What is the Queen for?

[Johnnytheboy]

V8 Fettler said:

The reality is that if the queen stood on a dictatorship ticket at the next general election, she would probably win. Such is the dismal state of politics in the UK

I was hoping for a royal coup after the 2010 election when no one could decide who'd won.

[Bradgate]

Cutting ribbons and saying "and what do you do?" or "have you come far?" a lot.

Sitting through yet another bloody pop concert with earplugs in and a scowl on her face.

[turbobloke]

DJRC said:

turbobloke said:

Personally, Chuck(les) can keep his architectural preferences, and the rest, as conversation pieces between him and his flowering plants and vegetables. It'd be better for him and us if he achieved his ambition to be Camilla's tampon rather than become monarch.

So we can't even credit someone for a positive thing now?

Credit where it's due? His Trafalgar Square comment was 30 years ago. It's not clear that anything beneficial came from it.

Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 10th September 16:38

[turbobloke]

DJRC said:

turbobloke said:

Personally, Chuck(les) can keep his architectural preferences, and the rest, as conversation pieces between him and his flowering plants and vegetables. It'd be better for him and us if he achieved his ambition to be Camilla's tampon rather than become monarch.

So we can't even credit someone for a positive thing now?

Credit where it's due? His Trafalgar Square comment was 30 years ago. It's not clear that anything beneficial came from it, architecturally.

[SilverSixer]

NinjaPower said:

I like the Queen, and the fact that we have a royal family.

It's certainly a major attractions for visitors to the UK.

Evidence please.

I think you're confusing the Royal Family with all the XXL council houses they inhabit at our expense, which is what people really come to see. Look at France, for example, Versailles. It is always rammed, it takes hours of queuing to get in. Ain't been no Roi, Reine nor Dauphine in there for a while.

[jmorgan]

SilverSixer said:

Evidence please.

Certainly a shed load of people at trouping the colour. Don't think the accidentally got lost and all found themselves on the mall.

They turn up in droves for changing the guard as well.

[anonymous-user]

jmorgan said:

SilverSixer said:

Evidence please.

Certainly a shed load of people at trouping the colour. Don't think the accidentally got lost and all found themselves on the mall.

They turn up in droves for changing the guard as well.

Yes, and like you, most of them probably couldn't even spell 'trooping'............

"You can fool some of the people all of the time"

[jmorgan]

REALIST123 said:

jmorgan said:

SilverSixer said:

Evidence please.

Certainly a shed load of people at trouping the colour. Don't think the accidentally got lost and all found themselves on the mall.

They turn up in droves for changing the guard as well.

Yes, and like you, most of them probably couldn't even spell 'trooping'............

"You can fool some of the people all of the time"

Who gives a fig on spilling mistooks....

Anyway, we have a Royal Family. Get over it.

[slipstream 1985]

I like the queen and what she represents.

[Randy Winkman]

McWigglebum4th said:

Mostly to keep Ed Milliband from turning up at any international event like the olympics etc and being there to represent the UK


If we can't have the royals then we should have a goat as the head of state

How about just not having one?

[DJRC]

turbobloke said:

DJRC said:

turbobloke said:

Personally, Chuck(les) can keep his architectural preferences, and the rest, as conversation pieces between him and his flowering plants and vegetables. It'd be better for him and us if he achieved his ambition to be Camilla's tampon rather than become monarch.

So we can't even credit someone for a positive thing now?

Credit where it's due? His Trafalgar Square comment was 30 years ago. It's not clear that anything beneficial came from it, architecturally.

? He hasn't shut up about bloody urban architecture in the last 30yrs! Whatsmore he was the only public voice at the time asking wtf have the architects imposed on us! The guy might be an arse in a lot of what he says but he's been bang on about buildings. You may disagree but I suspect its more because of who he is rather than what he is saying.

[turbobloke]

DJRC said:

turbobloke said:

DJRC said:

turbobloke said:

Personally, Chuck(les) can keep his architectural preferences, and the rest, as conversation pieces between him and his flowering plants and vegetables. It'd be better for him and us if he achieved his ambition to be Camilla's tampon rather than become monarch.

So we can't even credit someone for a positive thing now?

Credit where it's due? His Trafalgar Square comment was 30 years ago. It's not clear that anything beneficial came from it, architecturally.

? He hasn't shut up about bloody urban architecture in the last 30yrs!

Sure but then I didn't claim that he had!

DJRC said:

Whatsmore he was the only public voice at the time asking wtf have the architects imposed on us! The guy might be an arse in a lot of what he says but he's been bang on about buildings. You may disagree but I suspect its more because of who he is rather than what he is saying.

Really, there's nothing about who the bloke is, it's all about what he says.

Ultimately none of his opinions matter, though they can have undue influence. I'd suggest there's more chance of it being 'because of who his is' that some people give any credence to what he says.

I appreciate that you agree with HRH speaking out about buildings. Hopefully you'll appreciate that I don't!

[Sir Humphrey]

Ideally I would have the UK as a republic, but I like having an impartial head of state rather than Tony Blair/David Cameron to steal more of our money and getting himself more power over our lives.

I would have the monarchy pay its own way from its own lands and businesses though.

[dcb]

Randy Winkman said:

How about just not having one?

+1

Be lovely to leave the middle ages behind and be
a citizen in a republic, like most of the rest of
Europe has done. In some European cases, centuries ago.

You never know, it might encourage some folks
to drop the us'n'them attitudes and adopt a more
positive "we're all in it together" attitude.
This could work wonders for UK social attitudes.

Of course, Brenda, Phil the Greek, Brian, that woman
with the hair married to Brian, Diana's Kids (even the
ginger one) and the rest of the Saxe-Coburgs^W^W Windsors
should be, in my view, pensioned off ASAP.

I'm sure Brenda and Phil don't want to open any
more shopping centres at their age.

[V8 Fettler]

dcb said:

Randy Winkman said:

How about just not having one?

+1

Be lovely to leave the middle ages behind and be
a citizen in a republic, like most of the rest of
Europe has done. In some European cases, centuries ago.

You never know, it might encourage some folks
to drop the us'n'them attitudes and adopt a more
positive "we're all in it together" attitude.
This could work wonders for UK social attitudes.

Of course, Brenda, Phil the Greek, Brian, that woman
with the hair married to Brian, Diana's Kids (even the
ginger one) and the rest of the Saxe-Coburgs^W^W Windsors
should be, in my view, pensioned off ASAP.

I'm sure Brenda and Phil don't want to open any
more shopping centres at their age.

I don't want to be like the rest of Europe, thanks. Several generations of my family fought not to be like the rest of Europe, so please bugger off to Europe if that is your wish.

[Johnnytheboy]

dcb said:

+1

Be lovely to leave the middle ages behind and be
a citizen in a republic, like most of the rest of
Europe has done. In some European cases, centuries ago.

You never know, it might encourage some folks
to drop the us'n'them attitudes and adopt a more
positive "we're all in it together" attitude.
This could work wonders for UK social attitudes.

Of course, Brenda, Phil the Greek, Brian, that woman
with the hair marr loopied to Brian, Diana's Kids (even the
ginger one) and the rest of the Saxe-Coburgs^W^W Windsors
should be, in my view, pensioned off ASAP.

I'm sure Brenda and Phil don't want to open any
more shopping centres at their age.

Lovely poem!

[TwigtheWonderkid]

I suspect the Queen and I are on the same side re Scottish independence, that is we're against it. But I would be appalled if the queen lent her support to the NO campaign. The day the monarch interferes in things like this, it will be the end of the road for them. Which I suspect will be the day after Charles takes over!

[imagineifyeswill]

The Queen being the the very epitome of diplomacy will keep her opinions to herself but it is surprising we havent heard anything from Phillip hes not ussually shy about making his thoughts known. Disregarding his few word gaffs made on public appearances, while being seriously interviewed he ussually has fairly sensible and valid opinions and I think Charles tends to take after him in that respect.

[Ayahuasca]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I suspect the Queen and I are on the same side re Scottish independence, that is we're against it. But I would be appalled if the queen lent her support to the NO campaign. The day the monarch interferes in things like this, it will be the end of the road for them. Which I suspect will be the day after Charles takes over!

She made her feelings known in a speech in 1977, why is it a problem to do so now?

[davepoth]

Ayahuasca said:

She made her feelings known in a speech in 1977, why is it a problem to do so now?

Because her opinion might actually matter this time.

As to what the Queen is for, it's to make sure we don't get President Blair.

Monarchy is a ridiculous idea, is undemocratic, doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and runs completely counter to any idea of a modern society. But despite all of that, we have what is generally considered to be the best head of state in the world, bar none. She's such a good head of state that we export her head-of-state-ness to two dozen countries around the world. Compare her to the alternative.

Look at France. and then point and laugh.

Look at this guy:



ant tell me who he is without doing a reverse image search in google.

Try to remember a US president who wasn't at risk of being impeached.

Just because it seems "right" that democracy would be the best thing doesn't mean that it actually would be.