MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Duchess of Cambridge gives birth to a boy; third in the line of succession
The Duchess of Cambridge has given birth to a baby boy, Kensington Palace has announced. The baby was delivered at 16:24 BST at St Mary's Hospital in Paddington, west London, weighing 8lb 6oz. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesExcellent news, a future king, my guess is “George”
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 08:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 01 . You best me to it ! I was going to say that before the “ funnies ” start to say that the monarchy is an anachronism in this century , too expensive etc,etc I am delighted with the news . Really good news . A charming young couple now have a healthy baby . Great . You may be right on George !
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 09:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Congratulations your Royal Highnesses.
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0George is a good bet, since he'll have about 4 names I reckon George will be one of them. Also James, Charles, Arthur and Albert have a good chance.
Of course they could break with that tradition and go for a little used but traditional name like Louis, Francis, maybe David, Stephen, or what about Alfred?
Always a baby is wellcome ,but in this case is just an another little pirate parasite to maintain.! Conqueror kiss my ass hahahaha !! VIVA POPE FRANCIS!
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I will laugh if they give him a chav name. :)
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Headline news in Argentina, how strange is that considering they hate us, still I suppose they have no good news of their own.
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Congratulations on our new future little king, a proud day for Great Britain.
6@ what about francis in brazil!?? asshole!! I thinking the names Nestor or Maximo so parasites like royal family!! hahaha
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@7
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0your are right maximo is a parasite.
8@ of course ..all this Argentine government is a parasite like the royal family!!!!! some day will be free!
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@7
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry what has the Pope going to Brazil got to do with Argentina, he is the head of the Catholic Church, not Argentina.
Oh and just to emphasise my point, the Pope going to Brazil is not headline news in the UK, its not even news. Yet our future King IS front page news in Argentina.
Care to explain that irony?????
@5 No chance of that happening. I'm thinking James George and a couple of other names tacked on the end.
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 10:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0This probably isn't the best article for #7 to be doing his “retarded clown” act at, but he is a pretty amusing idiot.
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#7 ...coming from a member of the worlds leading parasite nation, that's rich!
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for the British, we are proud to be seen as pirates, following in the tradition of El Drago who plundered the Spanish Main relieving them of the gold they stole from from the Indians. And, they are still stealing from them!
royal pathetic parasites only that you are!! greetings and continue to keep parasites
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 013 Faz . We were not pirates ! After all they all gave a percentage to the Queen .
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@14
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You've been schooled Raspberry now crawl back under the whole from which you came.
@14
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do some research and educate yourself on how much money the Royal Family bring to the UK, it is rather a lot more than they spend, and they also serve in the armed forces. Now compare this to your equivalent, Maximo, what the hell does he do for Argentina.
Our Royal Family are far from parasites, they are the glue that holds everything together, not just in the UK, but in 15 other countries.
I think Charles will be in the name somewhere.
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@3 ill hazard a guess at the other three names john, paul & ringo!
Jul 22nd, 2013 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Was that Jack Sparrow announcing the birth?
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 01:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are we in 2013?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/going-out-guide/files/2013/07/03797705_image_982w.jpg
@10
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 04:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Front page news? Hardly, I just checked La Nacion and Los Andes and it's tucked in the front page. It's not completely irrelevant, it is a future head of state, but that's all.
@20
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 05:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Are we in 2013?”
Clearly not ; )
http://clip2net.com/s/5r6IXa
Constitutional monarchies are consistently the nations with the highest levels of living, GDP, education, healthcare... I'd rather support a system that represents a nation's interests than a Pope who represents a fictious fairy tale about space ghosts and uses that to exploit the weak minded idiots of the world. “I care for the poor!” he says, from his palace in Rome.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 05:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Myself I think James.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0Good save the queen.
Constitutional monarchies are positively cheap compared to how much the tax payers of republics like PRC, Venezuela and Argentina have lost into the private purses of their rulers.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0I've just read these posts and what do you get from Gustbury and
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Marcos - envy, green-eyed envy.
They pretend otherwise but it is obvious.
On a slightly different note why do Argentines think that the word 'pirate' is offensive to the Brits?
'Andrew' for the parents' Uni and to add a bit of 'Jockness', George for England, Philip for great-grandpa but 'George' rules out adding 'Michael', perhaps 'Charles'. If going to 5, ’Stanley' would be a nice touch.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 11:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Not: John, Gordon, Anthony or David.
