She was a very attractive young woman.
Her mom was quite a beautiful lady in her youth as well.
Posted on 05/12/2007 6:53:15 AM PDT by theothercheek
When Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip visited Goddard Space Flight Center, they dropped in on mission control to listen to an exchange between British-born NASA astronaut C. Michael Foale and the three astronauts aboard the international space station, and later toured an exhibit with British astronaut Piers Sellers, who explained how a spacesuit's life-support system operates. The Washington Post reports that Prince Philip inquired, "What do you do about natural functions?" and "the astronaut gave a discreet answer."
Not only this is the most unoriginal question the Prince could have thought to ask, but it is rather rude as well. No one asks him or his wife about their bodily functions, so why does he think this is a proper question to ask someone else? Instead of sending a platoon of protocol advisers to our shores to teach us bumpkins how to behave, the advisors would have done better to concern themselves with how the Royal Consort – who is clearly the product of inbreeding – behaved.
NOTE: See also: "G-d Save (Us From) The Queen" (second item, The Daily Blade).
“Why have a monarchy in this day and age?”
I’d say that’s the Brits problem not ours. European culture may not be what it once was but courtesy is everyone’s problem and the comments here and elsewhere show a distinct lack of.
If one can’t put aside their negativity for a few moments when meeting a head of state then we’re a sorry lot indeed.
“Prince Charles who talks to plants”
I talk to mine too. Notice I didn’t mention Charley or the other ones, just the Queen.
Wait a minute. Everyone who was to meet the Queen was perfectly willing and able to be courteous and hospitable to her - unlike when Bush visits other countries, no one here did anything that any one of us common folk would have found the least bit offputting. So why did Buckingham Palace feel the need to send over “protocol advisors” to make sure we treat her as something that she is not in THIS country - our sovereign? So what if President Bush stumbled over his prepared remarks and a phrase came out wrong - he tends to do that. Why did she have that puss on? I submit that WE Americans were very gracious to her and SHE put on airs of superiority and looked down her nose at us. So who is the sorry lot here? I don’t think it’s the Americans she interacted with.
Yes, I did notice actually. The Brits have been discussing getting rid of the monarchy for yars. At least she has some gravitas. Price Charles? No. Maybe after she goes, so will go the monarchy.
I honestly don't have a problem with the Queen. She was a guest in our country, and it's polite to honor her traditions just as we would honor the traditions and customs of any other country's dignitary.
I don't feel less of a person because of it. Maybe that's just me.
Don’t you think that every single person who was to come in contact with the Queen was going to go out of his/her way to make her visit pleasant - special, even? Of course. That’s American hospitality - and good manners. Who cares whether you extend your hand to the Queen before she extends hers to you? President Bush doesn’t make an issue of it when someone does that to him. No American does. So why does the Queen make an issue of it when she is visiting us, first by schooling us yokels on “proper” behavior in her presence and second by looking annoyed, put out and disapproving when someone forgets the intricacies of protocol that we fought a revolution not to have to follow?
One time, during a state dinner hosted by Bush 41, one of the foreign heads of state drank from the finger bowl by mistake. Seeing this and not wanting the dignitary to even get a hint that he may have done something wrong, Bush 41 picked up his finger bowl and drank from it too. That is the sort of manners - American manners - that no protocol advisor from Buckingham palace can ever teach. Because their job is to make you feel inferior so that their boss can feel superior.
we “have” to behave a certain way before the Queen (don’t speak to her unless she speaks to you, don’t shake her hand before she offers hers to be shaken, etc.) What nonsense!....Tell Hillary, dude.
Have you been in her presence and had to do stuff like that? As far as I know, all that was required when you are in close proximity to the POTUS or First Family protocol-wise is that you not make any explicit or implicit threats within earshot of the secret service. Does Hillary make you curtsey or something?
” I honestly don’t have a problem with the Queen. She was a guest in our country, and it’s polite to honor her traditions just as we would honor the traditions and customs of any other country’s dignitary.
I don’t feel less of a person because of it. Maybe that’s just me.”
My point exactly. Guess that makes two of us!
Have you counted the number of anti-abortion, anti-embryonic stem cell research, anti-illegal alien, anti-Hillary, pro-Iraq War women writers out there? From New York? Congratulations on stifling one of the few, if not the only. To The Other Cheek, that’s rather ironic. I meant no harm, and only wanted to give a new voice a boost.
To the Freepers who did read and like these posts -regardless of whether I had put them in the section where they were “supposed” to be posted - I hope you will continue to give moral support to someone with a viewpoint rarely heard coming out of NYC by taking the time and trouble to check “blogsville” to find future posts.
I told you already - the Queen couldn't take a lollipop from a baby, let alone anybody's rights.
The British royals haven't had any power to speak of since well before the days of Queen Victoria. She tried to exercise her right to choose her own Ladies of the Wardrobe, and all hell broke loose. In fact, I think you have to go back to before the 1688 Revolution to find any English king who subscribed to the sort of Divine Right thinking in Eikon Basilike. (And a lot of good it did Charles I, anyhow.)
You are attacking a straw man of British sovereignty that hasn't been around for at least 300 years.
I don’t know about taking a lolly from a baby but they sure suck up a lot of resources.
By marrying Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, George VI got a much older family into the royal line. Same for Charles (lot of good it did him.)
She was a very attractive young woman.
Her mom was quite a beautiful lady in her youth as well.
No kidding but this looks just like one of my sisters in law - and she’s not British.
I cannot imagine that in this world, most people would ask the question.
But, the privleged classes in the world never bother with contemplating the more mundane things in life. Rememember When President George Bush went to a grocery and was amazed to see the electronic scanners at the cashier counters? He probably hadn’t been in a grocery store for decades.
The way that royal life works is simple. There is a cadre of men that work for the Queen and her family, telling them what to do, when to do it, and how to do it. I’m sure in the beginning, everyone is grateful for this type of instruction. With time, it all becomes second nature.
Of course the prince had a limited understanding about this subject. The fact that he asked it may be in poor taste.
And yet, his mother-in-law, the Queen Mother, dispensed with all protocal in her life. She said and did things that no other Royal would do. She felt she had earned the position and no one would ever question her, the Queen.
Married a bit down did she?
Every family has them.
Yours is a more thoughtful take on the issue than I have been able to muster. I was just miffed at the implication that Americans weren’t couth enough to be in the Queen’s presence without extensive coaching in manners. Thank you for helping me see beyond that ...
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.