Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prince Charles to Marry Camilla Parker Bowles
FOX News ^ | Feb.10, 2005

Posted on 02/10/2005 9:40:34 AM PST by nuconvert

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-258 next last
To: Little Ray

She was born in 1947.
She's a bit too old for children. (without a lot of medical intervention)


161 posted on 02/10/2005 2:37:31 PM PST by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

Good!


162 posted on 02/10/2005 2:43:12 PM PST by Little Ray (I'm a reactionary, hirsute, gun-owning, knuckle dragging, Christian Neanderthal and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Allright you guys. You are posting these pics of the blond Norwegian Princess with her boobs hanging out. Here are two extraordinarily lovely ladies who are both intelligent, classy and bruntte, even without boobs hanging out! Click on the second picture and tell me they aren't just as lovely as Priness Medeleine. Even the (eek!) OLDER one.


"http://www.hellomagazine.com/profiles/charlottecasiraghi/?view=gallery"


163 posted on 02/10/2005 3:13:21 PM PST by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: All
Some folks here just slime out of their holes when another come-a-callin' regarding beautiful women. The threads quickly go downhill from there.

Why couldn't one like this be posted, which depicts more of her real beauty...and class.


164 posted on 02/10/2005 3:21:32 PM PST by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL (Stress is the confusion created when the mind overrides a body's desire to reach out & choke a rat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel

She does fill out that tiara well, doesn't she?


165 posted on 02/10/2005 3:27:57 PM PST by TheBigB ("Official Keeper of the FR Eye Candy" ~Title bestowed by SirLurkedalot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB
,,, star quanTITylity!
166 posted on 02/10/2005 3:31:14 PM PST by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB

Oh, my goodness!

I guess there is some advantage to those long nights in the Swedish winters.

**double sigh**


167 posted on 02/10/2005 3:39:17 PM PST by opocno (France, the other dead meat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

"George Bush should make Congress appoint Arnold Schwarzenegger as his successor."

I live in Caleeefornia. If He is elected, I will have to move back to Scotland.


168 posted on 02/10/2005 3:49:31 PM PST by followerofchrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

>Yeah, that's kind of what the "love is truly blind" saying is all about isn't it??

I think the "love is blind" is because said in the first throes of love we tend to endow our beloved with all sorts of good qualities which few can live up to. LOL!!


169 posted on 02/10/2005 4:17:26 PM PST by Paperdoll (On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl

>I thought Diana was a gorgeous creature but not a person I liked. She ws exhibitionistic, immature, self centered and immensely determined to destroy that family<

With all due respect, cajun, I couldn't disagree with you more. Diana was a teenager when she married Charles, and I think quite smitten with him. At first she was unsure of herself. To Charles (and perhaps even the Queen) she was but a brood mare for the throne. Her marriage was a tragedy from the very beginning. However, she eventually became a charming and poised philanthropist in spite of it. Anything she may have done behind the scenes was her desperate way of coping with a very unhappy situation all around. IMHO she meant no harm to the royal family, and was a loving mother to her sons.


170 posted on 02/10/2005 4:29:45 PM PST by Paperdoll (On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
I don't get why women just worship that bulemic needy person and her memory
It is always tempting to impute
unlikely virtues to the cute
- P J O'Rourke

171 posted on 02/10/2005 4:54:32 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Never apologise, Never explain. It's a sign of weakness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: followerofchrist

And you are a pietistic pissant that can't beyond the humor of the situation.

FO Ahole


172 posted on 02/10/2005 6:01:48 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (lex orandi, lex credendi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

LOL.

My husband says "cute" makes up for a good 15 points on the IQ test.


173 posted on 02/10/2005 6:08:58 PM PST by cajungirl (freeps are my peeps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
Any children from the marriage will be raised in the stables.

I agree. I figured these people got the nickname "the horsey set" from their looks...

174 posted on 02/10/2005 6:14:33 PM PST by NCjim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Churchillspirit

Yeah, well, after Henry VIII no royal ever would consider divorce either....the times they are a changin'!!

Since they are accepting divorce and the married/divorced mistress as consort, it is time to consider accepting abdication as well.

Charles should finally marry the woman he has always loved. But, because they both are adulterers, neither should hold the title, "Royal Highness". They have hurt so many people, and thus are very "low" indeed. Charles should never ascend to the throne.


175 posted on 02/10/2005 7:13:24 PM PST by tuckrdout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl

Diana was handed a very unfortunate hand, for a teenager to deal with. It is true that she knew about Charle's love for Camilla when she married him...but, she was very young and believed that he would change...

But, too bad. Happens to millions of women. At least she had the love of most of the world, two wonderful sons, as well as riches and beauty. It is sad that she did not have a good marriage. Not many do. She could have made the best of the good she did have. She could have really made a huge difference in the world.

It is a shame that instead she chose to inflict the same pain on other women, that Camilla inflicted on her. I ceased to feel any pity for the woman after it came out that she destroyed other homes, by having affairs with married men. She shamed herself and hurt her children.


