April 3, 2009 at 6:15 am

For a Most powerful man on the planet, and leader of country which fought against principle of birthright this is very very inapropriate thing to do. I know some will point to “respect” thing but it goes very much against that piece of paper which says something along the lines that all men were created equal.
And look at the Frog enjoying it.. :D:D:D
By: bazv - 4th April 2009 at 09:44
And I always thought it was only me who didn’t think Diana was a combination of Mother Teresa and a blonde bombshell.
Nah not all of us were taken in by the fluttering eyelashes…she didnt have much taste in men either :rolleyes:
cheers baz
By: bazv - 4th April 2009 at 09:41
The Civil List in 2006, as representative figure, was £12.2mn net. So thats ballpark 50p per working person per year for the upkeep of long standing tradition that is intrinsically linked with our national identity. Compare that with the UK social security budget and you’ll easily see which drains on our society need removal.
Well Jonesy
You ignored my point about how much land the ‘Wales’ family control…Do you know exactly how much ??
If you want to believe ‘official’ figures then dream on boy…they are at best usually misleading or more usually ‘terminological inexactitudes’.
No argument about the ‘social’ drain on us taxpayers but that just adds on to the fact that everything our governments do are extremely wasteful and dont get me started on MP’s allowances and the completely un needed MEP’s on the euro gravy train…we should be out of europe.
I remember when we were a cheap little island…we used to view most continental countries as extremely expensive,and now we are one ourselves.
cheers baz
By: Flying-A - 4th April 2009 at 03:00
A fascinating commentary on BHO’s royal progress thru Europe:
G-20 Outtakes
Victor Davis Hanson, April 1, 2009
Article printed from Works and Days: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson
URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/g-20-outtakes/
Poodle Redux. Blair was denigrated as Bush’s poodle, although his eloquence and influence over Bush were clear to all. In contrast, Gordon Brown is embarrassingly obsequious to Obama, in a way Blair never was around Bush. And in further contrast, Obama shows an airy, polite disdain at being courted in such grubby fashion—while Bush was downright magnanimous in taking advice from Blair. Didn’t Brown get the message with the unviewable DVDs, the return of the Churchill bust, the ‘UK size of Oregon’ analogies? And will the press do a Brit “poodle” story?
Rich Rioters. Odd to see anarchists trying to burn and loot while some are text messaging and cell-phoning in the news clips—as if such ignoramuses can’t grasp that nihilism and anti-capitalist angst lose their authenticity when they depend on the trademarks of the global corporate world. Spoiled Westerners tried to riot on TV before texting each other to meet for latte (no doubt at Starbucks); those in Peru or Chad are happy enough to have access to Amoxicillin via globalization.
Europe Out-europed. There is a certain sort of irony in London. Bush was so easily caricatured as the right-wing Texas-slanging cowboy that Euros found it easy to pose as progressive utopian antitheses. (Never mind that Bush in his second term was good to Europe, or that his positions on immigration, spending, new federal programs, etc. were hardly conservative.) Now Obama is trumping them all as a far more genuine leftist than any in Berlin or Paris. The President wants far bigger deficits than they do, wants more trade protectionism to protect domestic unions, wants to embrace cap and trade whole hog, is more eager to engage radical regimes abroad, and will pay for his socialism with big cuts in defense that will make it harder to protect socialist unarmed Europe.
All sorts of ironies arise: is all this sort of a ‘be careful what you wish for’ nemesis that Europe deserves? (I wrote about this for this week’s TMS column). A sort of Obama doing a Nixon to China that everyone can take an odd delight in? (no liberal will dare suggest he is being rude to the Brits or having trouble connecting with our allies). Or is Obama reflecting new realities that the US is now a revolutionary society whose immigration the last 50 years has come from Latin America, Africa, and Asia, that in turn better warrant our attention? Hussein is not the middle name of most European ministers (nor are many of African heritages), and Obama reminds Europe that we too were a colony without much of a colonialist history. All so strange.
