least the ring isn't going to cost anybody anything. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email) Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:14 PM I never heard of her, can't be bothered reading up on her either. I saw her on the television news earlier (sound on mute) they were running footage of her shooting Deer and walking about in black knickers. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:21 PM Ater what Diana and Fergie went through, I think most men would have qualms about their daughter marrying into that family. This is because, take away the posh accents and the fancy uniforms - you really are left with the sort of stuff that makes material for the Jeremy Kyle Show. People with no real jobs, no committment to either parenting or monogamy. I note also that the brides mother has been labelled 'impossible' and 'an embarassment' because she uses the term 'the toilet' instead of 'the lavatory'. The Royal family are obviously on another planet to the rest of us. They celebrate and rejoice in the fact. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:24 PM Out of interest, Al, who is it who has thus 'labelled' her?? ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: mandotim Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:25 PM Do I detect a touch of heavy handed sarcasm, MtheGM? I was making a comment based on the current track record of a seriously dysfunctional family! |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:29 PM Nothing 'heavy-handed' in that comment of yours then, Tim? Motes & beams, my dear fellow, motes and beams... |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: mandotim Date: 16 Nov 10 - 01:32 PM So I take it you haven't had your invite then M? Only a matter of time, surely? We're going to send them a quote for a reception barn dance I think. Care to quote some odds on this marriage lasting more than 15 years? Or even five years once they've got the breeding out of the way? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Zen Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:02 PM While I'm a staunch republican I wish them every happiness. Will try to avoid the inevitable hoo-ha as much as possible though. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: katlaughing Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:11 PM They're a young couple; I hope it works out for them, just as I would hope for the teacher's daughter and the cafe manager's son in the neighborhood; may they have a happy marriage. I fully expect to be more than fed up with the constant overblown media coverage long before the wedding. Same here. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,crowsister Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:21 PM Hey, what amazing timing! Now this very important news can be a focus for the media, so no-one will worry about all of that really boring political and economic stuff currently happening! Hurrah! |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:22 PM Tim, I do not bet ~~ it is a terrifying addiction that left someone close to me in a terrible situation. I should as soon be an alcoholic or a chain-smoker as a gambler. But I must say I think your view unnecessarily pessimistic, &, if I may say so, peculiarly and unnecessarily ill-natured. He is a more intelligent and stable man than his father, and I they strike me as a young, well-meaning, forward-looking couple, probably with a genuine regard for one another; and I think it rather unmannerly to approach their relationship in so negative a fashion. Of course I don't expect an invitation ~ from them or any other couple with whom I am completely unacquainted. But I have been exceptionally fortunate in two most loving marriages, and would prefer to wish any about-to-marry couple the same. The evil of racism, to which we all vigorously object, is, I would urge, that it is prejudice against someone for the birth they could not help. I am distressed to see so much prejudice against this young man for having had the adventitiousness to be born who he is. He can no more help having been born future king than I can help having been born to Jewish parents; so many ill-natured people would do well to get off his back & give him the chance of a happy marriage. I greatly admire Zen's post just preceding this of mine. ♥♫❤Michael❤♫♥ |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Jean(eanjay) Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:23 PM Well, I will be watching it on TV:) I think it is wonderful that she has Diana's ring. It did cross my mind though ~ what would happen to that ring if they ever split up? Would she be allowed to keep it? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:25 PM I'm not sure MGM - my wife told me. Apparently she has been sent on a load of shooting weekends to ease her transition from normal middle class person into person hanging about the royals without embarassing them. I get the Times everyday because my wife does the crossword, but I never read it. I suppose it must have been one of the royal watchers in there. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Jean(eanjay) Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:26 PM Love your post Michael; it wasn't there when I posted mine. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Fred McCormick Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:44 PM If messrs Windsor and Middleton wish to marry, I have absolutely no desire to stop them. I just wish that they'd do it in private as ordinary private citizens. What I object to, apart from the existence of the monarchy itself, is the pomp and ceremony and mass media coverage and cost to the taxpayer which this event will attract; to say nothing of the way in which it will be used to divert public attention from the real issues of the day, such as mass redundancies, spending cuts, and the destruction and diminution of every single public service which Cameron and Co. can get their hands on. Friedrich Engels invented a very good term for the way the masses are duped by this kind of nonsense. He called it false consciousness. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: VirginiaTam Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:44 PM Hey, what amazing timing! Now this very important news can be a focus for the media, so no-one will worry about all of that really boring political and economic stuff currently happening! Hurrah! Just picked this up from Facebook friend it is off the Guardian The UK at the beginning of the 1980s 'Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister, and the country was buckling under the strain of mass unemployment and an intense class war. Mrs Thatcher and her Chancellor Geoffrey Howe confronted the recession in a very brutal way rather than increase Government spending, they slashed it - in the 1980 Budget, the Chancellor also announced that benefits paid out to the families of people who went on strike would be cut by £12 a week and made subject to tax. The Budget sparked fury among economists, 364 of whom penned a letter to The Times demanding that a different course be taken, along the lines of a Keynesian style approach where spending would be increased to boost the economy.' and facebook friend said "AND THEN WE HAD - A RIGHT ROYAL WEDDING! - who says history doesn't repeat itself?" |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Van Date: 16 Nov 10 - 02:56 PM Just a thought; but if this hadn't filled the news bulletins all day what else would we have heard about? