I've always been pro monarchy in Britain, not only for the benefit of the tourists, but for the originality of history being alive. I'm coming to think though, that you people have forgotten the difference between history and herstory, which means that not all will end up being the fairy queen because they don't realize the trials and tribulations are theirs to act upon.
On 13 Mai, 11:39, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > Naaa I disagree. > > Our monachy brings in loads of cash for the country, they pay taxes, > they do good works. Ohh don't get me wrong, I'm no royalist, but I > see no need to get rid of them just yet. > > On 13 May, 09:57, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Monarchies need to be side lined as as they have little to no value except > > to those that are part of it,,, and their greed is will known takers and > > not givers,, and they have little to contribute to society other than > > ritual.. > > > I hope the colition works out as it will be the best of every one > > especially the people.. It would be a good thing for politicians to realize > > their job is really to look out for the best interest of the people not > > special interst or their own pockets. > > Allan > > Yes I kpw I repeated myself but it needs to be repeated until it is learned > > > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:20 PM, vamadevananda <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > No, Pat, I had none of Indian History in my mind. All of it I > > > projected on the basis of what ' democracy ' + search for political > > > power through coalition era translates into, when the floodgates > > > open.! > > > > On May 12, 7:13 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 12 May, 14:54, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Given the fact that the current arrangement is precarious and fragile, > > > > > and if Lib - Dem know their politics, that of grandstanding the two > > > > > ancient gigantic sloths, I suspect they'd just have two priorities : > > > > > one, fill the party and MP coffers ; two, prove to populace ( their > > > > > constituency ) how inept their coalition partner is. So, expectant > > > > > romantics beware ! > > > > > > I am no cynic or dreamer. I believe that this is the best that's > > > > > happened to UK in a long time, as in coming of age. The monarchy will > > > > > be more sidelined and rendered inconsequential. The people will gain > > > > > in leverage, the dumb and street smart the most ... yes, much much > > > > > more than even the intellectual frog in the wells. > > > > > Oooooh, a little double-entendre there, Vam? No reference to the > > > > "Indian Revolt" where a few purported renegades were duly shot and > > > > thrown down a well, there, was there? ;-) That was TRULY a low point > > > > in the old Colonial history. Absolutely tragic. Yet, I suspect it's > > > > not taught to school children in the UK. I'm pretty sure my eldest > > > > hasn't run across that incident in any history classes, yet. And I > > > > doubt he will. He'll hear about it from me, though. > > > > > >It's finally the > > > > > death knell of feudalism, thought not of demagoguery. The immigrants > > > > > ( read Asians, East Europeans ) will be valued and wooed, perhaps more > > > > > than the white natives ... in pursuit of vote banks. > > > > > No change there, then. LOL!! > > > > > > UK's just entered a huge change, that'd cascade if I understand it > > > > > correctly, and leave many with visions of glorious past, or with > > > > > templates for future, fuming and terribly ill ! > > > > > Snowball, hill and rolling down all come to mind. I.e., get onto the > > > > top of a hill quickly!! > > > > > > On May 12, 5:40 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On 12 May, 00:12, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > A rather naive interpretation of the British Constitution Orn. > > > I'll > > > > > > > be able to explain once someone works out whatever that is! It > > > looks > > > > > > > as though we will have a Lib/Con coalition now, subject to votes > > > > > > > within the Liberal Democratic Party. > > > > > > > I prefer to think of it as "Living in a Con-Dem-Nation". At least > > > > > > they chose Hague for Foreign Sec.; that was a decent choice. > > > > > > > >All the pundits are claiming to > > > > > > > know what the British voters have said, but none actually ask us. > > > > > > > Lizzie is a procedural phenomenon with no actual power to do > > > > > > > anything. Apparently we need strong, lasting government to > > > > > > > satisfy > > > > > > > the "markets" and we never have any vote about them. > > > > > > > Whilst our electoral farce trundled on, Europe got round to > > > > > > > quantitative easing to catch up with the US and UK in buying up > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > debt electronically. This puts power in the hands of the European > > > > > > > Commission and Central Bank, and we don't get a vote for them > > > either. > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that WWII isn't really over and that we're now > > > > > > fighting on the 'economic front'? After all, we recently had > > > > > > another > > > > > > Dunkirk evacuation, albeit due to the ash cloud from the Icelandic > > > > > > volcano. If this IS the case, then, so far...score one for the Holy > > > > > > Roman Empire--you remember them? They weren't holy, nor Roman, nor > > > an > > > > > > empire. That was clearly an early exercise in political correctness > > > > > > for the naming of an area. > > > > > > Actually, Lizzie DOES have some power left, although if she ever > > > > > > used > > > > > > it, that would be the last time any monarch in the UK ever did. > > > > > > Except for the odd monarch butterfly. > > > > > > > First on the Con-Dem list of things to do is a bit of > > > > > > gerrymandering. > > > > > > Once that's done, it may end up assuring another hung parliament, as > > > > > > the gerrymandering would have to satisfy both the Conservatives AND > > > > > > the Lib-Dems. Unless, of course, the UK decides to 'save' the > > > > > > Republic of Ireland from the European 'economic killing fields' by > > > > > > declaring it a protectorate with the right to vote Conservative. > > > > > > Then, the country's, once again, safe in Tory hands. And, yes, that > > > > > > IS sarcastic. ;-) > > > > > > > Alternatively, there's the chance that Cameron could offer payments > > > to > > > > > > New Labour (which is practically Conservative) MPs and get them to > > > > > > change parties, thus affording the Conservatives the majority they > > > > > > require. Much like the buying of the Roman Empire...back in the > > > > > > good > > > > > > ol' days. ;-) > > > > > > > > On 11 May, 16:28, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/05/07/uk.election.queen/-Hid... > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > -- > > ( > > ) > > I_D Allan > > > Be Paranoid. > > God is always building a better idiot!!!- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -
