Who would you prefer next to be King and Queen

Thanks John,l I must admit to not knowing a great deal about his estates but I've grown plants for years and I've never talked to them.
It appears to me that someone who has never struggled to survive in the real world should not be held up as some kind of pattern that the rest of us should follow.

Its totally ridiculous that they should know anything about how the ordinary person lives and manages to survive, in the same way, we cannot understand how they live.

 

Nero.
I have studied about him when I was a pupil.
Since he was playing his lyre while Rome was burning, he is a symbol of infamy.
But nowadays some scholars argue that actually that was not the case.
Who knows...

 

The Windsors so far, have turned out to be a totally dysfunctional family. May be the gene pool or nurture or both but William and Kate have a genetic advantage in that William’s mother was a ‘commoner’ and Kate is a ‘commoner’. William has had, and still has a real and very skilled job and Kate had one too. William too seems to have much more ‘up top’ than his dad or uncles and aunts.
I wouldn’t wish the throne on him soon, but I think in due course he’d make a far better monarch than his pater with Camilla Park and Ride as consort.

 

I have no issues with the royals. Some media companies would like to see the back of them, but if you dig beyond that, they are ok.

The thing is, they are just humans at the end of the day. They are not perfect, as prince Foolip keeps proving, but nobody is, and they are just figureheads.

I voted Bill and Katey, purely because they are younger and more down to earth and up to date. The monarchy brings money into the country through tourism, and I think a young down to earth king and queen will create a good balance between tradition and modern attitude.

Plus Kate is quite fit. She looks like a posh version of my good lady, so I have no objection to her being in the spotlight. Likewise Bill is a handsome lad, I'm sure ladies of all ages have no problem seeing him on telly, so everybody wins.

 

No, she can't. Not as an anointed monarch. Her uncle, yes he abdicated, but that was before her was offically crowned at the Coronation, which never happened in his case. The Coronation Day went ahead anyway, on the same day...just a different monarch!

 

The Queen can abdicate the throne only with the consent of the British Parliament and the parliament of the other nations that recognize her as their Head of State.
I think and hope that will happen next year at the Queens Diamond Jubilee.
She will pass the crown to William and Kate .
Charles and his mistress wife I feel have no right to rule the country.
Both divorced and remarried.
The scandal with the Beautiful Diana .
If only she could have been at her sons Wedding today.

 

I know that if Charles was not unfaithful to Diana, that she'd be alive today. Don't like him at all.

 

To be fair, it was not all one sided. Diana was giving her attention to other men (read nothing into that, I don't know the nature of that attention). I believe there was a butler sniffing about, and there was Mr Al Fayed's son. In fact I believe she was with Mr Al Fayed's lad when the limo crashed.

In any case, unless Charles was controling Diana's every move, which would be a very bad thing, then she was a free spirit and therefore Charles can't be held responsible for her every move. I doubt very much that when she died she was travelling in a Limo, driven by a chaufer who was alleged to have been over the drink drive limit, at speed, when the limo crashed.

 

The reason Diana was "a free spirit' was because Charles was to busy with Camilla and couldn't care less about her.
He didn't want her after the boys were born.
She was used to produce an Heir . Then thrown away, I don't believe he ever loved her.
On the engagement when asked about being in love his answer. Whatever love is.
She was entitled to give her attentions to whom she liked after he Charles had divorced her.
Diana was a lovely beautiful lonely person.
Charles hated the fact she became more popular than himself.
The people loved her.
It is so very sad she could not be here today to see her beloved Son Marry Kate.

 

As most here know I'm not an enviromentalist, but I take exception to the fact that the royals become patrons of all kinds of different organisations, and actually pretend to care.

They then go off and do their own thing, which is in many cases totally against what the organisations stand for.

I guess despise is too stronger word, but I do feel they need to be more honest, and as an example, if you want to blast birds out of the sky, be it tame or wild, or kill the occasional stag for an afternoons sport, then dont accept those kind of jobs.

 

Well maybe you,re better informed than me Armandii.

But Charlie has over the years always been associated with the Glorious 12th, and pictured out there with his gun.

Dont get me wrong, I still think a game bird has a better life than a chicken.
But I think they are hypocritical

Fox hunting has always been a royal pursuit as well. Only stopped, perhaps, by the law.
Stag hunting at Balmoral was also a good day out as well.

I'm sure they would still be shooting tigers if it was allowed.

I know organisations want them as their head, as it gives them some kind extra credence over other charities, RSPCA, RSPB, etc.

I'm in the process of building my own soap box, its higher than yours:WINK1:

Sometimes its just good to agree to disagree