176 posted on 02/10/2005 7:23:28 PM PST by tuckrdout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Bella_Bru
Very interesting as there is no way for Charles to get out of being king. It's just the way it goes. It doesn't skip a generation unless that generation is dead. Camilla won't be the Princess of Wales, so I guess she will merely be his consort.

The only way Charles can be KING is if Camilla's ex-husband dies before they get married. To be KING you can't marry any divorced women. Catholic woman are also out of the picture if Charles is to be KING.

Charles will never be KING.

Line of Succession List below:

Roman Catholics or those married to Roman Catholics are automatically excluded.

In the top 52...

(DOB)

1. HRH The Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales (1948)marriage to a devoiced women.

2. HRH Prince William of Wales, eldest son of The Prince Charles (1982)

3. HRH Prince Henry of Wales, younger son of The Prince Charles (1984)

4. HRH The Prince Andrew, The Duke of York, second son of HM Queen Elizabeth II (1960)

5. HRH Princess Beatrice of York, elder daughter of The Prince Andrew (1988)

20. Lady Davina Windsor (1977), daughter of Richard, Duke of Gloucester

21. Lady Rose Windsor (1980), daughter of Richard, Duke of Gloucester

22. HRH Prince Edward, Duke of Kent (1935), son of George, Duke of Kent

George Windsor, The Earl of St. Andrews (excluded himself from succession by marrying a Roman Catholic)

Edward Windsor, Baron Downpatrick (1988), son of George, Earl of St Andrews - excluded himself by becoming a Roman Catholic

23. Lady Marina Charlotte Windsor (1992), daughter of George, Earl of St Andrews

24. Lady Amelia Windsor (1995), daughter of George, Earl of St Andrews

Lord Nicholas Windsor (1970), son of Edward, Duke of Kent (excluded himself by becoming a Roman Catholic)

177 posted on 02/10/2005 8:36:07 PM PST by Major_Risktaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan

I doubt it. If Camilla had been the first wife, she would probably have symbolized whatever Diana as the first wife symbolized that irritated him at the time. He would probably have treated her just the same as he did Diana and with someone else to boot. On the other hand, if he was "in love" with Camilla in the first place, why in the world didn't he marry HER before she and he both were married to someone else? I've read somewhere that Camilla actually suggested his marriage to someone else rather than her even when they were both available for some reason. Perhaps she just enjoyed watching him flail about and then stealing him from another woman. That said, shall we never mention them again? Perhaps they richly deserve each other.
As an outsider, I see them as adulterers. Oops! Mum's the word!


178 posted on 02/10/2005 8:48:18 PM PST by Twinkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: followerofchrist
She is not ugly, she is an older woman (like your mothers), and he is an older man. Is he supposed to find a young girl he doesn't love, one without character and has nothing in common with him so the public's shallowness can be appeased? I am glad he is marrying her. He has loved her forever. He should have married her long ago. This one will last.

I would like explained to me, as a woman, why so many comments are derogatory to her because of her lack of youthful beauty? Don't you people have any other reason to hate her, or is not looking like a model sufficient? There are many ugly (not just older, but actually ugly) republican women. Is it appropriate for democrats to make light of the fact that they aren't pretty? Why is it it that we women are judged on our appearance, and not the content of our intelligence and character?


I do see that you do have a point anthough I admit I would be curious to see a picture of Camilla Parker Bowles when she was younger. Personally, I think he should have married her "way back when" when he first fell in love with her, IIRC, they hung around together in their late teens or early 20's. Diana, unfortunatly, was a trophy wife, but to remain true, he should have just married Camilla in the beginning and leave it at that instead of "alley catting" around on Diana.
179 posted on 02/10/2005 8:51:38 PM PST by Nowhere Man (We have enough youth, how about a Fountain of Smart?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: John_Wheatley
You can't have a catholic monarch because in the past, (and even today) the supreme leader/authority of a Roman Catholic on earth, is not the nation, but the Pope and Vatican. Think about it. However, there ARE catholic royals, like Princess Michael of Kent.

You are so wrong!

A CATHOLIC MONARCH

The Habsburg monarchy had a long relationship with the Roman Catholic Church.

As the political descendant of the Holy Roman Empire, the Habsburg monarchy had dual responsibilities for its subjects’ spiritual and temporal welfare.

In this context, the Austro-Hungarian monarch was head of both the State and Church; however, it must be noted that although the Habsburg emperors were Apostolic Majesties mandated to spread the Catholic faith and foster the Church’s welfare, they were also tolerant of non-Catholic faiths found in their empire.

________________________


Queen Mary

(Mary, Queen of Scots) 1542 - 1587

Last Roman Catholic monarch of Scotland.

________________________

How about Spainish this 1928 One peseta Spanish postage stamp Pius XI and Alfonso XIII

Alfonso XII of Spain (November 28, 1857 - November 25, 1885), was king of Spain, reigning from 1875 to 1885, after a coup d'etat restored the monarchy and ended the ephemeral First Spanish Republic.

180 posted on 02/10/2005 9:00:56 PM PST by Major_Risktaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-258 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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