|
20 Feb 05 - 06:02 AM (#1415471) Subject: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Richard Bridge The chimpanzee has apparently told Charles and Camilla that they will not be welcome at the White House after they marry because both of them are divorcees. Has he finally lost the plot completely? Wars have been fought for less! |
|
20 Feb 05 - 06:07 AM (#1415473) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Liz the Squeak Bet he still sees Clinton.... Did he ever know there was a plot? LTS |
|
20 Feb 05 - 07:10 AM (#1415492) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: gnomad I doubt it would worry them, after all GWB has only a limited period in office. They probably have other people to visiit too. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 07:18 AM (#1415494) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Big Mick Richard, could you post a link to the article? I googled and found references to the fact that there wouldn't be an official function, but that they would meet privately. This is due to Camilla, by your country's protocols, wouldn't be an "official" part of the entourage. I got this from the Daily Mail. I am no fan of Bush, and everyone knows that. But it seems to me that your opening post was completely out of context. Seems like more of the "bash Yanks at every opportunity" thing that happens. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank You, Mick |
|
20 Feb 05 - 07:38 AM (#1415506) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: *Laura* If I was Charles and/or Camilla I'd be relieved! And I still want to know what Bush would do if one of his girls wanted an abortion. Wouldn't look too good on him either way really - haha. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 07:51 AM (#1415509) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: kendall I'd love to be introduced to Bush...so I could turn my back on him as I would any other lying phony coward. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 08:02 AM (#1415513) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST,ragdall There is this article: CAMILLA BANNED FROM WHITE HOUSE |
|
20 Feb 05 - 08:07 AM (#1415515) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg Next White House news briefing with press secretary should clear it up. Sounds like a misunderstanding to me. ~S~ |
|
20 Feb 05 - 08:43 AM (#1415524) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Jeri Well, it's pretty much "bash everybody who isn't you" around here these days. It looks to me like a 'political' decision. An honest version of the 'clearing up' - the one with Wonder Woman's magic lasso - might go something like: "The Prez is really sorry people thought he had anything personal against Prince Charles and Ms. Parker-Bowles. He thinks they're OK, but realizes that the American People might be upset. Well, not ALL American people - just the ones who watch the news as if it were a daytime television drama, and are a bunch of busybodies who think they know about the lives of all the 'characters'. The President doesn't want to piss those people off. They hold grudges, and they vote."(These are the same people who watch news about a trial that's about to happen, and when asked what they think, they say "he's guilty," or "he's innocent." Fer-cryin-out-loud, the jury doesn't even know yet, and they're there.) |
|
20 Feb 05 - 08:50 AM (#1415529) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Terry K "Seems like more of the "bash Yanks at every opportunity" thing that happens. Please correct me if I am wrong." 'Scuse me, but I understood Open Season for this lasted from the start of June until the end of May. Please correct me if I am wrong. cheers, Terry |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:00 AM (#1415534) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Bobert Sounds like the boy been back in into the pretzels... |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:04 AM (#1415535) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST Hold the phone, please. Bush's Republic had a leader by the name of Ronnie Rayguns, and HE was divorced, and LIVED at the White House for 8 years. Wazzupwitdat? |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:08 AM (#1415538) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Tweed Terry I think thet all hunting is off now. Thar is a thread on Mudcat about just that thing, so to all you Britternz I respectly say, "CALL OFF YORE DOGS, az THATCHER OR CAMILLA OR SOMEBOBBY OBV EQUAL HIGH INFLUX HABV DECREED IT. OPEN SEASON ON ALL YANKS AND FOXES IS CLOSED!"I think NPR said it wabz still arlight to stalk skinks, newts, rats and so forth. They are probalby good eatin' after boiling for a couple hours with a few spuds throwd in the pot. Cheers backatcha and thanks, Tweed |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:17 AM (#1415542) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST Grand idea--let's boil Newt Gingrich! |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:19 AM (#1415543) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST BTW, who the fuck really cares if one twit insulted another twit and his soon to be dowdy bride? |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:44 AM (#1415553) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Bobert Not to fear, folks. I just got off the phone with Chuck and told him that he could and his bride-to-be can stay in my double-decker bus/cottage. So all is well that ends well... I even estened an invite to Lizzie but she turned me down. She's allready had reservations at the Comfort Inn in Arlington... Bobert |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:57 AM (#1415560) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Donuel http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/bushqueen3.jpg |
|
20 Feb 05 - 09:59 AM (#1415561) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: CarolC Speaking of Newt, he's divorced (twice?) and I bet he's still welcome at the White House. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:04 AM (#1415563) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Amos I give two to one that the story is a silly fiction. He's has much grander fuckups to deal with. A |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:20 AM (#1415571) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Richard Bridge The Mirror link is above. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:46 AM (#1415590) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Amos I saw the link but I am skep[tical of its veracity. It has the earmarks of a National Enquirer fiction. A |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:49 AM (#1415591) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: nutty Apparently , this is a trade mission that has been arranged for the last 3 years. It's Charles who wants to move the goal posts and take Camilla along ..... According to todays Mail on Sunday, there are still doubts as to the legality of the wedding ..... no soap writer worth their salt could have thought this lot up. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:58 AM (#1415596) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: McGrath of Harlow I imagine this could actually help the couple's public standing outside America. And very likely inside, I'd have thought. Being insulted by Bush must be the dream of every public figure with an image problem. With one bound it'd give you quite a significant boost in popularity. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 10:58 AM (#1415597) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg Some folks would wait to be invited, dontcha know? I'm no fan of George myself, but this story just doesn't sound like even our goofy White House line of reasoning. Sounds more like a George-bashing, with a side order of the poor-Camilla machine in high gear. The Mirror story LOOKS grand, and it's certainly inflammatory, but it's full of journalistic holes. It does not exactly say what it gives the impression of saying. Is it by any chance an anti-Blair paper looking for as many chances as possible to bash Tony's good pal Georgy? I think if she WAS snubbed it has a lot more to do with declining to play a role in Charlie's people's PR machine. He does not appear to be making a visit representing the Queen, and therefore all the protocol conventions would be different. Don't the Brits have a pretty complicated protocol themselves, especially as regards the careful positioning of Camilla as a non-Princess-of-Wales and non-future-queen? Maybe the chips are simply falling where one might expect. When I Googled around on this, I noted there also are Brit stories about Camilla declining to be as publicly "royalistic" as her predecessor. It's quite possible she herself is calling the shots-- hasn't she had a habit of doing that for poor, indecisive Charles? Wasn't the UK press just the other day labeling him a first-order ditherer (and I quote)? Isn't it kinda odd that this would not all have been settled quietly and discreetly between protocol people on both sides, LONG before Charles started up PR about his plan to come visit and meet up? Hate to carp, but it smells fishy to me. :~) ~Susan |
|
20 Feb 05 - 11:25 AM (#1415608) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: McGrath of Harlow I'd have thought, if it's a spin, that it might be more likely to be intended to help Blair, by giving him a safe issue over which to be critical of Bush, which is always a popular thing for anybody over here. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 11:36 AM (#1415613) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Terry K "-- hasn't she had a habit of doing that for poor, indecisive Charles? Wasn't the UK press just the other day labeling him a first-order ditherer (and I quote)?" must be true then, if you have it from the UK press. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 11:55 AM (#1415624) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Donuel The divorce rate among Congressmen and Senators for the Republican party members is indeed higher than the Democrats. In a way the Republicans own the family values agenda partly because they have "more families". Divorce has not been the issue in this administration - gay marriage has. Unless W has proof that Camilla is a man, I doubt this story too. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 12:25 PM (#1415638) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Tweed Whatthehail,.. Camillia is a man? ...well that explains ebvertythig!! |
|
20 Feb 05 - 01:09 PM (#1415664) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg "-- hasn't she had a habit of doing that for poor, indecisive Charles? Wasn't the UK press just the other day labeling him a first-order ditherer (and I quote)?" must be true then, if you have it from the UK press. My little attempt at irony. My point was, do "you" (the mythological, collective "you") believe everything you read in the press? Shall I, as well, then? Shall we all descend to the level of the first post's swallowed-whole gullibility? ~Susan |
|
20 Feb 05 - 01:20 PM (#1415672) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: jacqui.c The Mirror is an inflammatory rag that will try and make a crisis out of every issue it can. This sells papers to the lowest common denominator who can read words of more than one syllable. Those who can't take the Sun. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 01:20 PM (#1415673) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Donuel this just in |
|
20 Feb 05 - 01:42 PM (#1415689) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Tweed LMFAO!! Thanks Donuel! |
|