@4 I think not. Your “name” has doubtless been chosen to describe what comes out of it. After the many things that have gone into it!
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 11:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0@9 Fortunately, WE are very happy with OUR Royal Family. But you are right about your “government”. Perhaps you shouldn't vote for it! Good to see that we have many years of OUR Royalty ready to lead the fight against the scum of the world! Now we can see that Her Majesty will be followed by a proven Royal Navy captain, then a proven RAF helicopter pilot, then the new baby, then a proven Army Air Corps combat pilot. And even after that there's a proven Royal Navy pilot who flew in the Falklands War. Just great to recognise all the courageous leaders we may have in the future!
@20 WE are. You're not. Somewhere back in the 1830s, I believe!
Oh, and generally, GOD SAVE OUR GRACIOUS QUEEN!
LONG LIVE OUR NOBLE QUEEN
SEND HER VICTORIOUS
HAPPY AND GLORIOUS
LONG TO REIGN OVER US
GOD SAVE OUR QUEEN!
@26
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 12:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.hastingsobserver.co.uk/news/local/pirates-from-near-and-far-descend-on-the-town-1-5309208
These people don't identify with you.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 01:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are serfs and plebs and povs to them.
If you are not from the 'right stock'/class/background, or have the incorrect religion, or are non-white you could never be part of their family.
They will tour the world on yachts you effectively payed for while you sweat at work, and never even say thank you.
Go and try to meet one of them in person...you'll be told where to go.
This is why, despite their endless marketing campaign, there is a growing republican movement in their own back yard.
And why a national newspaper 'The Guardian' gives an option on its site to block all this hype about an infant born into riches based on the sole qualification of being born like every other child on earth.
Stuff for teenage girls and simpletons to fawn over. Horses carriages and castles, princes and babies. Pathetic.
Heres to the USA, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Singapore, Brazil, Russia, India and China.
(and Scottish nationalists too).
@30
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 02:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Only goes to show what an idiot you are Vestige. try looking at the media around the world. The vast majority are completely taken with it.
Here comes that eeeennnvvvvyyyy again.
By the way Alex Salmond said that if Scotland were to secede from the United Kingdom the Queen would still be head of state.
It's all soooo ppaatthhheeeticcc - but not so pathetic as whining over some islands that don't belong to Argentina, never have and never will
@30 'there is a growing republican movement' lol really? That's why recent polls have shown record levels of support for the monarchy? c80% in favour of monarchy vs 13% in favour of a republic
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 02:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes its an event, something that can sell papers.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 02:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At Christmas, everybody sings Rudolph the red nosed reindeer. Then they get on with it. Do you expect them to care once another story comes along.... a fukishima, the next US presidental election, the next world cup etc etc.
99.9 percent of those 'taken with it' will either have forgotten by tomorrow, are mildly interested, are politically very unimpressed or are equally 'taken' by Bieber.
You overestimate how many reading the story actually have any affinity or respect for the majestic ones. They won't all order the kate and baby cutlery set.
Yes Im hugely envious that my head of state is unelected and had no qualifications other than being born.
Its a feudal system and all a bit simian with a large element of chance.
As for Scotland .... I knew that, but don't be surprised if upon asking a Scot what their opinion is of the monarchy, you get a very high response rate of disrespect towards them.
Personally I've nothing against them and they are an integral part of English culture and history, I just find the head of state bit disturbing in the 21st century, especially given the biased racial and religious and class criteria.
By all means keep them, (its not all bad) but reduce their un-necessarily high expense and distribute a good part of their assets for the overall good. Also remove their legal and political powers, 1 man 1 vote.
Royal baby or not one thing is for certain, this child will have loving caring parents and that's as it should be.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My money is on Francis being one of the names.
@33
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 03:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Vestige you really are an idiot
The Queen has no political rights or influence she is purely a figurehead.
eeeeennnnnnvvvvvvyyyyyyy is sooooooo ppppaaaatttthhheeettiiiccc!!
I've never been keen on monarchy, monarchymania, the Cult of Diana, and the rest and actually cheered on “FU” at the end of “To Play the King” wondering why he didn't have THAT conversation on the roof, but I'm happy for the new family, and grateful that they won't give the little rascal some godawful celebrity baby names or something with a silent Ǿ, æ, œ, Þ or whatever obscure random letter their “Character Tool” on their PC they hit to make their child “special.”
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 03:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Likewise, I am glad to see another example of a stable European government that can have liberal democracy and a hereditary line too without having to chop of some nobs head and for good measure a heckovalotta commoners as well.
I AM sad that the kid probably won't get his official job until he's too old to enjoy it as we're seeing in a lot cases in other European titular monarchies. (As will his dad -- Gosh can't some fatal and historically entertaining accident occur to Gnarly Charlie?)
Darragh, with respect.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 04:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0IMHO its more a matter of reviewing the powers and privileges of the majestic ones, rather than lining them up for execution.
From republic.org.uk
“The Queen certainly does have power, including the power to sign international treaties and deploy British troops abroad”
From various sources:
“...and to dissolve parliament and appoint M.P's. Bishops, police offices and soldiers also must pledge allegiance ”
(so if you want to be one of them and of different political views you'll have that to stop you, which is an exercise of power in itself)
Ooohh look these two are handy.
Pardon convicted criminals.
...and....Command the army and raise a personal militia.
Centreforcitizenship.org
“In 2011 a report by the Guardian newspaper revealed that Mr. Windsor has a right that few had known about before. The head of state's son is able to veto proposed legislation if it affects his private interests, particularly those to do with the Duchy of Cornwall.”
I can assure you Im not envious.
You should know about who you pledge loyalty to and why.
What a lot of utter rubbish.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0For a start, MP's are elected not appointed.
Secondly, parliament, an elected parliament invites the Queen to dissolve it.
Last time a monarch tried that unilaterally, he wound up losing his head.
I could go on, but there is little point.
Your a Republic, your soldiers, police etc, swear allegiance to your Republic.
We are a monarchy, we swear allegiance to the Monarch.
We like it that way and be assured, if we wanted to be a Republic, we would be, but with examples like yours to follow, that is never going to happen.
@37 Vestige
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 05:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Republic.org are a marginal organisation that have a few thousand members. They have the right to believe what they want, but the Monarchy has a 90% approval rating.
How is your Head of States approval rating? Falling fast, isn't it?
As for Her Majesty's Constitutional powers, she has them for a good reason. It is the Monarch's job to protect the people of the UK from a potentially damaging government, for example a dictatorship.
That's why the UK's system of government is so stable, as there are 3 aspects to it: Parliament, the Judiciary and the Monarch. No one branch can gain complete control as any of the branches can stop the others in their tracks.
Don't you wish Argentina had such a stable system of government? A government that can't steal the country blind, curb freedom of speech and expression, or alter the Constitution on a whim and apply it retrospectively.
No wonder you sound so bitter and jealous of the British Monarch and institutions.
Congratulations to the happy couple on the birth of their baby boy.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0AND, for the argies:
Just remember, no matter how long it is before this third in line to the throne actually attains it, he will still be King over the Falklands! And won't the Falklanders love it, you bet.
Once again the hatred and the envy show in the words of the indoctrinated, ungrateful,
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And the jealous,
Still,
Once again the British upstage the rest, and the world want to read about it,
British, you know its for the best..
.
all we want to know now is the childs name
George , Edward , Charles , Bertie , Henry , who knows...
@ Reality - I see you choose only 2 points. One of which I will address thus;
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The swearing of allegiance to a republic which is based on democratic values in which you had the opportunity to influence the outcome along with your fellow countrymen, is quite different to swearing allegiance to a private individual over whom you have no influence and who came into power in a feudal system.
hmm heres a good one.
The monarch also has the power to alter British territorial waters and cede territory. Her freedom to do these things in practice is doubtful, in that they might deprive British citizens of their nationality and rights.
(so obviously this practically impotent and unjust privilege should be stripped)
Seriously ... Im not suggesting much more here than what MP Tony Benn previously did.
Its the people who should own the monarchy ... not the other way round.
Re; English republicans... well obviously they're not going to win anything time soon, but they did manage to hit 20% at one time, which is not bad for such a movement right in the heartland of British monarchy.
I take muuuch more hope in the continuing overall upward trend over the years in Australia and Canada....both of whom (prevented only by voter apathy and republican infighting) ..WILL be dropping the monarchy within the decade regardless of how many cute babies or fancy dreamy weddings can be marketed to the now much more 'diversified' public.
