Skip to comments.
Breaking: Prince Charles to marry Camilla Parker Bowles
CNN (wire services) ^
| February 10, 2005
| AP
Posted on 02/10/2005 1:27:23 AM PST by Former Military Chick
Wires reporting that Prince Charles to marry Camillla Parker Bowles.
They plan to marry in April 6th of this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: camelbarkerbowwow; england; homewrecker; princecharles; rottweilerweds; royals; royalwedding; weddingbells
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-259 next last
To: Former Military Chick
Charles doesn't need a wife, he needs (through no fault of his own, necessarily) a NANNY, and that is what Camilla has been for him all these years.
To: Former Military Chick
I'm shocked, Shocked I tell you!
that it took them this long to go forward with it.
22
posted on
02/10/2005 1:38:23 AM PST
by
GretchenM
(Mrs. Gregoire, U-Haul is waiting eagerly for your call.)
To: MadIvan
William shows every sign of not wanting to be King. Which in my eyes makes him ideal for the job... A point for monarchy.
23
posted on
02/10/2005 1:39:11 AM PST
by
dread78645
(Truth is always the right answer)
To: tjwmason
There's no way I'm going to join the Camilla fan club either. She's bound to get some title, though I agree she won't become Queen, and probably not Princess of Wales.The memories of Diana are too strong; if Charles dared give her the title of Princess of Wales, the reaction would be horrific. It is precisely because of Diana, and the very unseemliness of their relationship, that means that Charles is not likely to be King. It must be William. King William V has a nice ring to it.
Regards, Ivan
24
posted on
02/10/2005 1:40:23 AM PST
by
MadIvan
(One blog to bring them all...and in the Darkness bind them: http://www.theringwraith.com/)
To: Former Military Chick
Eh, Charles is an idiot and the Brits will be better off without him. Maybe it's time for another Lord Protector? : )
25
posted on
02/10/2005 1:43:13 AM PST
by
WestVirginiaRebel
("Senator, we can have this discussion in any way that you would like.")
To: MadIvan
Good riddance. I wanted William to be our next King anyway. Britain generally does well with a King William at the helm. William I and III, yes, but William II? If I recall he was killed on a hunting trip by his own men for being, shall we say, more attracted to the men than he ever was to the women. Strong William I, and similarly, Edward I, followed by effeminate sons bearing their names.
England has not fared well with a Charles-in-charge yet. Given what happened to Charles I, and the reputation of Charles II, I wondered whether a Charles III would ever be crowned anyway. Were it not for the passing of Victoria, I suspect even Edward VII might have continued along the same line as Charles is now. The problem may be that Elizabeth II has delayed Charles ascendancy for so long that his role as prince for all this time has just worn thin for him.
To: Former Military Chick
Now wait -- he's divorced too isn't he?
27
posted on
02/10/2005 1:47:01 AM PST
by
ichabod1
(The Spirit of the Lord Hath Left This Place)
To: Lib-Lickers 2
I have this sneaky little suspicion that William might be gay...
28
posted on
02/10/2005 1:47:54 AM PST
by
ichabod1
(The Spirit of the Lord Hath Left This Place)
To: Agamemnon
I said "generally", not always. William I, III, and IV were all good monarchs. William I was bold and brave, William III was William of Orange - a fearless soldier and peerless statesman, and William IV was a good, substantial, moderate and parsimonious king that helped Britain avoid revolution from breaking out.
William II, "Rufus", is alleged to be homosexual, and inherited his father's ambition, but few of his talents. So, 3 out of 4 good King Williams isn't bad.
FYI, Charles initially planned to be crowned King George VII.
Regards, Ivan
29
posted on
02/10/2005 1:48:30 AM PST
by
MadIvan
(One blog to bring them all...and in the Darkness bind them: http://www.theringwraith.com/)
To: Former Military Chick
>>Camillla Parker Bowles
True story: I once toured the Ben and Jerry's plant (friggin' hippies but hey, free samples) and they said that they had a "name the flavo(u)r" contest in Britain
and some of the _non_-winning entries included "Minty
Python" and... "Vanilla Parker Bowls" :)
To: Former Military Chick
I'd rather see Prince William as the King. Prince Charles is just too damn weird.