20 Feb 05 - 02:58 PM (#1415726) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: McGrath of Harlow Now here is the spin The Times put on this same story a few days ago.. NB The Times these days, while posher than the Mirror, is no less suspect as a news source, owned by Murdoch as it is. The Mirror version is more recent, which may mean possibly mean something. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:01 PM (#1415727) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: khandu Okay...I understand LMAO means "laughing my ass off", but just WTF does "LMFAO" mean? Kk |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:05 PM (#1415729) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg ALSO AT THE TIMES: ... Meanwhile doubts have been raised by senior lawyers over the legality of Charles and Camilla's marriage. The couple are due to marry in the register office at Windsor Guildhall. In a paper submitted to Lord Goldsmith, the attorney- general, Stephen Cretney QC, an emeritus fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, argues that members of the royal family are barred by a 19th century law from marrying in civil ceremonies. ... Senior lawyers have also voiced opposition. They include Cretney, whose view is supported by one former attorney-general and two other former senior law officers. He argues that the Marriage Act 1836 disallows members of the royal family from marrying in a civil ceremony. This exclusion, Cretney argues, was updated in every subsequent amending statute, including the Marriage Act 1949 which governs civil weddings today. Cretney recommends a "simple bill putting beyond doubt the capacity of members of the royal family to contract civil marriages". ~S~ |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:07 PM (#1415730) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg FABulous ass of course! ~S~ |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:10 PM (#1415732) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Peace Well, if it's any consolation, they shant be coming to my house either. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:33 PM (#1415746) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Tweed KHANDU-WHO-IS-ASLO-TWEED!!!I knew if any thread on this board would tweak yore interest, it would be this one. How are the rains down yore way and have you banned fox hunting yet? Yaz, LMFAO in actuallment means Lulu May Fox All Osteopaths. I have seen several bumper stickers obv late and that is the only reason I tried it out here. I'm not sure what the meaning is howebver. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 03:49 PM (#1415757) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: McGrath of Harlow I suppose the F might be "Fat", "Fucking", "Friendly", or in some contexts, "Fenian" or "French". Or "Folkie's" perhaps. With the LMAO having its customary meaning. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 05:36 PM (#1415829) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Big Mick I rest my case. I ask for a verifiable source, in fact I was hoping you had one. I would like nothing better than to kick this man's ass, in a figurative sense of course. What do you give me? A tabloid rag that probably has articles on the back page about aliens having sex with monkeys and producing right wing zealots. Mick |
|
20 Feb 05 - 05:43 PM (#1415835) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Peace "A tabloid rag that probably has articles on the back page about aliens having sex with monkeys and producing right wing zealots." Always wondered where they came from. Thanks fer solving the mystery. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 05:59 PM (#1415861) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Cluin Everybody in the Republican party has been divorced at least once. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 06:04 PM (#1415868) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST,milk monitor Mick it's that classy a rag they keep those stories for the front page. Good luck with the move...and if i had the technical ability to link to a pic of Shane waving, you know I would. :) |
|
20 Feb 05 - 06:07 PM (#1415874) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Richard Bridge The Mirror, like it or not, is the only UK tabloid that carries a left-ish slant. In that sense it carries a heavy journalistic responsibility up to which (it would be my impression) it usually tries to live. It wins an awful lot of journalistic awards (by eg John Pilger). Maybe it is not perfect, but it is nothing like the National Enquirer (or the Daily Star). The Times article was actually a different story, not the same one. Let's see what denials we get tomorrow... |
|
20 Feb 05 - 06:27 PM (#1415896) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: McGrath of Harlow Two tabloid rags, counting The Times. "The Times article was actually a different story, not the same one." Not really. The Times story and the Mirror story were really the same story at a different stage of development, and with a different angle. The Times ran it, the Mirror rewrote it gave it a different spin, and ran it again a few days later. Essentially the story is that there is some anticipated problem about a visit to the White House which is likely not to happen; and there are at least two different accounts about what the facts are. I'd call that two versions of the same story. Or variants as we say in relation to songs... A fairly nebulous story too at this point, which I imagine is why the other papers failed to pick it up. No doubt they will now. |
|
20 Feb 05 - 08:47 PM (#1416033) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Once Famous The thing is, Richard Bridge believes this crap and reads it while he is waiting in line in the supermarket. What's next, Bridge? "Lawyer dies from fat man sitting on his face and farting?" |
|
21 Feb 05 - 01:11 AM (#1416151) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Manitas_at_home What is it with people being "banned" from places, these days? I'm sure if Camilla wanted to go to the White House she could just join one of the organised tours. Not invited is the the same as banned. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 04:26 AM (#1416221) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Gervase The Sunday Mirror, like most British Sunday tabloids, spins its stories way beyond what is true, so I would put absolutely no faith in its claims. I should know - I worked there briefly until I got so fed up with my copy being spun and rewritten by the subs to sensationalise it and stretch the truth that I left. The then political editor - who would often rubber-stamp sensationalist guff with a supporting quote from 'Westminster sources' - had no such scruples, however. Alistair Campbell waited a few more years before his Damascene conversion. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 04:45 AM (#1416226) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST This is extremely interesting news |