(now thats a celebratory cutlery set I will be buying)
(ps the child will be named Louis )
Out of interest,
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i think you will find that the people do own the monarchy,
and the name will either be - one of the past kings, or a modern name,
as long as he is not called dave , apples or other modern chavy name,
tradition i think will be observed..
All of Vestige's points are quite crap really.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All her powers all all literally honorary with no real world application.
In the event the queen did try something like to dissolve government, the government would simply hold a referendum asking to abolish the monarchy. And the winner of that referendum would no matter what way be democratic.
You can argue all you like what powers she COULD use. Many people in positions of power have powers they could abuse. The difference between a good ruler and a bad one is that our queen never has abused her powers and never will.
All her powers all all literally honorary with no real world application.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0- then why put them there.
(MP Tony Benn was on the right track)
Wouldn't it be nice to know your child could one day hold the highest office in your country, not be beaten to the spot by 'old money'.
Agreed,
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And our Queen is the envy of the world,
Unless you like in the witches forest like CFK lol
@33 and if you lived or in fact been to Scotland you'd know your last statement is SHITE, hence fat boy salmonds increased attempts to hang on to the Monarchy. And ONCE again you show your stupidity by quoting the Guardian
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0tis better to be british looking out,
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0rather than the envy looking in...lol
“- then why put them there.”
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They were not “put” there. It's the evolution of a thousand years of monarchy.
Like for instance, under law any beached whale in the UK is property of the Monarch. This is simply an old law that would never happen in real life if a whale was to beach in the UK, not would she want it.
We have many old silly laws that while are technically laws, have no real life application. For instance it is illegal(actually, treason) to put a postage stamp upside down on a letter. Mince pies are illegal to be consumed on Christmas day, ect.
None of them have any real life application. Much like the Queen. If she were ever to use one of her powers out of line with the government, she would quickly loose all her powers. So it's not really power if you can't use it.
@44 No all vestiges points are crap always
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Another supposed “”“royal”“” person born. Kings and Queens in this day and age is simply silly---real real silly. Thank God we won the American Revolutionary war against the King of England, or the USA would still be under a “”royal“. Actually the ”royals“ of England are Germans, not even British. - Can you believe they call some on like ”Prince” Charles a Royal - yeah right!! - Millet USA
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Télam. National News Agency of Argentina. April 29, 2013. Vice- president of the Nation, Amado Boudou, said today that the official delegation that he heads traveled to Amsterdam to give Princess Maxima Zorreguieta, the best wishes of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and the Argentine nation in her new position as Queen of Holland.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.freenewspos.com/news/article/d/26183/today/vp-amado-boudou-to-give-princess-maxima-zorreguieta-the-best-wishes-from-president-cristina-and-the-argentine-nation
Three events in BA to celebrate the coronation of Princess Máxima
http://www.freenewspos.com/news/article/d/26183/today/vp-amado-boudou-to-give-princess-maxima-zorreguieta-the-best-wishes-from-president-cristina-and-the-argentine-nation
“Actually the ”royals“ of England are Germans, not even British”
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That statement just shows how thick you are, really. European monarchies were all interbred, this is how alliances were formed at the time. In reality our royal family has elements of British, Irish, and Danish among many other nations.
The last German monarch was George II, some 300 years ago.
49 - “ So it's not really power if you can't use it”
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 08:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0ok, so why not remove it.
53 - theres a tiny bit of Indian blood in there too.
(though that may disappoint some).
So why don't you remove it.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We did once, the alternative sucked, so we brought it back.
There, answers that one.
lol ... but aren't they “all literally honorary with - > no real world application.”
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@51 Millet
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Her Majesty the Queen can trace her ancestry in the UK back nearly 1,500 years. Yes she has some German ancestors.
In fact, most people in the UK have ancestors from other countries. I have Irish, English, Welsh and Italian in my genetic makeup. Does that make me any less British?
What about your ancestry, Mr Millet from the USA? Whose land do you live on? Whose land did your ancestors steal?
You also know nothing about the Royal Family or Prince Charles.
He has served his country in the Royal Navy, and continues to serve the people of the UK every day, and will continue to do so.
Tell me, Mr Millet, how do you serve your country?
