-
I was reading an article about Will and Kate's brief visit to the U.S. and found something confusing. Any of our UK members, or royal watchers, surely know the answer.
Queen Elizabeth's husband is known as Prince Phillip.
When William assumes the throne Kate (Catherine?) will be referred to as Queen.
So the Queen's husband is a Prince, but the King's wife is a Queen?
Is that correct? If so why? ??? Or does it not matter?
(BTW Kate is absolutely gorgeous in my opinion--whether it's jeans and a t-shirt or a designer gown--she's stunning.)
RAB
-
RAB...
I don't have specific answers but you may find them here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Royal_Family
https://www.facebook.com/TheBritishMonarchy?ref=ts
-
Yes it's correct and, if I remember from my school days, it's because you can't get any higher than a King. (think chess) so if a woman is in line to the throne then her husband can't be made king or he'd be the one with all of the power.
Does that make any sense?
Leese
-
I often wondered how all that royalty stuff worked.
Anyway: Found this informative
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110426095940AAtllAB
-
Oh you've got me digging around now. Apparently he could have been given the title King consort but it's quite unusual in the UK.
This explains it well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_consort
-
Sorting out who is a king and who is a queen can be...challenging.
-
Sorting out who is a king and who is a queen can be...challenging.
;D
-
Silly Brits.
-
Sorting out who is a king and who is a queen can be...challenging.
Andy, only with gays in the US. I do believe there are more queens than kings. ;)
-
So when two gay men get married, is it a Queen and her King-consort, or a King and his Queen-consort? Or if it's a Queen and her Queen consort, who gets to wear the tiara? This stuff is so confuzzleing. I'll have to email Sir Elton and ask. He may know.
-
So when two gay men get married, is it a Queen and her King-consort, or a King and his Queen-consort? Or if it's a Queen and her Queen consort, who gets to wear the tiara? This stuff is so confuzzleing. I'll have to email Sir Elton and ask. He may know.
Most times its just to queens arguing over who has to be top .
-
Most times its just to queens arguing over who has to be top .
Why don't y'all just get a double-headed dildo so everyone's happy? ;D
-
It gets worse, some of us like to maintain the title of princess! 8)
Bill used to call me that in the early days when I was trying to get my way. Lord, I'd love that title again!
-
Pardon my abundance of ignorance and I had trouble opening links today, my p.c. is having one of THOSE days but where do they get titles like Prince of Wales even when they are not at all from Wales, like Charles. And now the younger royals are Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, or am I mistaken?, no great surprise there I know. So I guess Cambridge is a place they declare, just for the heck of it, why not an extra title or three? Queens can be fun, but tedious at times as well. ;)
Jody :)
-
Queens can be fun, but tedious at times as well. ;)
Testify!
-
The heir apparent is always the "Prince of Wales". When Chilla becomes king, Willy will succeed him as Prince of Wales. In addition the heir apparent is also usually the Duke of Cornwall.
The Welsh were subdued by the Poms centuries ago and so they have to suck up to an Englishman as their Prince.
It's customary for royals (the direct descendents of the monarch) to receive a title upon marrying (Andrew is the Duke of York, William was created as the Duke of Cambridge, poor old Edward was only made an earl -- the Earl of Wessex) so we can be confident that Harry will get one too if he ever manages to drag some vapid drone up the aisle at Westminster Abbey.
My guess is that Camilla will not be style as "Queen Consort" because everyone seems to hate her. Presumably because of that dreary slut Diana. I imagine Camilla will have to settle for "Princess Consort". Catherine (should she manage to stay hitched) will most likely become Queen Catherine.
Phillip isn't styled as the "King Phillip" because Queen Victoria couldn't convince the nobs to let them style her husband Albert as "King" and the precedent stuck.
Personally I'd shoot the lot of them. Fucking parasites.
Bring on the revolution.
MtD
-
The heir apparent is always the "Prince of Wales". When Chilla becomes king, Willy will succeed him as Prince of Wales. In addition the heir apparent is also usually the Duke of Cornwall.
The Welsh were subdued by the Poms centuries ago and so they have to suck up to an Englishman as their Prince.
It's customary for royals (the direct descendents of the monarch) to receive a title upon marrying (Andrew is the Duke of York, William was created as the Duke of Cambridge, poor old Edward was only made an earl -- the Earl of Wessex) so we can be confident that Harry will get one too if he ever manages to drag some vapid drone up the aisle at Westminster Abbey.
My guess is that Camilla will not be style as "Queen Consort" because everyone seems to hate her. Presumably because of that dreary slut Diana. I imagine Camilla will have to settle for "Princess Consort". Catherine (should she manage to stay hitched) will most likely become Queen Catherine.
Phillip isn't styled as the "King Phillip" because Queen Victoria couldn't convince the nobs to let them style her husband Albert as "King" and the precedent stuck.
Personally I'd shoot the lot of them. Fucking parasites.
Bring on the revolution.
MtD
Of course you would ::)
-
Of course you would ::)
Oh dear. Closet royalist are we Droodles? :)
MtD
-
You learn something every day.
I thought it was because Philip was a bit down market and a bit foreign, a kind of budget Royal and at the time the family couldn't bring themselves to give him the title.
Now that is less important and anybody can get in on the act, that old hag Camilla setting a precedent.
-
The heir apparent is always the "Prince of Wales". When Chilla becomes king, Willy will succeed him as Prince of Wales. In addition the heir apparent is also usually the Duke of Cornwall.
The Welsh were subdued by the Poms centuries ago and so they have to suck up to an Englishman as their Prince.