31
posted on
02/10/2005 1:49:47 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Smoke-free since January 16, 2005)
To: WestVirginiaRebel
Brits will be better off without him. Maybe it's time for another Lord Protector?
What an horrendous idea; even thinking about it turns my stomach.
I would be perfectly happy if the succession were to skip a generation, but abolishing the Monarchy would be grotesque in the extreme. The highest aim of the leftists would be achieved, and within 20 years Britain would no longer exist.
32
posted on
02/10/2005 1:50:31 AM PST
by
tjwmason
(For he himself has said, and it's greatly to his credit, he remains an Englishman.)
To: Former Military Chick
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1170515,00.html CHARLES TO WED CAMILLA

Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles are to marry. Clarence House has confirmed reports they will wed, with the rumoured date April 6 in Windsor. The 56-year-old heir to the throne and his long-term partner will marry in St George's Chapel. Charles divorced the late Diana, Princess of Wales in 1996. She died the following year. The Prince has in recent years given Camilla a more prominent public role, frequently taking her to official engagements. But she has no official royal position and at engagements they were sometimes seated apart. They first met at a polo match in Windsor, Berkshire, in 1970. Their marriage will raise the issue of how she will be addressed, the possible options Princess of Wales or even, when Charles becomes King, Queen Camilla. Royal commentator Jennie Bond told Sky News: "It's brilliant news. I've long said they should get on with this." She said Camilla was a "very nice woman" but admitted: "There will be quite a lot of hostility from those who do not like her."
33
posted on
02/10/2005 1:50:36 AM PST
by
ETERNAL WARMING
(We have the best politicians corporate money can buy)
To: ichabod1
My gaydar isn't going off.
34
posted on
02/10/2005 1:50:56 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Smoke-free since January 16, 2005)
To: WestVirginiaRebel
Eh, Charles is an idiot and the Brits will be better off without him. Maybe it's time for another Lord Protector? : )If you can name an MP that has the military talent, political skill and the sheer willpower to take on that job, I'm all ears.
Regards, Ivan
35
posted on
02/10/2005 1:52:34 AM PST
by
MadIvan
(One blog to bring them all...and in the Darkness bind them: http://www.theringwraith.com/)
To: MadIvan
Charles can't exactly give her a title anyway, can he? The Queen is the only one that can do that, right?
There's been a lot of talk about getting rid of the monarchy, but I don't think too many people really want to do that. However, if Charles ascended after marrying this woman I think that might tear it. If William were to become King I think it would give the dynasty another 40 or 50 years of zest.
All that aside, it seems Queen Elizabeth is not planning on going anywhere anytime soon. She may outlive her own mum in the end.
36
posted on
02/10/2005 1:53:00 AM PST
by
ichabod1
(The Spirit of the Lord Hath Left This Place)
To: ichabod1
He was - now he is considered to be a widower for legal purposes, and as far as remarriage is concerned within the Church.
It is going to be interesting to see how this if finessed. Personally, I think Charles will still be King, if for no other reason than to prevent William having to take up that burden any earlier than he has to.
Whether Camilla will be Queen is another matter entirely - short term, I would expect her to be Duchess of Clarence.
37
posted on
02/10/2005 1:53:01 AM PST
by
naturalman1975
(Sure, give peace a chance - but si vis pacem, para bellum.)
To: ichabod1
I have this sneaky little suspicion that William might be gay...The tabloids have caught him with his girlfriends. He isn't gay.
Regards, Ivan
38
posted on
02/10/2005 1:53:29 AM PST
by
MadIvan
(One blog to bring them all...and in the Darkness bind them: http://www.theringwraith.com/)
To: Former Military Chick
39
posted on
02/10/2005 1:54:45 AM PST
by
BunnySlippers
(When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest! - Bullwinkle J. Moose)
To: naturalman1975
short term, I would expect her to be Duchess of Clarence. I'm slipping - I mean, of course, Duchess of Cornwall.
40
posted on
02/10/2005 1:55:06 AM PST
by
naturalman1975
(Sure, give peace a chance - but si vis pacem, para bellum.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-259 next 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson