And we don't have to pay any tax... dad.

[Onelife]

How dare you speak of “Sir David Beckham” like that …your King has to surround himself with people of his ilk to keep the pantomime functioning.

It was quite pitiful to listen to David Camaron avoiding awkward questions about your Kings involvement/influence in politics.

I will however give Charlie credit for his NIMBY involvement in overturning a building development by persuading his chums in Saudia Arabia not to pursue this venture.

His influence holds no bounds.

[Onelife]

I know this is going to be an excruciatingly difficult watch for you tonight…but do try and tune in (9pm BBC1)

[oldbluefox]

I enjoyed the last programme and am looking forward to the next. There was nothing in that first episode to suggest my attitude to the Royal Family may change or even be challenged. Actually the interviews with the Republicans only emphasised how shallow their arguments were. "Born into wealth and privilege"...............Come on!!! Will have to try harder than that but it gives the cheery chappies and their chums a day out with their flags. Sadly when you need a megaphone to get your message across you are struggling but God loves a tryer.

[Onelife]

I enjoyed the last programme and am looking forward to the next. There was nothing in that first episode to suggest my attitude to the Royal Family may change or even be challenged. Actually the interviews with the Republicans only emphasised how shallow their arguments were. "Born into wealth and privilege"...............Come on!!! Will have to try harder than that but it gives the cheery chappies and their chums a day out with their flags. Sadly when you need a megaphone to get your message across you are struggling but God loves a tryer.

You’ll know who to come to when you need a tissue

[oldbluefox]

I will when you come out of hiding

[Onelife]

Irrespective of where our views lie on the Monarchy, I think it very unlikely that any royalist ‘who watched tonight’s program’ will endorse the covert interference that the royal family has over the Government in its manipulation, or as the late Queen would have it “Evolving” the Royal finances to mitigate any personal impact on their already extortionate wealth.

And you wonder why there is an ever-growing distain of this parasitic institution.

[towny44]

Irrespective of where our views lie on the Monarchy, I think it very unlikely that any royalist ‘who watched tonight’s program’ will endorse the covert interference that the royal family has over the Government in its manipulation, or as the late Queen would have it “Evolving” the Royal finances to mitigate any personal impact on their already extortionate wealth.

And you wonder why there is an ever-growing distain of this parasitic institution.

David, I think the forum might have a virus, we seem to have been invaded by an annoying republican bug.y

[Stephen]

…..or a repetitive bot that is somehow bypassing the firewall.

I wonder if David has tried using Domestos

[oldbluefox]

Seems the site has been infected with the Yellow Peril virus. Thankfully nobody takes much notice of it but a good dose of Domestos should clear it.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Or gunpowder

[Onelife]

I delayed watching what I hope won’t be the final series of “What’s the Monarchy for” until today as I wanted to enjoy Christmas knowing we are one step closer to having an elected head of state. My sincere thanks to David Dimbleby and the BBC for exposing this ridiculous notion that the Monarchy has any purpose whatsoever in the 21st century.

The Invisible Man.

• An email by "A" from "Balmoral" asked Jeffrey Epstein's associate Ghislaine Maxwell for "inappropriate friends", new documents released by the US Department of Justice show
• The sender asks: "Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?" and the sign-off reads: "See ya A xxx"
• It was sent from an address using the alias "The Invisible Man" – a pen name that was also used alongside a separate email address listed in Epstein's phone book as "Duke of York"
•

I wonder if the Royal freeloaders would allow one of their own to be extradited should the American courts ask for it? I mean they themselves aren’t above a little inappropriateness if it means keeping the Royal line going, are they?

RIP Diana

[oldbluefox]

Whilst he is a total buffoon, I ask you…… if it was a member of your family would you allow him to be extradited?
Interestingly President Trump has decided his involvement in this shabby affair is fake news and all contrived. Perhaps that’s how leaders of a republic deal with matters like this.

[Onelife]

Whilst he is a total buffoon, I ask you…… if it was a member of your family would you allow him to be extradited?
Interestingly President Trump has decided his involvement in this shabby affair is fake news and all contrived. Perhaps that’s how leaders of a republic deal with matters like this.

Unlike the Royals I wouldn’t have a say in the matter. You will have no doubt watched the final episode of “What’s the Monarchy for” and having done so you will have been enlightened as to how much control the Firm has over the Media and if truth be known, over our judicial system as well.
The mere mention of Republicanism conjures up thoughts of ‘Trump’ which is convenient for those of a more Royalist persuasion but the reality is that not a lot would have to change to our political system should we decide to get rid of a hereditary head of state to that of one which is voted for.

