Reply With QuoteI can kind of understand a few women being interested in this silly soap opera but men? No, that beats me!
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I tend to agree.Originally Posted by BLUETIT
I can kind of understand a few women being interested in this silly soap opera but men? No, that beats me!
I have no time for them really and am surprised that there are so many strong views on this thread I started.
On an unrelated topic I have clashed with Meghans and Harrys charity organisation - while they support some good work they are supporting a damaging orphanage in Nepal - those who know me know I'm child protection and development specialist and work on care reform globally... and that supporting orphanages is hugely damaging to children and families. We also clash with other members of the royals who support orphanages. The organisation I work for have a project in Nepal and have raised alarm bells about that particular place.... but because they are royals (or were) their people are pretty closed to discussions about it.
However, while I am sure they are making a lot of money out of the TV interview, I would argue that they probably felt it was the only option to put the record straight, globally, as in the UK the 'palace' has the whole british national and royalist toxic media to do their bidding and continuing to attack Meghan and Harry. The UK media is an abomination.
Lad!!
All this bloody hullabaloo over 2 people, media are crucifying them and they haven’t committed any crime, yet Andy has got away with everything he’s been linked to regarding the paedophile Epstein. Media are really bellends in this country.
Makes you want to puke.
If only Prince Andrew had ignored Piers Morgan’s Snapchats rather than just been a sex offender he’d have got a bit more hate.
I think that is the perspective everyone needs to hear. Thank YOU!
Check their hard drives immediately
to follow up on a post earlier in this thread (that I can't find)
there was a poll today on whether we should remain a monarchy, or instead have an elected head of state and the results were 66:34 in favour of monarchy.
this is quite a big increase towards ditching the monarchy already. this kind of poll usually is 70-80 in favour of the whole daft business continuing so it represents good progress.
in the 35 and under age group there was a majority in favour of ditching the royals.
I imagine anti-monarchy sentiment will grow once the Queen dies as well, Charles isn't particularly popular
William and Kate appear to be a little more acceptable though, Charlie will not have a chance, straight to Will and Kate
If she dies
I tihnk public opinion will also turn on her if it becomes apparent that she cannot die
I guess it will be Megans fault if she doesnt die and her poularity wanes?
Chuck is 72 and there's still no sign of his apprenticeship ending.
Like most on here, you don't understand the principle of having a Monarchy. All those things like the Cenotaph, meeting other heads of states, etc. etc. is done in a non-political way. The U.S. has the president which actually costs the US many times more. The new Airforce 1 is costing $5.4 billion dollars. In 50 days Biden hasn't appeared once. In 50 days the Royal Family have completed 200 public engagements.
Just to give the argument some balance..
Think Charles should step aside if the queen passes that lets William in and his lovely wife ,they can them apply a younger and fresher approach to the role , in addition Archie become a prince and all the support dosh follows for him and his lovely family.
I have a better idea.
Charles steps aside. and so does everyone else and we end all this silliness when the current queen passes away.
open up all the public owned palaces to tourism (some are private property of the Windsor's). stop giving them millions of pounds every year and let them live their lives in peace
Bit weird to say that no one understands the monarchy and then compare it with the us president, but anyway.
Surely all the royal public engagements are quite expensive with security and so on. How many of those 200 will raise more money directly than they cost? Can't imagine it's many.
it is zero
200 public engagements in 50 days during lockdown. Interesting!
nobody wants to replace the kings and queens with a us style president, what people like me want is a ceremonial president with no real power.
like Ireland or Switzerland.
Like Mark Drakeford ?
like whoever the public want (probably not Drakeford then)
it would have the additional benefit that egotists like Boris Johnson or Donald trump who want the prestige of the role but don't actually want to do any of the actual running of the country would probably try to go for that role instead, thus saving us from their harmful leadership.
Possibly includes visits to Philip in hospital.
Posting Permissions
