| These Royal types.... 09:43 - Jan 9 with 1364 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
...if the media weren't w@nking on about it would anybody really care? |  |
| |  |
| These Royal types.... on 09:54 - Jan 9 with 1155 views | Swansea_Blue |
I don't care :)
Seems to me that a certain element of the media have been making life hell for them and are now outraged that the people they've made life hell for have said 'feck this, we're off'. Seems like an entirely reasonable response to me.
I'm not sure what the media's motives are though. Just to sell papers? Or is it all part of the larger flag waving, chest thumping conservative project that we see here and in a number of countries now (coincidentally, where Murdoch seems to have his tendrils). |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:01 - Jan 9 with 1138 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| These Royal types.... on 09:54 - Jan 9 by Swansea_Blue |
I don't care :)
Seems to me that a certain element of the media have been making life hell for them and are now outraged that the people they've made life hell for have said 'feck this, we're off'. Seems like an entirely reasonable response to me.
I'm not sure what the media's motives are though. Just to sell papers? Or is it all part of the larger flag waving, chest thumping conservative project that we see here and in a number of countries now (coincidentally, where Murdoch seems to have his tendrils). |
If in doubt, blame the Torys...
The election is over, Labour had their second worst result in history. Stand down momentum. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:03 - Jan 9 with 1137 views | BLUEBEAT |
Good on them.
They’re internationalists, not internalists.
Just because he was born into a system doesn’t mean he has to live to the system.
Equal partnerships are stronger too. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:20 - Jan 9 with 1115 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| These Royal types.... on 10:01 - Jan 9 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If in doubt, blame the Torys...
The election is over, Labour had their second worst result in history. Stand down momentum. |
Is that yes or no....re. caring? | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:26 - Jan 9 with 1104 views | Ryorry |
| These Royal types.... on 09:54 - Jan 9 by Swansea_Blue |
I don't care :)
Seems to me that a certain element of the media have been making life hell for them and are now outraged that the people they've made life hell for have said 'feck this, we're off'. Seems like an entirely reasonable response to me.
I'm not sure what the media's motives are though. Just to sell papers? Or is it all part of the larger flag waving, chest thumping conservative project that we see here and in a number of countries now (coincidentally, where Murdoch seems to have his tendrils). |
The abuse they're getting here, on other social media, and msm, just for doing what they believe to be right for themselves, their kids, the future of the monarchy (and their chosen charities as well) highlights exactly why they want out.
As for the social media in the shape of TWTD - we say on here that we always support people with mental health issues, so I think it's hypocritical by some to not even consider what pressures they are feeling from this point of view & regarding their childrens' futures too. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:31 - Jan 9 with 1086 views | BlueBadger |
| These Royal types.... on 10:01 - Jan 9 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If in doubt, blame the Torys...
The election is over, Labour had their second worst result in history. Stand down momentum. |
Weird flex bro, but OK. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 10:32 - Jan 9 with 1076 views | Swansea_Blue |
| These Royal types.... on 10:01 - Jan 9 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If in doubt, blame the Torys...
The election is over, Labour had their second worst result in history. Stand down momentum. |
I didn't blame the Tories | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 11:03 - Jan 9 with 1022 views | noggin |
| These Royal types.... on 10:32 - Jan 9 by Swansea_Blue |
I didn't blame the Tories |
You must have done, you're a commie. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| These Royal types.... on 11:15 - Jan 9 with 994 views | solemio |
Probably the 81% of the population who supported the institution of the monarchy at the last survey might care, to at least some extent.
For very many years now either 18 or 19% have been in favour of abolition. This changes astonishingly little. |  | | |
| These Royal types.... on 11:27 - Jan 9 with 963 views | Swansea_Blue |
| These Royal types.... on 11:03 - Jan 9 by noggin |
You must have done, you're a commie. |
Oh yeah, I forgot about that bit.
Right, I'm just of to ...er, do whatever Commies do.
 | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 11:43 - Jan 9 with 946 views | Guthrum |
| These Royal types.... on 11:15 - Jan 9 by solemio |
Probably the 81% of the population who supported the institution of the monarchy at the last survey might care, to at least some extent.
For very many years now either 18 or 19% have been in favour of abolition. This changes astonishingly little. |
Altho there's a difference between supporting the monarchy as an institution (as opposed to republicanism) and being a devotee of the royal family and all its members.
Personally I believe it to be no less cost-effective and makes, practically, little difference to having an elected, but purely cermonial, head of state. Presidents (and former incumbents) with their families will still require all the police protection the royals now get. They are no less prone to scandal. Will make very little difference to power structures within the UK. It does help bring in tourist money. The desire for change is more a fetishisation of democracy (ironic, given how much people seem to grumble about elections) than a practical thing. Doesn't save money and probably wastes more of it (new presidential palace, anybody?). The personalities of any but the main players are irrelevant. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 11:46 - Jan 9 with 927 views | GlasgowBlue |
Most posts started on here about the royals are from people who claim to not care.
