Jump to content

King Charles is a bit of a Wanker


Neonmoon

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

Most people hate Charles, so it wouldn't surprise me if he's the reason the monarchy goes bye bye.Ā 


The queen is/was an amazing human being, who had two idiot sons. Takes a special kind of dumb to be scree up being horn into the royal familyĀ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Neonmoon changed the title to King Charles is a bit of Wanker
Any chance they disband the entire royal family once the queen kicks it? Please?

I think it will happen.

QEII was an institution.

The British public donā€™t revere Charles. Heā€™s still associated with wanting to be a tampon and ruining Diana. And they still HATE Camilla.

And William and Kate are boring ass, tone deaf mayonnaise who are rumored to be separated.

I think King Charles III will be the last British monarch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:


I think it will happen.

QEII was an institution.

The British public donā€™t revere Charles. Heā€™s still associated with wanting to be a tampon and ruining Diana. And they still HATE Camilla.

And William and Kate are boring ass, tone deaf mayonnaise who are rumored to be separated.

I think King Charles III will be the last British monarch.

Iā€™d bet against that. The Brits love their monarchy.Ā 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Iā€™d bet against that. The Brits love their monarchy.Ā 

Support for the monarchy has steadily gone down the past decade. The Brits have less faith in Charles than Will. And the ruling party just chose an anti-monarchist as PMĀ 

I could see it if Charles decides to glue that crown to his head and not give it to Will until he dies. 20-25 years of Charles III doesnā€™t bode well.Ā 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

Well, that and thereā€™s also the fact that having a pretend monarch who doesnā€™t actually have authority is just tremendously silly and the only reasons for keeping it are tradition and out of respect for figures like Queen Elizabeth.Ā 

And Charles isnā€™t a rallying figure like her. So yeah, he could be the end.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Support for the monarchy has steadily gone down the past decade. The Brits have less faith in Charles than Will. And the ruling party just chose an anti-monarchist as PMĀ 

I could see it if Charles decides to glue that crown to his head and not give it to Will until he dies. 20-25 years of Charles III doesnā€™t bode well.Ā 

America will give up oil before the Brits give up the royalty.Ā 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Neonmoon changed the title to King Charles is a bit of a Wanker
49 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Well, that and thereā€™s also the fact that having a pretend monarch who doesnā€™t actually have authority is just tremendously silly and the only reasons for keeping it are tradition and out of respect for figures like Queen Elizabeth.Ā 

I think our most recent ex-President (not to mention Boris Johnson) are compelling arguments for having a separate head of state from the head of government.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

Ā I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.

Ā 

42 minutes ago, ConferenceRoom said:

You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship!Ā 

I TOLD you! We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune! We're taking turns to act as a sort of executive-officer-for-the-week, but all the decisions of that officer 'ave to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting--

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Support for the monarchy has steadily gone down the past decade. The Brits have less faith in Charles than Will. And the ruling party just chose an anti-monarchist as PMĀ 
I could see it if Charles decides to glue that crown to his head and not give it to Will until he dies. 20-25 years of Charles III doesnā€™t bode well.Ā 

Too many tourism dollars are tied to the royal family. Theyā€™ll keep it propped up just for that aspect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they still have to have a general election after the sovereign dies?Ā  At least at one time, because the monarch was the authority that called Parliament, Parliament automatically dissolved when the monarch died and a new election had to be called.Ā  But I think they got rid of that at some point.

If they did have to do a general election right now, then that's an absolute nightmare for the Tories.Ā Ā 

Ā 

Anyhoo--I can't help but think this makes Scottish independence a lot more likely.Ā  I think there were a lot of old Scots who kind of personally favored independence, but didn't want to betray the Queen, of whom the are very fond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

And William and Kate are boring ass, tone deaf mayonnaise who are rumored to be separated.
Ā 

from what i understand, they are pretty fucking sexually liberated and quite a bit of fun to hang with...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Anyhoo--I can't help but think this makes Scottish independence a lot more likely.Ā  I think there were a lot of old Scots who kind of personally favored independence, but didn't want to betray the Queen, of whom the are very fond.

the economist in me says unlikely.Ā  they may talk a big independence game...but economics rule the day.

the entirety of Scotland generates pretty close to the the same gdp as the austin metro area (~$200B) despite being four times the size.Ā  the UK is 10x that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Too many tourism dollars are tied to the royal family. Theyā€™ll keep it propped up just for that aspect.

The tourists donā€™t come for Charles and Camilla.

They come for the castles and the Tower and the history shit.

The tourist dollars will still flow with or without an actual monarch.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Do they still have to have a general election after the sovereign dies?Ā  At least at one time, because the monarch was the authority that called Parliament, Parliament automatically dissolved when the monarch died and a new election had to be called.Ā  But I think they got rid of that at some point.

If they did have to do a general election right now, then that's an absolute nightmare for the Tories.Ā Ā 

Ā 

Anyhoo--I can't help but think this makes Scottish independence a lot more likely.Ā  I think there were a lot of old Scots who kind of personally favored independence, but didn't want to betray the Queen, of whom the are very fond.

Nope no electionĀ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:


I think it will happen.

QEII was an institution.

The British public donā€™t revere Charles. Heā€™s still associated with wanting to be a tampon and ruining Diana. And they still HATE Camilla.

And William and Kate are boring ass, tone deaf mayonnaise who are rumored to be separated.

I think King Charles III will be the last British monarch.

Ā 

will william keep it in his pants and cut down on his hustling side snatch ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Ɨ
Ɨ
  • Create New...