|
21 Feb 05 - 05:27 AM (#1416242) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST,Mr Red in word play mode "Sounds like a misunderstanding to me" ho ho ho - ROTFLMAO when were his sounds not a misunderstanding? |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:06 PM (#1416658) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: nutty The latest in today's papers states that Charles has asked for the visit to be postponed until next year. This really is a farce |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:11 PM (#1416662) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Richard Bridge Link please nutty |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:17 PM (#1416664) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Richard Bridge I have re-read the articles. On the face of them they appear to be in sequence, not simultaneous, and to portray two different stages in the same discussion or related discussions. So far I see nothing to make me doubt the Mirror article. Gibson, of course, can judge the whole output of the newspaper although he does not read it. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:33 PM (#1416679) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: robomatic If you believe the Mirror article, you don't really understand W. Divorce is common enough among all circles in the US and no way would that lead to a problem. The only question might be one of 'shacking' up pre-nuptials. I doubt that will be officially sanctioned. Anyhow, this reads like a bash thread, not one where anyone really wants to discuss anything. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:50 PM (#1416691) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Kim C Bush Insults Charles and Camilla. Well, he certainly isn't the first. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 03:57 PM (#1416696) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Once Famous Bridge, who needs to read trash to know it's trash? Probably how you read your legal briefs, also. |
|
21 Feb 05 - 07:20 PM (#1416925) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: DougR Horse pucky! I think Mick is right for a change. It sounds to me like a political reporter in GB trying to create a story that will make Bush and the U. S. as a whole look bad. Banning Prince Charles' wife from the White House because she is a divorcee just makes no sense at all. If that were the case probably (just guessing) fifty percent of the White House visitors would have been banned. DougR |
|
21 Feb 05 - 11:47 PM (#1417077) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: George Papavgeris Well, Monday's come and gone, and I've seen nothing on the main UK TV news, nor on any other papers. It does sem OTT, I agree Doug. |
|
22 Feb 05 - 04:49 PM (#1417843) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Big Mick I find it extremely curious that I have yet to see this reported in any major publication. I get several of them daily, including the NY Times. I have yet to see any mention of this "major event". Mick |
|
22 Feb 05 - 05:01 PM (#1417863) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: sue exhull What a farce this wedding is turning into, Cant believe the Queen will not be attending!! Will it still take place do you think? |
|
22 Feb 05 - 06:02 PM (#1417930) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: DougR I certainly don't know the answer to your question, Sue, but I think the fact that the Queen is going to attend the Wedding Blessing Ceremony should get her off the hook, don't you? DougR |
|
22 Feb 05 - 06:06 PM (#1417936) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST Not with the Brits! |
|
22 Feb 05 - 07:25 PM (#1418031) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: Bee-dubya-ell I think the divorced bit is just an excuse. The real reason is that Charles and Camilla are just boring twits who represent a defunct institution that has no relevance other than to provide British citizens with something to talk about. |
|
22 Feb 05 - 07:29 PM (#1418036) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: GUEST Most of the folk on this thread aren't Brits. |
|
22 Feb 05 - 07:33 PM (#1418045) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: wysiwyg Mick, and no updates even in the Mirror, as of earlier today. Drive-by bashing? ~S~ |
|
22 Feb 05 - 07:59 PM (#1418077) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: SharonA I haven't heard or read a thing about this story in the US news media, and believe me, they've been keeping us abreast of C&C's wedding plans, where the ceremony will and will not be held, which royal personages will and will not participate in the ceremony, etc., etc. Meanwhile, the biggest recent news about Bush-quotes has to do with his having been taped as saying he smoked marijuana when he was younger, and of course is against it now. Seems to me that if he were going to ban anyone from the White House, it would be the lesbian daughter of his own Vice President. But of course he wouldn't do that; he needs Cheney. Since he also needs the UK as an ally in Iraq, I suspect that he either did not make the statement reported in the Mirror, or that the statement was made and was quickly and quietly retracted. |
|
23 Feb 05 - 02:10 AM (#1418368) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: nutty After todays news about the queen (and the rest of the royal family) declining to attend the wedding anything Bush may have done /said pales into insignificance. If the couple want this wedding to be low key they should not expect special privileges afterwards. |
|
23 Feb 05 - 02:31 AM (#1418371) Subject: RE: BS: Bush Insults Charles and Camilla From: sue exhull To be honest, I dont know or care if attending the blessing gets the Queen 'of the hook' really. I have no interest in any of the Royals, tho I do feel a bit sorry for the Queen, she must be a bit sick of all the carry ons! But, It happens to us mere mortals all the time, and we cope, so Im sure she will :). Im just fed up of hearing about them. |
