Posted on 11/19/2010 4:55:59 PM PST by NormsRevenge
I hear ya,, if she could hang in there to 100,, then William and Harry are ready to go.. Charles has been a disappointment but look whose boots he’s trying to fill family heritage-wise.. I like his kids.
OK by me!
So...who cares? Didn’t the Revolutionaries fight and die to rid us of this “royal mania”? I bet this moron’s mother is taking weird medical treatments to live beyond his life to appoint one of her grandsons. Do you think he and camilla will be going to a dentist anytime soon?
Lord Carrington was Margaret Thatcher’s first Foreign Secretary.
So, Charles wasn't screwing horse face while he was married to Princess Diana? THAT kind of committed member to the Church of England?
The Prince of Wales did have an affair during his marriage, yes. His affair began shortly before or shortly after his wife also started her affair. At the time this happened, both considered their marriage effectively over, but divorce was not a simple matter. They decided to try and live separate lives without taking that step - they ultimately decided this was untenable.
Did he commit adultery? Yes. Was that wrong in the eyes of the Church? Certainly.
In the circumstances, however, I can see why it happened. He lacked easy access to solutions other people have come to take for granted.
Camilla says Prince Charles may be queen.
I remember watching the wedding of Charles and Diana and thinking, “this is a serious mismatch.” their age difference was a small factor, but she was so young, full of life, and looked as if she wanted to twirl around and dance in that wedding gown!
Your posts have been extremely interesting to read and cast a different light than what the press puts out. I feel distaste for Charles, but he must have done something right to have nurtured such fine, brave sons.
Neither of them were blameless in what happened in their lives - but he was knew much better than she did what their lives were like and didn't prepare her enough and didn't make sure enough that she did understand. One of the reason William waited so long to propose is both his father and his grandmother urged him not to propose until both he and Kate were certain they understood what it meant. They don't want them making the mistake.
Long live the Queen!
Prince Chuck isn’t that much of a conservative. I grew up wanting to be like him . . . . . . until Princess Diana. After that, I lost all respect for him and see him for the inbred moron that he is.
His belief in Global warming is not where his liberalism stops. He’s another liberal who believes in one set of rules for royalty, and a different set for everyone else.
That’s a sentiment he shares with Algore.
I know him personally and I know his political beliefs. He is a conservative and the only type of liberalism he has any time for is clasical liberalism - the type that existed before American leftists corrupted it. Limited government. Freedom of religion. Freedom of speech. And individual liberty at the core of mankind.
You certainly don’t have to respect him, but you don’t even know what he actually believes.
His actions and his own words tell me everything I need to know about him. He lives in luxury off the backs of Britsh taxpayers, has no real job and preaches to everyone else how they should live their lives.
That's not the definition of a Conservative.
Not even "The House of Kennedy," aka "The American Royal Family?"
He doesn’t live off the back of British taxpayers, his wealth comes from land and property he owns (the Duchy of Cornwall). It in, essence, a company that he runs as a Chief Executive Officer. That is a real job.
In addition to that he also fulfills the roles the constitution of the United Kingdom requires him to. Following the constitution fits my definition of conservatism quite well.
And for the record, he doesn't get a penny in income from the British taxpayer. The only members of the Royal Family who do receive a taxpayer funded income are the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, and that is a twelve million pound per annum payment in exchange for ceding the two hundred million pound profits from the Crown Estate to Britain's general revenue - the taxpayers of Britain come out well ahead on the deal.
That’s an interesting question.
There are no members of the Royal family sitting in the Lords at present. The highest members of the peerage are the current Duke of Norfolk, who is distantly related to the royal family (as is most, if not all the peerage).
I’m not sure who was the last member of the Royal Family to sit? Anyways, as far as I can tell, there is nothing that would bar one of the Royal Family from sitting as a peer on the Lords, and if the Commons were to invite them to sit on Cabinet, they could sit as minister of defense or Home Secretary.
Andrew, Duke of York took his seat in the Lords on 12th February 1987. By the time, Edward was created Earl of Wessex in 1999, hereditary peers no longer had the right to sit.
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.