Debt, debt, debt everywhere. The backdrop behind the entire scene is that Obama is borrowing $1.7 trillion, and with future projected budgets that require perhaps another ca. $10 trillion over the next possible eight years. The message seems to be that we Americans need new entitlements that we cannot pay for, nor have we earned them with goods and services, but we want all of you abroad to lend us the cash nonetheless. Odd, as was pointed out a few posts ago, that we will have cradle-to-grave health care due to borrowed Chinese dollars that didn’t go to basic cancer treatment to millions of Chinese who toil at factories.
And Apologies Too! Obama apologized for American culpability for the meltdown. But wait: Iceland melted without us. No American forced Austrian banks to lend 100% plus of their worth to eastern Europe. What did Wall Street have to do with the crazy Spanish or Aegean real estate market, or the nutty spending habits of oil-drunk Russians and Middle Easterners? If he wants to apologize (this is going to be a long Carter/Clinton “I’m sorry” Presidency), then, for God’s sake apologize for the new borrowing, and draining the world’s available capital to finance our out of control budgets.
Re: the new relations with Russia. I hope all the happy talk leads to less tensions. But it is easy to sort of promise to be nice, to push the “reset” button, or to talk grandly of new protocols; but the fact is that all this rhetoric means nothing.
What Obama must answer is to what degree is he going to turn Ukraine, Georgia, and other former Soviet republics back over to Russian influence, to what degree is he going to ignore Russian gas/oil blackmail over energy-hungry Western Europe, to what degree is he going to tsk tsk Russian complicity in Iran’s nuclear program, to what degree is he going to drop talk of protecting eastern Europe (and Western) with an anti-ballistic system aimed at Iranian missiles, etc. If those really are issues, then we will have problems with an authoritarian and dictatorial Russia bent on restoring former grandeur.
Hope and Change. In every case, a democratic Russia, integrated within the West, could solve such tensions fairly easily. But I fear now that all of them are challenges that Putin, Inc. will see as means to an end, such as restoring domestic pride, restoring Russian hegemony in areas encroaching upon Eastern Europe, and creating more problems for the US that will check our power.
I fear that the Russians will leave praising Obama to the skies, while delighted that Iran’s new bomb will cause us problems untold, that those in the East cannot trust us in a crisis, that Europe will learn to respect Russia if their flats are to stay warm—and that a rogue’s gallery of global fascists will begin to look to Russia, in Cold War fashion, to deal with us to further their aims.
Bottom line: this is the first global summit that I can remember in which the United States is occupying a position to the left of all our allies, and, in our fiscal promiscuity, to the left of our left-wing rivals as well.
By: BumbleBee - 4th April 2009 at 00:35
And I always thought it was only me who didn’t think Diana was a combination of Mother Teresa and a blonde bombshell.
By: Moggy C - 4th April 2009 at 00:13
What the idealistic emigrees always forget to mention is the alternative to the monarchy.
Something upstanding and honourable like John Howard, Bill Clinton, Bertie Ahern.
Nuff said?
The monarchy isn’t anything like perfect. But it is a lot better and cheaper than many of the alternatives.
They even give us soap opera characters like the late, unlamented princess bimbo.
Moggy
By: Jonesy - 3rd April 2009 at 23:42
Randy like the rest of ’em got his privileged backside powdered in the Officers Academy…why weren’t any of the Royal parasites thrown in the deep end with the grunts…too dangerous
‘H’ was flying operational missions from one of the two highest value targets in the South Atlantic. He is due the same respect, as a man, as any other member of the fleet.
By: steve rowell - 3rd April 2009 at 23:36
Randy did 22 years in the navy, & pulled his weight in the Falklands. Never did a days work? I think you’ve been in Oz too long. You must be walking lopsided from the weight of that chip.
BTW, his mother joined the ATS when she was 18, apparently on her own initiative. Her parents were reported to be reluctant to agree, but she wore them down. A bit late in the war to do much, but it showed willing. Trained as a mechanic. Yep, just a parasite.
