News0 min ago
Do You Agree With Her ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by tamaris. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't have the stamina or willpower to carry this through but the bottom line is that the money isn't earned like normal folk have to earn it (barring what the latest victim brings with her), some anachronistic, perverse system of 'right' is at the back of it all and it's outrageous.
It is what it is but 'it' is wrong. Charlie didn't build a duchy, he was given it because of historic nonsense and set the serfs to work on it making and selling overpriced tat to the gullible.
Still, gawd bless 'em and their appetite for free everything.
It is what it is but 'it' is wrong. Charlie didn't build a duchy, he was given it because of historic nonsense and set the serfs to work on it making and selling overpriced tat to the gullible.
Still, gawd bless 'em and their appetite for free everything.
Sqad - // Yes.......I agree with her.
I don't want the Royal family to be "more human"....I want them to be different.
I am not in favour of leveling off all incumbents of a country as in my opinion it leads to mediocrity.
This "slapping on the back" and mixing with the "common folk" is not my idea of the Monarchy.......any Monarchy. //
Your approach is very much the one that has retained the 'mystery' of the monarchy for so many generations.
The Queen Mother never gave an interview, no-one really knows what the Queen thinks - about anything - of such mystique is the monarchy's status made and maintained.
But I think that even the Firm understand that times are changing, and they must modernise.
William, as heir, has to be as remote and stuffy as Charles - Kate was greeted as a 'breath of normality' but she also has to toe the royal line in terms of her appearance and behaviour.
Harry however, is this generation's Princess Margaret - he isn't going to rule, so the pressure is off.
As far as Meghan is concerned, she can never win, and I am sure she is completely aware of this, and will deal with it perfectly well.
The Mail - Ms. Platell's readership, are largely a monarchist bunch, so she is pandering to them by tutting that this is not a 'gel of British stock and breeding', and is therefore, by default, somewhat vulgar.
In terms of criticising Ms. Markle's clothing, I seriously doubt that most people give a money's about its provenance, which they are only aware of because the media in general, and the Mail in particular, are careful to make an issue of it.
Ms. Platell and her Mail colleagues will sniff and tut, the tabloids will titter about the age difference, ethnicity, and 'murky past', and the public will go on liking Meghan a lot.
I am sure Ms. Markle is more aware of her status and life ahead of her than the snooty and pompous Mail journalists would like to think and suggest, and I doubt she gives a flying fly about what they think of her.
I don't want the Royal family to be "more human"....I want them to be different.
I am not in favour of leveling off all incumbents of a country as in my opinion it leads to mediocrity.
This "slapping on the back" and mixing with the "common folk" is not my idea of the Monarchy.......any Monarchy. //
Your approach is very much the one that has retained the 'mystery' of the monarchy for so many generations.
The Queen Mother never gave an interview, no-one really knows what the Queen thinks - about anything - of such mystique is the monarchy's status made and maintained.
But I think that even the Firm understand that times are changing, and they must modernise.
William, as heir, has to be as remote and stuffy as Charles - Kate was greeted as a 'breath of normality' but she also has to toe the royal line in terms of her appearance and behaviour.
Harry however, is this generation's Princess Margaret - he isn't going to rule, so the pressure is off.
As far as Meghan is concerned, she can never win, and I am sure she is completely aware of this, and will deal with it perfectly well.
The Mail - Ms. Platell's readership, are largely a monarchist bunch, so she is pandering to them by tutting that this is not a 'gel of British stock and breeding', and is therefore, by default, somewhat vulgar.
In terms of criticising Ms. Markle's clothing, I seriously doubt that most people give a money's about its provenance, which they are only aware of because the media in general, and the Mail in particular, are careful to make an issue of it.
Ms. Platell and her Mail colleagues will sniff and tut, the tabloids will titter about the age difference, ethnicity, and 'murky past', and the public will go on liking Meghan a lot.
I am sure Ms. Markle is more aware of her status and life ahead of her than the snooty and pompous Mail journalists would like to think and suggest, and I doubt she gives a flying fly about what they think of her.
Really dont care myself being a Republican but what AH says makes sense in that the mystique is done through the heirs who must hold themselves above political argument whilst the touchy-feely is done by the minors. To a degree this has been done before and is nothing new.
Can't stand that Platell woman though.
Can't stand that Platell woman though.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Mass Job Losses In The Retail Sector...
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank13 mins ago
