As for the Queen I don't give a s
t either way, I just can't see why anyone would be interested in what she does. How is it different from any other celebrity?
She fills a post. She is head of state. This is a vital position. It is one that can be abused. The Queen, however, performs her function with little fuss, she entertains foreign heads of state whom I wouldn't like to be in the same road as, and does it with very little scandal. Other countries do it differents. We could have a president: George W., Clinton anyone?
The Queen holds a role that is apolitical and, remarkably, does it well.
Further, the armed forces hold an allegience to the Queen and not to a political party. You don't have to look far to see how important this might be.
There is much wrong with the royal family but if it was to go it would be replaced by something different. How about Varsi? Perfect post for her. She would not be able to fiddle her expenses claim for accommodation. Because that is the type of person who would probably replace the Queen, a career politician.
There's an article in the Telegraph today about whether oligarchy is the problem rather than monarchy.
As a country, we are lucky to have her as the head of state. Hardly a celebrity, she has a function and performs it well.
No, I think we already are a quiet little backwater of the EU, with more pretense than ambition on the "world stage" whatever that is.
You hate the UK so much, moved away and then still moan about it? Wasn't the point of moving away so you were unaffected about the thing in the UK you dislike so much?
Olympics is great to have the UK. However we are doing a very very good job as making it as tacky as humanly possible. That logo is awful. That melted helta skelta - WTF?
However the stadiums and facilities we're building are top notch. Hopefully they will get some use afterwards. It's a great thing for the UK, but I'll try and avoid it as much as possible
I'm not big fan of the olympics. It's main function is to sell advertising space. However, it promotes sport as a secondary function. I think that the dedication required to perform any sport well is something that should be encouraged in the young.
There's a very rough estate in Brighton. I don't want to name it so let's call it West Rhodean. If you wanted to split the kids, the male kids at least, into two groups then there are those who play (rather than follow) a sport seriously and those who cause trouble. There is some 'seepage' of course, but the rule is that if the kids take up sport seriously then there is hope for them.
Their coaches are the real social workers. There wre three lads of the same family. Two played football and the other, the runt, didn't. The LBO told me that he'd spoken with the coach of the football team hoping to turn the youngest around. Unfortunately the lad didn't take kindly to having to work hard so he was 'lost'. One wonders if it wasn't for football whether the elder two would have avoided the temtations of the estate.
The olympics is an advertising fest. On the playing fields and arenas it rewards excellence but not those who work hard. However, it motivates. Get more kids into kit and we'll get more kids being productive.