To: Eddie01
Ah heck, just let them become the 51st state. . .we will let them keep the pound and the Royals. . .
2 posted on
04/24/2016 4:54:59 PM PDT by
Hulka
To: Hulka
So long as the royals be required to perform Hamlet - in the rain.
They could move to Milan, and start a bird hat / codpiece discount barn.
3 posted on
04/24/2016 4:58:57 PM PDT by
Eddie01
To: Hulka
NO way!
The Brits would turn them into a cricket team.
4 posted on
04/24/2016 5:06:09 PM PDT by
tumblindice
(America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
To: Hulka
Sorry - no royals. We have enough layabouts.
9 posted on
04/24/2016 5:20:54 PM PDT by
Zirondelle
("disce aut discede")
To: Hulka
It wouldn’t be too hard. As part of an agreement, we pass a law making protecting the Royals as a non-profit, and allow them to become a private institution. They remain the ‘Royal Family’, and have succession of the crown, without any actual authority. But I’d definately let them ‘devolve’ into several different states.
17 posted on
04/24/2016 7:46:31 PM PDT by
Dimez_Recon
(Tomahawk and Currahee.)
To: Hulka
Ah heck, just let them become the 51st state. . .we will let them keep the pound and the Royals...
And the Page 3 girls...
21 posted on
04/24/2016 9:19:31 PM PDT by
farming pharmer
('Your work will warm you' - overheard in a Soviet gulag...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson