Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Queen and Prince Philip recreate honeymoon photo to mark 60 years of wedded bliss
The Daily Mail (UK) ^ | 17th November 2007 | IAN GALLAGHER

Posted on 11/17/2007 4:28:09 PM PST by fanfan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 last
To: Polybius

“The elected representatives of Great Britain, put in power by British voters in free elections, wanted no part of a Republic of Great Britain.”

WRONG

The British government is put in place at the request of the UN-ELECTED monarch. That is how the British system has always worked. The government yes commands a majority of voters in parliament, but if you think that they allow every bill to pass through to a second reading based on actual support for it - you are living in a fantasy world.

Please know the basics of the monarchy and our system before discussing it.


61 posted on 11/24/2007 10:23:21 AM PST by UKrepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: UKrepublican
“The debate point is not whether “Commonwealths” are undemocratic but that Puerto Rican independence advocates actually claim that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is “undemocratic” while conveniently ignoring the fact the voters of Puerto Rico could vote themselves independent whenever they so please.”

That is such a stupid arguement. Just because something has evolved, i.e as in a monarchy, or on occasions even a dictatorship, it does not mean it has a democratic mandate or credentials.

Non sequitur.

Your thinking is so concrete that it is obvious that trying to debate with you is a waste of time.

So, let me simplify things for you:

You want a Republic of Great Britain?

Get the majority of the British electorate to agree with you. After the next democratic election and after the time necessary to pass the required legislation, it will then be so.

Simple as that. Good luck.

62 posted on 11/24/2007 10:48:37 AM PST by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Polybius

“Non sequitur.

Your thinking is so concrete that it is obvious that trying to debate with you is a waste of time.”

Yes nice linky etc - but I’m here to debate the facts - and I responded to your points without dismissing you. You should try and do the same.

“You want a Republic of Great Britain?

Get the majority of the British electorate to agree with you. After the next democratic election and after the time necessary to pass the required legislation, it will then be so.

Simple as that. Good luck.”

Yes all very nice and well, I have no problem with that but you failed to actually respond to what I said or any of the points I made.


63 posted on 11/24/2007 10:52:43 AM PST by UKrepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

I keep forgetting how pretty she was. She is like Deborah Kerr without the red hair. But this would be the Kerr of “The Sundowners,” where she played without the make-up.


64 posted on 11/24/2007 11:09:43 AM PST by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Polybius

Then the Windsors have to be paid off, and I guess that like the other formerly royal houses, they would remain among the richest families in Europe.


65 posted on 11/24/2007 11:14:20 AM PST by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Then the Windsors have to be paid off, and I guess that like the other formerly royal houses, they would remain among the richest families in Europe.

In any society, be it democratic or dictatorial, the monarchy can simply be told to pack their bags and hit the road. No society has to pay off royals.

Prince Phillip's family was once told to do just that when the Greek monarchy was abolished in 1922.

66 posted on 11/24/2007 11:53:15 AM PST by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ciexyz
Even with the hateful smear campaign against her in the film The Queen,

What are you talking about? That movie was very obsequious and respectful towards her and the Monarchy in general.
67 posted on 11/26/2007 2:09:26 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Borges
What are you talking about?

Au contraire, the film "The Queen" made her out to be a cold-hearted, anal-retentive monster who had no finesse in keeping faith with her people after Diana's death - she needed Tony Blair to ride to the rescue to save her throne.

68 posted on 11/27/2007 9:48:31 PM PST by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Ciexyz

She was made out to be a diginified human being who makes mistakes and admits them. It’s certainly nothing resembling a smear job. The Royal Family was pleased with the film and there was talk about Helen Mirren being invited to Buckingham Palace for tea.


69 posted on 11/28/2007 7:33:46 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson