Posted on 02/10/2005 1:13:48 AM PST by Dont Mention the War
Just announced on CNBC Europe.
LMAO!
Here's the way I see it: Diana was a pathetic figure with some natural PR gifts who got in way over her head and was wrecked by the experience. Charles couldn't help but grow up emotionally stunted in that environment and didn't have the common sense to try to pretend his marriage to Diana meant something to him.
The whole affair was a personal tragedy. We should all be glad we don't have to grow up and live in the world of the Windsors and that no one gives a damn what we do every minute of the day. I don't see how we can begin to judge these people by a normal moral code when they don't inhabit anything like a normal world. It's sad, sad, sad.
The Windsors should follow the continental European model of enjoying their spectacular wealth in private with their peers while withdrawing from 90% of the publicity they do and putting forth a patriotically modest front. This cross between Fantasyland and Hollywood they've created is death to everyone who comes close to it.
(To our UK friends reading this message board: no, it's not my business as an American to tell you what to do with your institutions. All I'm saying is that the current state of the royal family is transparently hazardous to anyone unlucky enough to be born into it, and something ought to change if we don't want every HRH to go to his grave with at least one gruesome divorce broadcast to the whole world.)
The last Royal, IMO, was the Queen Mother. Those following haven't been worth spit, including the present queen. Royalty is so yesterday.
In a way, that was the whole reason the C of E was founded in the first place, so that the King could do the things he was not allowed to do under the Catholic Church.
It's going to be a civil service anyway. Not a religious ceremony. Though the Archbishop of Canterburyt will be permitted to say a few words at the end.
I'm glad there will be some civility, at least.
More like Mr. Ed?!
I've always thought it was neat that Charles preferred the plain middle-aged Camilla, his true love, to the glamorous but ditzy blonde he was stupid enough to marry.
(don't assume by this that I am plain and middle-aged.)
Or do.
That was his younger brother Harry!
Rather than beat him up, I prefer to wish them well at long last.
sw
Wrong prince--it was his brother Harry who showed up in the Nazi garb.
I thought it was the House of Windsor?
>Actually from what I've heard, Prince William is more in >line to become King. But, I dunno, after his showing up to >some party in Nazi garb, I think he jeopardized his >chances.
Prince William didn't do that, Prince Harry did.
> I have to admit, strikes me as kind of romantic. It is >kind of like the ugly duckling girl finally triumphs over >the blond cheerleader (talk about your mixed metaphors >there... must get more coffee!).
I find your synopsis horrible! Ugly duckling girl was a homewrecking whore, blond cheerleader was horribly mislead into believing that her Prince loved her and was miserable to find out he didn't. You act like CPB is the victim here!
>Remind me why Camilla and Charles didn't get together as a >couple in the first place? Was that the Palace?
She wasn't a virgin. She blew it years before and that was her fault if she wanted to be royalty. Princess Di had to go to a doctor to be certified a virgin before she could marry.
>I don't see how we can begin to judge these people by a >normal moral code when they don't inhabit anything like a >normal world. It's sad, sad, sad.
Should that same logic apply to Michael Jackson and molesting young boys?
Yawn,,,in other news, a cat got stuck in a tree...
I'm not sure I would characterize any of these individuals (no, not even Diana), as a "victim" here. I don't think the situation is quite as black and white as you perceive it to be. I think there is blame to go around for the whole situation, and there also is something sad and rather futile about the whole mess. I was only noting that Charles didn't run off with a bimbo model/actress/socialite/whatever. He returned the woman who, it seems, was his first and true love. I agree with you that his conduct during his marriage to Diana was reprehensible (but hers was not perfect either), but to me there is still something about his loyalty to his first love. His disloyalty to his wife, however, is deserving of condemnation. How much better off all would have been had they just dealt with the situation openly, ended (or never begun) the obviously mismatched marriage, or at least behaved honorably in its demise.
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.