On the other hand, I wonder how many tourists take a trip to Washington DC specifically to see the changing of the Secret Service security detail at the White House.
The Firm⦠they all look pretty comfortable to me
and nobody ever comes to see them.
A significant spot of leech downsizing is required. Now, where did I put my guillotine?
And thatās only the hanger-ons in line to the Throne ![]()
Britain needs to enter the 21st century. Itās forelock tugging and ancient rituals that made Brexit enthusiasts think thereād be a second coming of the Empire, once the pesky EU foreigners got out of the way. Now Canada is in pole position EU wise and the UK isnāt even on the grid. (F1 parlance there
)
Seeing Charles peddling down from Buck Palace to the opening of Parliament, in the rain wearing the Royal mac and with Camilla on the crossbar, would be a far better visual clue than the pomp as to Britainās status in the World today.
Letās face it. if Trump likes the British Monarchy, and he does, then there must me something seriously wrong with it.
If the monarchy in itās current form was completely āself fundingā would that change peopleās minds about moving to being a republic?
No, because at root, republicans are motivated by envy and not principle. You can see that in everything written on the topic.
I know itās early Porridge, but just to clarify, youāre claiming that out of the 195 or so sovereign states the 160-170 that are republics are so because of āenvyā and not āprincipalā.
How can so many billions of people have got it so wrong, and the UK (of all places) got so right? ![]()
Itās all smoke and mirrors. A bunch of rebadged Germans (who with their cousins brought us WWI) sitting on top of the UK - it doesnāt make sense to a republican (small r) like me. Nor many other British citizens I would think, which is why the āthey are good value for moneyā myth was born. Everybody is too busy trying to live their lives to really examine the cost, financial and reputational, of Big Ears and the Firm.
Not at all. By ārepublicansā, I mean people who want to replace the UK monarchy with a presidency. And not all republicans - itās just it seems that way sometimes ![]()
I donāt think we can ever do much in the way of comparison between UK and other countries, because of the way the UK Constitution developed. But the way the UKās Head of State works - largely staying out of politics, but providing an apolitical object for the peopleās loyalty - is far better than what we would see with a (necessarily politicised) presidency.
That was quite stinky bait, Iām surprised that you bit ![]()
I have finally realised that on some topics a strong suspicion that our Mr. Lapin is a wind-up merchant is justified.
After all, weāve front row seats right now on everything that can happen if a pure Presidential system goes awry.
I thought he was the one caught by the bait rather than the one casting it. ![]()
Iām inclined to agree. Tne āenvyā bait was two big juicy maggots on a size 10 tipped with a tail of lobworm laid down over a carpet of groundbait stuffed with pinkies and squatts. Classic style.
Maybe you donāt recognise sincerity and sound analysis when you see it? ![]()
FWIW, Roger and John are both gentlemen whose judgment and character I respect, while disagreeing profoundly with (different parts of) what each believes. Theyāre not the only ones here, but Iām not naming names in order to protect the innocent ![]()
Thanks for the confirmation ![]()
I think we should all watchThe Real King Of England or whatever it was called by Tony Robinson and bring that family back as its my family
. Would make me Duchess of Kent or someone equivalent and I could live in a fancy house ![]()
![]()
Itās all fun.
Only on certain topics Karen, just like one would throw out a remark over dinner and see how it develops. On other matters I am deadly serious ![]()
Equally Porridge, Iām a spurtle at heart ![]()
Better stirred than beaten!
i think the term is shaken, not stirred 007.