See also poppy threads. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:12 - Jan 9 with 875 views | usm |
| These Royal types.... on 11:43 - Jan 9 by Guthrum |
Altho there's a difference between supporting the monarchy as an institution (as opposed to republicanism) and being a devotee of the royal family and all its members.
Personally I believe it to be no less cost-effective and makes, practically, little difference to having an elected, but purely cermonial, head of state. Presidents (and former incumbents) with their families will still require all the police protection the royals now get. They are no less prone to scandal. Will make very little difference to power structures within the UK. It does help bring in tourist money. The desire for change is more a fetishisation of democracy (ironic, given how much people seem to grumble about elections) than a practical thing. Doesn't save money and probably wastes more of it (new presidential palace, anybody?). The personalities of any but the main players are irrelevant. |
Spot on Guthers, as usual.
Have an Uppy. |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:25 - Jan 9 with 849 views | GlasgowBlue |
| These Royal types.... on 11:43 - Jan 9 by Guthrum |
Altho there's a difference between supporting the monarchy as an institution (as opposed to republicanism) and being a devotee of the royal family and all its members.
Personally I believe it to be no less cost-effective and makes, practically, little difference to having an elected, but purely cermonial, head of state. Presidents (and former incumbents) with their families will still require all the police protection the royals now get. They are no less prone to scandal. Will make very little difference to power structures within the UK. It does help bring in tourist money. The desire for change is more a fetishisation of democracy (ironic, given how much people seem to grumble about elections) than a practical thing. Doesn't save money and probably wastes more of it (new presidential palace, anybody?). The personalities of any but the main players are irrelevant. |
Once again the voice of reason Guthers. | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:49 - Jan 9 with 819 views | itfcjoe |
| These Royal types.... on 12:25 - Jan 9 by GlasgowBlue |
Once again the voice of reason Guthers. |
Have you had much of a read about what is coming out with regards to this split, is really severe and a really bad look for Meghan and Harry. Just binning off all the royal duties to do the bits they want to do, commercialising themselves, selecting the media they will have at their events etc.
Websites registered a year ago, etc etc - looks as though their financial independence is going to be off the back of selling themselves out |  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:51 - Jan 9 with 815 views | jimsymBLUE |
|  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:54 - Jan 9 with 805 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| These Royal types.... on 11:43 - Jan 9 by Guthrum |
Altho there's a difference between supporting the monarchy as an institution (as opposed to republicanism) and being a devotee of the royal family and all its members.
Personally I believe it to be no less cost-effective and makes, practically, little difference to having an elected, but purely cermonial, head of state. Presidents (and former incumbents) with their families will still require all the police protection the royals now get. They are no less prone to scandal. Will make very little difference to power structures within the UK. It does help bring in tourist money. The desire for change is more a fetishisation of democracy (ironic, given how much people seem to grumble about elections) than a practical thing. Doesn't save money and probably wastes more of it (new presidential palace, anybody?). The personalities of any but the main players are irrelevant. |
Or have none of the above . | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:57 - Jan 9 with 797 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| These Royal types.... on 11:46 - Jan 9 by GlasgowBlue |
Most posts started on here about the royals are from people who claim to not care.
See also poppy threads. |
Despite the saturation coverage about these 2 at the moment I promise that I am struggling to give a fukk. | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 12:58 - Jan 9 with 795 views | tractordownsouth |
Nah, the media always talks about how they hate unelected elites and foreign families scrounging off the benefit system! [Post edited 9 Jan 2020 13:00]
|  |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 13:08 - Jan 9 with 771 views | Guthrum |
| These Royal types.... on 12:54 - Jan 9 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Or have none of the above . |
Nice idea, but I'm not sure the human race is sufficiently evolved for that. Too many people wanting to play Franco. | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 13:14 - Jan 9 with 747 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| These Royal types.... on 13:08 - Jan 9 by Guthrum |
Nice idea, but I'm not sure the human race is sufficiently evolved for that. Too many people wanting to play Franco. |
Give people some real options and they might surprise you... | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 13:16 - Jan 9 with 739 views | itfcjoe |
| These Royal types.... on 12:51 - Jan 9 by jimsymBLUE |
|
I thought it was Ben Stokes and Dec | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 13:44 - Jan 9 with 706 views | GlasgowBlue |
| These Royal types.... on 12:58 - Jan 9 by tractordownsouth |
Nah, the media always talks about how they hate unelected elites and foreign families scrounging off the benefit system! [Post edited 9 Jan 2020 13:00]
|
That was copyrighted by BlueBadger in 2009 mate. | |
| |
| These Royal types.... on 14:08 - Jan 9 with 677 views | Guthrum |
Can't help thinking a lot of the press rage is merely red-top fear of being denied a stream of lucrative articles about the Sussexes and their supposed travails. Hell hath no fury like a tabloid journalist scorned and there's only so much mileage you can get out of the Duchess of Cambridge wearing yet another elegant but sensible frock. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
