I love the "Would it seem odd?" test. What a standard!
Quote above is from an unnamed "well-placed" source, but the linked article (in The Guardian) also quotes Paul Flynn, a Labour member of the Commons political and constitutional reform select committee:
"We know Prince Charles has deep-seated, passionate views, some of which are sensible, some eccentric and some barmy.... If he continues to be a controversial figure on issues like complementary medicine and country sports he could precipitate a constitutional crisis if he comes up against a government which is bent on some course of action and he disagrees and refuses to sign the act of parliament."Barmy views on country sports, eh?
Flynn said the Queen’s silence on controversial issues had secured the monarchy and made it acceptable in a democracy.
Posts
43 comments:
The British Monarchy has been a huge PR invention since the 1920s. The people they have playing the parts these days are terrible actors.
I suspect QEII has another decade in her.
One thing I like about America is our tourist traps don't try and get involved in policy. When's the last time Mt. Rushmore tried to speak out on some big public issue?
I think the monarchy is valued (or tolerated) mainly as a nostalgic symbol of Britain's past. If Charles continues, as King, to go all climate-change on the poor Brits, he'll wear out his welcome pretty fast. He needs to learn to STFU and smile, like his mum.
"I suspect QEII has another decade in her."
She may outlive him yet. Charles isn't a spring chicken.
"country sports" = fox hunting, etc. which have become non-pc in the UK
I always thought Charles was a terrible shit for marrying a woman he did not love.
"... [when he is king, Prince Charles will] try and continue with his heartfelt interventions, albeit checking each for tone and content to ensure it does not damage the monarchy.
It's like he's describing his sex life. And what a fucking disaster that was. How about be honest and true and say what you think when you think it? Try that for a change, you rich unemployed fucker.
What a king may become a real ruler?
If it would seem odd, does that make it a go or a no go?
Prince Charles assertiveness is a sign of the times. The brief interval of Representative elected governments replacing the true Kings is an experiment started in the Colonies that spread to France. With King Obama rising up over the experiment in the Colonies what's to keep the old times from coming back.
I have been saying for years that monarchists better hope and pray he predeceases his mother because I give him a year before he creates a constitutional crisis.
And it is for this reason that Elizabeth will never abdicate.
Two in one week.
God save the Queen.
God save our Constitution.
Elizabeth and her mother saved the Monarchy in Britain.
The Queen Mum's best line, on the topic of the Blitz and sending her girls off to safety.
"The children won't leave without me; I won't leave without the King; and the King will never leave"
The British Royal Family is not particularly intelligent, but they are raised to be brave. It works well for them.
Charles is an odd man. I hope the Queen lives a long, long, time.
As I said before, Charles keeps Elizabeth alive. No way she's gonna go before him.
Charles has ben practicing to be King; for one example, he has worn his mother the Queen's panties every day for the last ten years.
It really would be so much nicer for William (with Kate) to follow Elizabeth directly.
Since Charles seems to want to make "heartfelt" but odd statements, why -- at this point -- should he ever do anything else?
But what's it to me? I'm American.
I did read Tina Brown's book about Diana. It was excellent!
William seems decent enough, but Harry is the real deal.
"Charles has ben practicing to be King; for one example, he has worn his mother the Queen's panties every day for the last ten years."
You can wear it too: for sale on eBay.
And here's an article on the lady who made bras for the Queen.
Saint Croix wrote -
"It's like he's describing his sex life. And what a fucking disaster that was."
You couldn't be more wrong. It produced an heir and a spare. From the monarchy and the state's standpoint, that is the very definition of success.
The Royals did wonderful things for morale during both the 1st and 2nd World Wars. Like Drill Sgt said, they were brave.
Harry seems to get "it". Charles...never.
Many of us are hoping that Queen Liz decides to skip Chuck and make Willy the Next king.
"It's like he's describing his sex life. And what a fucking disaster that was."
You couldn't be more wrong. It produced an heir and a spare
Well ...there is some question as to exactly who produced the spare.......
You know what they called "barmy" back in the 80s when they made fun of him? His organic farming. Now it's all the rage and his Duchy Originals brand of organic food is a huge success and he employs a lot of people.
Also his support of "alternative medicine" which is also all the rage. I bet most of the barmy writers at the Guardian see chiropractors, do yoga and get take echinacea.
He married a woman he didn't love because he had to. In those days, it had to be a virgin with an "unblemished past" and in the 1970s and early 80s that was hard to come by.
If you read Tina Brown's book on Diana (great read), she did what a lot of women do. Pretend to like everything the man likes (Scotland,the country, hunting, fishing, reading) to get the man and then as soon as they were engaged...she hated hunting, Scotland, etc.
Harry was conceived almost 3 years before Diana met Hewitt. I feel sorry for Harry to have to hear on the radio or read in print that people doubt his paternity. I just think it is cruel.
The Spencer's are red-heads. Harry looks like Diana's sister Sarah and Sarah's son is practically his twin. At the wedding of William and Kate I did a double take.
http://www.geni.com/people/George-McCorquodale/6000000001436218210
Agree with some of the above commenters, QEII will never abdicate while Charles is in line for the throne. She is likely the last of her family to understand -- right down to her bones -- the meaning of the term "noblesse oblige".
If Charles had the good of the country in mind, he'd step aside in favor of his son, and then Elizabeth could step down, retire, and live in the country and raise Corgis.
Sadly, that will never happen.
Next week the supreme court will consider whether 27 letters between Charles and government ministers should be published following a nine-year freedom of information battle between the Guardian and Whitehall.
Supreme Court? Supreme Court? What pernicious modern nonsense is this?? What happened to the Law Lords?
Stoutcat - The Queen will never abdicate. Even if Charles was just like her. She sees it as her duty to be Queen until her death. In fact, one of the reasons why I think the Queen and her husband are in such good health for their ages is that they have jobs that keep them interested and sharp.
Constitutionally, she can't pass the crown to William. Also, she knows more than anyone what it's like to become monarch at a young age with a young family.
Since the Diana drama is in the past, Charles perhaps learned what his mother already knew. Shut up, do your job, this will pass.
William and Harry (who are very close to their grandparents, unlike their father) seem to emulate their grandparents behavior rather than their parents. Having suffered through their parent's airing of private matters, they both are very private.
I read many years ago that the queen would ask people" how is the project coming along?'
It stuck with me because I always have projects.
Now, I usually ask "What are you working on..?"
LCB said...
The Royals did wonderful things for morale during both the 1st and 2nd World Wars. Like Drill Sgt said, they were brave.
While the demands on the Royals for Duty and Bravery were more critical to the country during the existential crises of the two world wars, let us not forget that the Queen standing on the pier in 1982, sending her second son off to the Falklands War. William wanted active service in the ME but had to settle for Search and Rescue Piloting, while Harry served two short tours in the ME. ""There's no way I'm going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my arse back home while my boys are out fighting for their country."
I like Diana's children.
I do not like Elizabeth's son.
What's come out in the last few years that is flat out astonishing is that the Queen and Charles have used the power of Royal Assent to kill and modify legislation nearly 40 times:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills
When's the last time Mt. Rushmore tried to speak out on some big public issue?
The last government shutdown drama? I seem to remember some strategically placed traffic cones out by Mt. Rushmore by jerkwater park rangers trying to do their bit to embarrass Congress and shake the money tree.
"Complementary medicine"?
Is he trying to say complimentary medicine (as in free to the user)?
Or is this some new kind of medicine that you still pay for but which somehow completes you as a person (ala Jerry Maguire's "you complete me")?
Re: George:
What's come out in the last few years that is flat out astonishing is that the Queen and Charles have used the power of Royal Assent to kill and modify legislation nearly 40 times:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills
Good for them! Professional politicians should occasionally have to confront someone who has not consumed his whole life in climbing to the top of a greasy pole. Now that they've gutted the Lords, the Queen is the only power that can stand in their way.
God save the Queen. God save Britain from her heir.
Among that crowd, I can't think of someone I'd like to hear less from than Charles. The last I recall, he was chasing a tampon. One of Diana's sons would be fine.
Frankly, I'd much rather hear from Cathy Cambridge (as Tom and Lorenzo call her). She would have my FULL attention.
- Krumhorn
"I love the "Would it seem odd?" test. What a standard!"
And yet King Charles III will have a hard time meeting it.
"Many of us are hoping that Queen Liz decides to skip Chuck and make Willy the Next king."
She cannot. Only Parliament could do that, through a bill that would have to pass both Commons and the Lords and then get Royal Assent. I think she's determined to outlive her son.
"What's come out in the last few years that is flat out astonishing is that the Queen and Charles have used the power of Royal Assent to kill and modify legislation nearly 40 times:"
I would be interested to know who the British public trusts more to have their interests rather than special interests' desires in mind; Queen Elizabeth or the current Prime Minister. I would not have a Queen - but I'd rather have her than David Cameron and his colleagues.
"Barmy views on country sports, eh?"
Yes, Charles is an ardent fan of infidel-beheading.
"Elizabeth and her mother saved the Monarchy in Britain. "
Charles seems to have inherited a damaged version of his great uncle Edward's. Inbreeding has done more damage than wars.
"Barmy views on country sports..."
That's a fair thought to lie between maids' legs.
Post a Comment