There will come a time when the media turns its back on the Royal Pantomime and I’m hoping I’ll still be around to see it happen.

Wishing you plenty of mince pies

Happy Christmas Foxy

[Stephen]

Don’t forget to record the Kings speech tomorrow Keith.

[david63]

not a lot would have to change to our political system should we decide to get rid of a hereditary head of state to that of one which is voted for.

And just what would this "new" elected head of state actually do?

[oldbluefox]

His Majesty undertook 500 engagements last year which for a man who is 77 years old and receiving cancer treatment is pretty impressive.
Maybe OLs new head of state (President) will be taking on this role as well as his state duties. I don’t think so.

[Onelife]

Don’t forget to record the Kings speech tomorrow Keith.

I have far more productive things to do than listen to a load of patronizing twaddle....I'll be doing the washing up!

[Onelife]

not a lot would have to change to our political system should we decide to get rid of a hereditary head of state to that of one which is voted for.

And just what would this "new" elected head of state actually do?

Hopefully a lot less interference in public affairs.

[Onelife]

His Majesty undertook 500 engagements last year which for a man who is 77 years old and receiving cancer treatment is pretty impressive.
Maybe OLs new head of state (President) will be taking on this role as well as his state duties. I don’t think so.

500 engagements, with a large proportion of them taking place withing the Palace Walls, thus probably equating to him working less that 20 weeks a year, but to his credit this is a dam sight more than lazy Cam and his work shy,/bad-tempered son Willie.

[Ray B]

Don’t forget to record the Kings speech tomorrow Keith.

I have far more productive things to do than listen to a load of patronizing twaddle....I'll be doing the washing up!

Do post a photo, I'm sure you look the business in your marigolds

[Mervyn and Trish]

not a lot would have to change to our political system should we decide to get rid of a hereditary head of state to that of one which is voted for.

And just what would this "new" elected head of state actually do?

Hopefully a lot less interference in public affairs.

Well if the US elected head of state is an example, good luck with that.

[towny44]

Whilst he is a total buffoon, I ask you…… if it was a member of your family would you allow him to be extradited?
Interestingly President Trump has decided his involvement in this shabby affair is fake news and all contrived. Perhaps that’s how leaders of a republic deal with matters like this.

Unlike the Royals I wouldn’t have a say in the matter. You will have no doubt watched the final episode of “What’s the Monarchy for” and having done so you will have been enlightened as to how much control the Firm has over the Media and if truth be known, over our judicial system as well.
The mere mention of Republicanism conjures up thoughts of ‘Trump’ which is convenient for those of a more Royalist persuasion but the reality is that not a lot would have to change to our political system should we decide to get rid of a hereditary head of state to that of one which is voted for.

There will come a time when the media turns its back on the Royal Pantomime and I’m hoping I’ll still be around to see it happen.

Wishing you plenty of mince pies

Happy Christmas Foxy

If not a lot would change if we had a voted head of state vs a hereditary one, what would be the point of changing, asking for a friend.

[Onelife]

The definition of change and its implications would have to be a future goal with an undetermined transition date that reflects the complexity of changing from one outdated system to one that encompasses a more modern approach both in attitudes towards inherited privilege and the absurdity of what it represents.

As for the political changes, they could be very much along the political system we have now but without the social climbers that our present system fosters, with of course a defined roll and accountability for an elected head of state.

[towny44]

The definition of change and its implications would have to be a future goal with an undetermined transition date that reflects the complexity of changing from one outdated system to one that encompasses a more modern approach both in attitudes towards inherited privilege and the absurdity of what it represents.

As for the political changes, they could be very much along the political system we have now but without the social climbers that our present system fosters, with of course a defined roll and accountability for an elected head of state.

Most democracies that don't have a Royal family member as head of state, but have a parliamentary system that decides all policies have an appointed head of state, who generally is a political non entity, no power only the obligation to represent their country in any non political arena.
Surely our royal family do that in far better way than the likes of Ireland and Germany, granted the pageantry does not come cheap, but most of the rest of the world seem to be very jealous of how we manage these state events. What if the Royals and the govt were to be more open about the Monarchy's finances, would that satisfy your curiosity?

[oldbluefox]

How nice it was to see the Royal Family yesterday at Sandringham looking totally resplendent. I was surprised how many people had turned up from other parts of the world to see them.
His Majesty produced an excellent King’s Speech which, by all accounts has been well received.
Happy Christmas everyone.