Also the UK tried the republican route. We were without a Monarch for 11 years, and they were the worst 11 years in British history. Those 11 years were particularly bad for the Irish.
The Irish would prefer ANY King or Queen of England over the Lord Protector any day of the week.
The Monarchy is a part of who we British are. Their role is to prevent another dictator like Cromwell from ever taking power again? Checks and balances.
And a Constitutional Monarchy is far safer than a republic.
I love it when people such as Vestiges come out and prove that they have no understanding of how the British constitutional (and other Commonwealth Realms) system works.
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But I especially love the argument Vestiges and Millet put forward about in this day and age and the inability of the “common man” being able to rule a country.
Would I trade the stability of a constitutional monarchy that has had a guiding hand at the helm for 60 years? Trade a non-political person with experience of government that exceeds any elected president on the planet? Trade the continuity so that 15-25 people (most if not all who are neither a “common man” nor would come from humble roots) can work up enough debts and favours to vested interests and pressure groups so they could get elected by just enough people and for just long enough to make it worthwhile to have almost unfettered power?
No way José!
@ 51 Birdseed
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 09:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0(do you get it millet: only unlike many of the sensible Americans on here I thought I had better explain it to a 'good ol' boy like you).
Happy with a Muslim Pres then are you? Bit of a mongrel yourself though I bet.
Jobless, job shy, there are so many ways of describing envious pricks like you, but heh, you already know that, don't you?
Glad to explain things to you.
ChrisR, I'll give the point that our current president is a jerk. Obama is the worst president in my life time. However, still King and Queens playing fairy land that belonged a centry ago is just plain silly -- really silly. The new “royal” baby is just another common every day human breing that happened to be lucky enough to be born into a wealthy German family. Once again, “Prince” Charles (old Charley) is an actual blue blooded “royal” personage---Oh Please!!!. Is his illicit marriage to Camilla royal British behavior???? I'll will grant that “Prince” Charles ears certainly are of royal size. Royal, make believe. . - Millet USA
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 10:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@6If its that Bad why do so many Americans love it welcome back sussie good to see your input is as sensible as always. If you want to talk about behaviour lets talk about bill Clinton and cigars
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0slattzzz . very good point. I will have to give you 10 debating points on that one. But you have to remember both obama and clinton are democrat liberals. (very very liberal). “Prince” Charles still has a way to go to match England's most corrupt King in Henry 8th, and his many illicit and murdered “wives” Anyway enouth on the “ pretending royals” . - Millet USA
Jul 23rd, 2013 - 11:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh dear, there hasn't been a King of England since the 17th Centrury.
Jul 24th, 2013 - 01:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/royal-baby-birth-will-help-give-the-economy-a-250m-boost-8729729.html
Jul 24th, 2013 - 12:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am not a monarchist, but believe me, the US' republican form of government is nothing to jump up and down over...Flag-worship replaces respect for the Monarch, and while most of the modern monarchies have done away with lese-majeste laws, the US has flag laws that are just as nuts. And there are many who want to make them even worse. So for those of you who don't like the Royals, believe me, you will be no better off with presidents, congressmen/senators/parliamentarians. I do wish the Prince and Princess all the best. Births are joyful occasions for all of us.
Jul 24th, 2013 - 02:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Congratulations to the parents and their families.
Jul 24th, 2013 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0....and their lowly subjects.
Jul 24th, 2013 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Great news........wether you are a lover or a hater of monarchy...
Jul 24th, 2013 - 05:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“George Alexander Louie” it is...
And the child is names GEORGE,
Jul 24th, 2013 - 06:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0not a bad guess..
@67
Jul 24th, 2013 - 07:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Of course that includes James HARRISON.
In reality there are no “royal” people in the entire world. Just people who claim they are somehow “royal”, and the masses who go along pretending that they are actually “royal”. Thank God we won the Revolutionary war, or we could have been stuck in the same fairyland.. - Millet USA
Jul 24th, 2013 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Uk could be a republic (with an occasional military dictatorship-which millions supported in 1982) like Argentina - with a President Kirchner flying on IRN BRU1 (when flying to countries that won't impound IRN BRU1)
Jul 24th, 2013 - 09:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 071
Jul 24th, 2013 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In reality there is no person known as Millet in the world.
Do I exist?
Your comment is just idiotic. There is no such thing as a “president” just someone who pretends he is and everyone goes along with it.
Anglotino there is a “queen” just as there is a president. Only the queen is just a normal human personage, claiming “royality”---- its all just a Britsh fairyland headed by Germans. - Millet USA
Jul 24th, 2013 - 10:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Millet or is it mullet? Your statement is stupid.....just stupid. You better look up royalty. I am not one to believe in monarchies as an American but it is the UK's to choose not you or me. If you knew anything about the Brit's, they accept it's royalty as the Head of State quite well. More so, they are quite proud of the legacy and history. Go back to Chubut.
Jul 25th, 2013 - 01:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Congrats England.of the new Prince..........by the way....awesome name.
I vote for
Jul 25th, 2013 - 03:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0#76 I think there are MORE Americans swooning over William, Kate and George than Brits. All the hoo ha is from your side of the pond. We just orchestrate the spectacle and the USA falls for it.
Jul 25th, 2013 - 09:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0Chuckle chuckle...
Faz...you are correct.....just the shear size of the USA. If 10% of Americans and thrilled with royalty that is 31 million people. Personally I am not one of them, but they are always in the news here. If Millet is indeed an American, he knows that. However he rants more like an RG
Jul 25th, 2013 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0perhaps millet just dont like the brits.
Jul 25th, 2013 - 06:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0and pretending to be American ..
The most royal blue blooded personage of the “royal” House of Windsor is indeed Camilla. - Millet
Jul 26th, 2013 - 03:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0Briton........agreed......maybe a Chubutan
Jul 26th, 2013 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0true..
Jul 26th, 2013 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#33
Jul 27th, 2013 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for Scotland .... I knew that, but don't be surprised if upon asking a Scot what their opinion is of the monarchy, you get a very high response rate of disrespect towards them.
Where did you get this from. Have you conducted a poll from never-never land where you live ?
#71
No, you got Nixon instead !
#74
What have you got against German ancestry ?
Clyde......millet is not an American.......ignore the idiot. American's know the the USA, a former colony is a spin off, just like a TV series, from England. Which is why American people in general has always felt a kindred connection to England regardless whether our government in office feels is or not. I always said here that president come and go yet the people remain the same.
Jul 27th, 2013 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Americans have always been fascinated with royalty. One cannot flip a channel and not come across something on the Windsors be the news or some documentary. I have also stated that I personally do not agree with the concept, but my unwaivering allegiance with England and knowing how they love their royal family, I certainly respect their government.
I digress.....millet is by far not an American.
Thank you Captain poppy.
Jul 27th, 2013 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The envy from Argentina,,lights up the sky....
Jul 27th, 2013 - 06:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry to correct all of your hopes, but I am indeed an American. Born in Saint Mary's hospital, San Francisco, California, and lived on Baker street, until my family moved to Colorado. Graduated from North high school in Denver, Colorado, followed by the University of Colorado at Boulder Colorado, with a degree in Chemistry. Still a big CU Buffalo fan, even though the football team has not done all that good the last several years. Your free to believe what you wish, but all above is indeed true. Did not vote for obama either time he ran. obama is the worst president of the USA in my life time, followed by Jimmy Carter a former peanut farmer from Georgia. God bless the USA and please hurry. - Millet USA
Jul 28th, 2013 - 01:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well remember (I didn;t either) Obama did not murder Americans by sending them off to their deaths in a fictitious war in Iraq. Or course, pretending to be an American, obvious a republican means you never serves in the military, only voted to send others to their deaths. Are you guys getting ready to send us to die in Africa soon? Bring back the draft and see how many republican wars we have then.
Jul 28th, 2013 - 01:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0Central America
Lebanon
Kuwait
Somalia
Afghanistan
Iraq
All republicans, Two to W alone and one was an outright lie and he should be charged. Your boy Bush, Is still taking lessons to spell his middle initial. Are you succeeding from Colorado yet? Republicans issue with Obama is
1-they never gave him a chance. It says a lot when they bring back an exact bill Republicans introduced two years earlier only this time by Democrats and they deny it only because this time it was Democrats, says a lot
2-republicans never got over a black man won
BTW thank you so much for saying I am free to believe as I may. I doubt you are a republican OR American......Republicans are staunch UK supporters. But I digress
How about the little prince George.....did I say great name?
Millet
Jul 28th, 2013 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0In the USA you have a different “royalty” based on money and short lived personalities. To be President in the USA you have to be backed by big bucks. No poor black would stand a snowball's chance in Hell of being elected. Your electoral system for president looks “dodgy” to us. Remember George W.'s election with the Florida vote ?
You keep your system and we will keep ours..thank you !
The electoral college is on the way out. The first sign it was antiquated was when states mandated that the electorates votes in in accordance to the popular vote of the state. However the continued flaw that remains is that the electorates of no prorated in according to the popular vote, they are winner take all save for two states.
Jul 28th, 2013 - 02:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for blacks......yes and no. There are quite a few blacks in politics, it's getting to be president that is difficult for anyone.
As I said before Clyde, ignore millet, he is not an American. He can quote and school he wants to form public records and websites. It does not make him an American.
88, I indeed served in the US military. I served in the US Navy. Spend two years on board an air craft carrier, the USS Bonhomme Richard CVA-31 stationed out of Alameda CA . followed by two years of duty at the Naha Naval Air Facility on Okinawa. Then was honorably discharged at Treasure Island, CA. I enjoyed my time in the Navy, and hae always been proud of my service. My father, brother, and two uncles all served in the namery. My two uncles served for 20+ years and both retired as Cheifs. It is not wise to make assummptions when you have no knowledge of the situation. - Millet
Jul 28th, 2013 - 05:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And yet one hates the british,
Jul 28th, 2013 - 06:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0interesting loyalties,
does CFK rank high on your list of friends.
Humor us what was your MOS and rating? What year was your BCT and where?
Jul 28th, 2013 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First, I certainly do not hate the British. The British have long been America's staunchest ally. I have been to Britain many times. The last time was to attend the Chelsea Flower show. I even joined the Royal Horticultural Society so that I could attend the first day of the flower show, to avoid the crowds on general public days. I was a Naval Air supply officer, and attained the rank of Luetenit
Jul 29th, 2013 - 02:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0I take it, OCS than?
Jul 29th, 2013 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0Luetenit ?
Jul 29th, 2013 - 11:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0Obviously a mustang.
Jul 29th, 2013 - 12:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0On my last two post this forum some how returned me back to the article, and when I tried to backspace to to get back to my posting it automatically had posted my unfinished reply.. Anyway... I was released from active service as a Lieutenant, and finished the required time for retirement in the Navel Reserves at Buckley AF B. As a point of interest, today in 1981 Britain's “Prince” Charles married his real wife Lady Diana Spencer in London. - Millet USA
Jul 29th, 2013 - 02:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Mmmmmm, neither Midshipman, OCS or a mustang....interesting.
Jul 29th, 2013 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I certainly do not hate the British
Jul 29th, 2013 - 06:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yet you condemn our royal family
You insult them by calling them German
You are glad you won the war 1776.
Yet you don’t hate the British
As far as I know, Queen Elizabeth was born in England
And her father and grandfather,
As was queen Victoria, so this makes them British in my books,
Where did you decent from I wonder,
As for 1776 I was not born then so I will have to take your word for it ..lol.
.
You guys have painted me all wrong. I never ever said I hated the Brits,nor did I ever say I hated the House of Windsor. What I did say (write) was that no one on earth are royal blooded people. The members of the house of Windsor were born the same as God created every baby, just ordinary human beings, but lucky to be born into a wealthy situation. Believing that some people have royal blood is believing in fairy tales. It also shows a serious lack of intelligence of the creation. Anyway,this whole discussion is getting quite boring, therefore I'm moving on, you guys can go kiss the “royals” ring if you wish, and lower your heads in submission as all the lowly common English people are supposed to do. Enough of your silliness. The best to England. - Millet USA
Jul 29th, 2013 - 09:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He's not American Briton, I wouldn't bothering responding to his nonsense.
Jul 29th, 2013 - 10:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#101
Jul 30th, 2013 - 07:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0You have it rather “skewed ” here. No one is saying that “Royal” blood is special or magical. In a society that has a line of Monarchs, all it means is that you are of “Royal” lineage if you are borne one of the family. It does not infer special mental or physical abilities. It just shows where you are in the pecking order.
You carry on with your celebrity worship and we will keep our Royalty. By the way, it is not mandatory to bow before Royalty !
102
Jul 30th, 2013 - 02:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0agreed.
i will consult with normal people..lol.
cheers.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!