Randy like the rest of ’em got his privileged backside powdered in the Officers Academy…why weren’t any of the Royal parasites thrown in the deep end with the grunts…too dangerous
By: Jonesy - 3rd April 2009 at 23:16
I dunno peter…most of the people who support the UK royals probably have absolutely no idea just how much land the royals actually control here,and I think I am right in saying that if the land was owned before a certain date then it does not have to be declared publically.I have no time for most of them…I know some of them make a token effort,and of course Flying Officer Wales has been treated exactly the same as all other RAF trainee pilots :rolleyes:
regards baz
Now do you want to check and see where the revenue generated from the Royal Estates goes to?.
If the Royals were to forgo their state handouts in favour of keeping the revenues from the estates we have granted them they would be considerably wealthier than they are today….might even be able to fix up a few of the palaces properly!.
As for the outrageous handouts that the Royals ‘mooch’ off us poor UK taxpayers. The Civil List in 2006, as representative figure, was £12.2mn net. So thats ballpark 50p per working person per year for the upkeep of long standing tradition that is intrinsically linked with our national identity. Compare that with the UK social security budget and you’ll easily see which drains on our society need removal.
By: bazv - 3rd April 2009 at 21:17
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve rowell:
Should have put her hands around her neck and done the World a favour
What a strange opinion!
I dunno peter…most of the people who support the UK royals probably have absolutely no idea just how much land the royals actually control here,and I think I am right in saying that if the land was owned before a certain date then it does not have to be declared publically.I have no time for most of them…I know some of them make a token effort,and of course Flying Officer Wales has been treated exactly the same as all other RAF trainee pilots :rolleyes:
regards baz
By: Arabella-Cox - 3rd April 2009 at 13:33
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve rowell:
Should have put her hands around her neck and done the World a favour
What a strange opinion!
By: swerve - 3rd April 2009 at 12:54
William and Harry i don’t regard as being part of that lot…
Randy did 22 years in the navy, & pulled his weight in the Falklands. Never did a days work? I think you’ve been in Oz too long. You must be walking lopsided from the weight of that chip.
BTW, his mother joined the ATS when she was 18, apparently on her own initiative. Her parents were reported to be reluctant to agree, but she wore them down. A bit late in the war to do much, but it showed willing. Trained as a mechanic. Yep, just a parasite.
By: bazv - 3rd April 2009 at 11:42
:rolleyes:
I agree moggy…I must admit I missed that bit 😀
By: Moggy C - 3rd April 2009 at 11:18
and why wouldn’t they be being the sons of such a beautiful person as their Mother…
:rolleyes:
By: bazv - 3rd April 2009 at 11:04
( I know, I’m sad … Sorry ! )
Welcome to the home of sad people BB 😀
By: BumbleBee - 3rd April 2009 at 11:02
Whilst I’m here …. I know it looks like I’m a total grammar anorak but I just have to point out that it should be spelt ” gaffe ” which is the French for an embarassing mistake. ” Gaff ” is something you do violence to a fish with.( I know, I’m sad … Sorry ! )
By: BumbleBee - 3rd April 2009 at 10:54
I am amazed at what I’ve read in the posts above.
Paul
Well don’t keep us in suspense,which side are you on ?
By: bazv - 3rd April 2009 at 10:37
.it’s just a shame they’ve got that useless thing as a father!!!
Surely they have different fathers (allegedly 😀 )
still part of the same group of overpriveleged inbreds 😀
By: pierrepjc - 3rd April 2009 at 10:35
I am amazed at what I’ve read in the posts above.
Paul
By: BumbleBee - 3rd April 2009 at 10:27
Yes they do…you can always tell an Aussie but you can’t tell ’em much
Interesting – they often seem slightly aggressive.Kiwis are so laid back you need to poke ’em to see if they’re still breathing.
By: steve rowell - 3rd April 2009 at 10:14
Not really fair Steve! Look at William and Harry 😉
William and Harry i don’t regard as being part of that lot…they seem like very sensible nice young lads …and why wouldn’t they be being the offspring of Dianna…it’s just a shame they’ve got that useless thing as a father!!!