That IDS hasn't assessed her for a fortune in "bedroom tax" - must have hundreds of spare ones around this sceptre isle.

For some reason I used to respect the royal family. Now I realise they are a bunch of Reptilians with dubious morals. Obviously they are handy for the economy with all the tourists who come here to see all things Windsor but is it really worth living under their oppressive, exploitative regime?

Remarkable that her father died relatively young so she could take over in her twenties and live to an age just above the average for women?

It's more luck than anything. Now if she lived another 20 years that would be remarkable.

Everything they do or say is massively exaggerated. They offer a molecule of sympathy and they are beyond generous, anything less than open cowardice is noble and heroic, avoid total stupidity and they are wise and intelligent.
They are a bunch of big eared, buck toothed, balding f*****wits who rely on a baffling, misguided sense of duty from people too tiny and afraid to give up serving and indulging them.

They mean nothing to me other than a perpetuation of a class system that allows the less capable to dominate and control their betters. The thought of celebrating an old woman drenched in the most obscene levels of privilege and wealth managing - with all the odds in her favour - to live a long time makes me cringe.

Still, it's a free country, isn't it.

Did the ginger one not do a spell in the desert, and the one who married the ginger one not do his bit in the South Atlantic?

I recognise they are not the Queen but given the hatred of the Royals spouted on here maybe a couple of notable contributions.

When Corbs gets his chance they can opt out of the armed forces tax with you lot.

And they are different to the others who were in the desert and South Atlantic in what way?

Who would have thought that the lovely posters of the Sin Bin would be out of touch with public opinion on the monarchy

Exiled down south wrote:Did the ginger one not do a spell in the desert, and the one who married the ginger one not do his bit in the South Atlantic. See my reference to "everything they do is exaggerated". Prince Andrew ? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/th ... 54205.html Useless, overweight parasite.

Exiled down south wrote:Did the ginger one not do a spell in the desert, and the one who married the ginger one not do his bit in the South Atlantic. See my reference to "everything they do is exaggerated". Prince Andrew ? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/th ... 54205.html Useless, overweight parasite.

There are times when a monarchy is a good thing. The Roman Empire was repeatedly rocked by internal strife precisely because Augustus and his successor emperors never managed to solve the problem of succession. If there is no clear and unambiguous mechanism by which power transfers from a dying emperor to his successor then it's a free-for-all with myriad factions all competing for the throne. Before long violence breaks out and the matter is invariably settled by the candidate with the most soldiers behind him.

IIRC the people of Rome once witnessed power transfer through five emperors in a single year.

Part of the reason America is currently going down such a worrying route is precisely because they've never had any kind of monarchical system which, in conjunction with its supportive class, forms The Establishment. As contemptible as it is - you need such a power bloc to function as a bullwark against the excesses of the business and military classes.

In the United States these special interest groups have really grown out of all control and this is why it's currently teetering right on the edge of fascism. Of course, the Americans didn't help themselves when they foolishly threw open their doors to thousands of card-carrying Nazis (whose crimes are unspeakable) after WWII. In their haste to use these people against the new Russian menace they never once stopped to think what effect they might have on the nation ...

Well done Your Maj!

Isn't it 'doff' the cap btw?