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: John MacKenzie Date: 16 Nov 10 - 03:05 PM I wonder how many of our families could stand up to the sort of scrutiny the royals get? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Nov 10 - 03:11 PM One can however help saying "toilet" and one can learn to speak properly and which knives to use. This one hopes that Middleton is not a spoiled undisciplined manipulative drama queen like Diana the Martyr. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: I don't know Date: 16 Nov 10 - 03:18 PM May they be happy together especially as we will have to pay the bill & for any children they have. If not we will be paying for the divorce. Either way the "common" person losses out. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Will Fly Date: 16 Nov 10 - 03:28 PM I confess: I'd never heard of Kate Middleton until today. And now I've heard as much as I want to hear. They're getting married. Good luck to them and let's hear no more about it. As is my wont, I shall avoid any news of them, or any other Royal, in the media as much as I can. Not easy but one does one's best. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 16 Nov 10 - 07:54 PM Is it true that they're going to exhume Diana Spencer just for the wedding? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Ralphie Date: 17 Nov 10 - 02:12 AM DAILY MAIL HEADLINE. Lower Class Woman marries into a Family on Welfare. shock. It's only day one, and I haven't found a Radio or TV programme that hasn't mentioned this event. Dear God, and to think we've got six months of this crap. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: mandotim Date: 17 Nov 10 - 02:56 AM MGM; I'm not sure I've wished them any ill-will, I carry no personal animus for either of them; after all, I don't know them, neither do you,and nor are we ever likely to. I do wish them well as human beings; it's what they stand for and the assumption that iI will be in some way interested and uplifted by the news they are getting married that rankles. Nothing the Royals do has any significant impact on my life, and I object to their everyday lives being rammed down my throat by every media outlet. Trying to listen to the radio this morning on the drive into work was just awful; there is so much serious news to report, and yet every station was full of this drivel. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: MGM·Lion Date: 17 Nov 10 - 03:11 AM Well, I do see what you mean, Tim. But I thought you were being just a little too positive about the inevitability of divorce, and am glad to learn that that was not what you actually meant. One of my minor talents is the ability to let what I don't particularly want to hear just wash over me without my paying it very much attention ~ I do not, for example, hear a lot of the commentary when watching tv football. I suggest this is an ability which many of you with negative attitudes to this forthcoming event might do well to try and cultivate, by the sound of it. As for me ~~~ ❄❄❤ Good luck & happiness, Kate & Will ❤☖☖ ♥♫❤Michael❤♫♥ |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: theleveller Date: 17 Nov 10 - 03:19 AM Here we go again - another onanistic orgy of ananchronistic sycophancy to delight the lickspittle Sun readers as this tawdry and divisive institution spends an obscene amount of our money on its own glorification. At least the wedding will provide a good platform for protests against the unfairness of the government's cuts. What better demonstration of our divided society? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: akenaton Date: 17 Nov 10 - 03:27 AM I enjoyed Charlies comment when asked for his feeling on the marriage. "About time...they've been practicing long enough! Chip off the old bloke? |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Patsy Date: 17 Nov 10 - 03:38 AM Here we go again, perhaps Wills has taken some advice from his Grandmother for him to find a wife before he is on his way to getting a bus pass unlike his father. But really I couldn't care less. Who knows though the nation might get a bit of paid hols from this. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Dave Sutherland Date: 17 Nov 10 - 03:54 AM Will we get a day off work? I missed out on the Charles and Diana do as I was experiencing my second bout of redundancy at the time (see some of the comments above) |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 17 Nov 10 - 04:41 AM I spent most of yesterday in a nursing home, accompanying some inspectors. Spent a lot of time talking to many of the residents. Amazing how many were excited about the wedding, and looking forward to watching it on the telly. I remember my Gran and her sister glued to the telly when Princess Anne got married. My Gran baked a cake with an iced union flag on it. So whilst many people are either uninterested, wondering where the money is coming from or for some reason hostile to young people getting married, it is worth remembering that whilst I personally won't bother watching it, it is a small something that will bring a day of joy to a hell of a lot of people. And for that, it is cheaper and more worthwhile than an episode of Strictly Come Dancing, which is all the poor old buggers have to look forward to at present. |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: mandotim Date: 17 Nov 10 - 04:53 AM Perhaps we shouldn't spend anything on the Royal wedding, and put any money saved towards re-instituting the mobility allowance for those same old people? Just a thought... |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 17 Nov 10 - 05:13 AM Perhaps her Maj could pay for the wedding? She's got loads of dosh! All she'd have to do is sell off a palace. I hope she realises that 'we're all in this together'. Whoops! Where am I? Just dozed off and had an odd dream about the Royal Family paying for their own nuptials! |
Subject: RE: BS: Royal Wedding Announcement From: Stu Date: 17 Nov 10 - 05:26 AM The Queen's worth £290m - if she can't stump up for all the costs (including security and local authority expenses) then that will say plenty about how she views the hardships suffered by her 'subjects'. |