It's customary for royals (the direct descendents of the monarch) to receive a title upon marrying (Andrew is the Duke of York, William was created as the Duke of Cambridge, poor old Edward was only made an earl -- the Earl of Wessex) so we can be confident that Harry will get one too if he ever manages to drag some vapid drone up the aisle at Westminster Abbey.
My guess is that Camilla will not be style as "Queen Consort" because everyone seems to hate her. Presumably because of that dreary slut Diana. I imagine Camilla will have to settle for "Princess Consort". Catherine (should she manage to stay hitched) will most likely become Queen Catherine.
Phillip isn't styled as the "King Phillip" because Queen Victoria couldn't convince the nobs to let them style her husband Albert as "King" and the precedent stuck.
Personally I'd shoot the lot of them. Fucking parasites.
Bring on the revolution.
MtD
For the second time in a week I agree with Matty. The royals serve no purpose except to leech off of the people. By the way due to the rare occurrence of double agreement someone needs to cue the apocalypse.
-
My guess is that Camilla will not be style as "Queen Consort" because everyone seems to hate her. Presumably because of that dreary slut Diana.
MtD
;D ;D ;D
Do you really blame them?
(http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k521/inwales101/Camilla.jpg)
(http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k521/inwales101/Diana.jpg)
-
;D ;D ;D
Do you really blame them?
(http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k521/inwales101/Camilla.jpg)
(http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k521/inwales101/Diana.jpg)
Well, unflattering pap shots aside, I've always thought Camilla to be a rather handsome woman. The sort of "made of tweed" straight limbed, frigid, horsey type perfectly suited to an idiot like Charles.
Charles, of course, is as mad as a clown's cock. Talking to plants, defending fox hunting and quaffing homeopathic remedies like his stain-fanged grandmother sloshed gin and lillet down her nasty old screech at breakfast.
Diana was a stupid simpering slag. Her life was so hard, rolling around in those massive palaces tripping over piles of cash lifted from the Civil List. I suspect no-one would have minded the conga line of arab playboys hanging out of her had she practised just a touch of discretion.
Frankly, I think the Windsors should have been billed for the damage to the pylon that finally freed the world of the noxious, inbred, upper class cunt.
MtD
-
watch this short video about the royals;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw
J
-
watch this short video about the royals;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw
J
Troo dat. I remember reading an article (in the UK Independent, I think) a few years ago that said pretty much the same thing as the video. (btw, it cracks me up that it's narrated by a Yank) The Royal family does not leech off the people.
Camilla isn't as hated as she once was. I think the turning point came when people realised that William and Harry accepted her and actually seem to like her. None of the carry-on with Diana would have happened if Charles had been permitted to marry Camilla in the first place, like he wanted.
-
Has anyone seen that really messy Sarah Ferguson trainwreck show on Oprah's new channel? I was channel surfing during a bout of insomnia recently and managed to watch at least 20 minutes of it. Tragic. They actually had her sitting down with Suzy Orman for financial advice. I think Dr. Phil was going to do an intervention with the Duchess but I couldn't bear to watch that.
The Windsors are really, really messy so I enjoy them. As far as expense to the taxpayer -- poppycock! You'd have to keep up those properties anyway, those are cultural expenses. Look at what France still pays to upkeep cultural treasures. So you stick some soap opera family in the properties and get really good PR effect for tourism. It's a bit of a wash financially.
And hating Lady Di well, that's like hating E.T. and you folks should be ashamed.
-
Oh dear. Closet royalist are we Droodles? :)
MtD
Talking to plants, defending fox hunting and quaffing homeopathic remedies like his stain-fanged grandmother sloshed gin and lillet down her nasty old screech at breakfast.
Diana was a stupid simpering slag. Her life was so hard, rolling around in those massive palaces tripping over piles of cash lifted from the Civil List. I suspect no-one would have minded the conga line of arab playboys hanging out of her had she practised just a touch of discretion.
ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I would like to get banged by Harry! ;) :P
-
None of the carry-on with Diana would have happened if Charles had been permitted to marry Camilla in the first place, like he wanted.
And William and Harry would have been such ugly children, that not even a steak hung around their neck, would entice the family dog to play with them.
-
And William and Harry would have been such ugly children, that not even a steak hung around their neck, would entice the family dog to play with them.
So very true!
-
watch this short video about the royals;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw
J
I hope you watched that wearing your union jack silk stockings held up with the gilt brocade suspenders emblazoned with the Royal Warrant. Which reminds me, I must raise the Eureka flag above the garage before breakfast.
Really, C. G. P. Grey? (http://timemanagement.cgpgrey.com/public-speaker/) Monarchist propaganda by a low born gun-for-hire. Feh! ::)
Camilla isn't as hated as she once was. I think the turning point came when people realised that William and Harry accepted her and actually seem to like her. None of the carry-on with Diana would have happened if Charles had been permitted to marry Camilla in the first place, like he wanted.
Good and dutiful lads, William and Harry. Given that Harry is worth 43 millions by virtue of birth and as thick as shit, I suspect he wasn't too hard to convince. Where Charles is just mad, the stupid comes straight from the Spencer loins.
What's Harry's real father's name again?
The Windsors are really, really messy so I enjoy them. As far as expense to the taxpayer -- poppycock! You'd have to keep up those properties anyway, those are cultural expenses. Look at what France still pays to upkeep cultural treasures. So you stick some soap opera family in the properties and get really good PR effect for tourism. It's a bit of a wash financially.
Cultural treasures be fucked. High time those crumbling piles were pulled down to make way for mega malls and council housing for the disadvantaged.
And hating Lady Di well, that's like hating E.T. and you folks should be ashamed.
Y'know, come to think of it, they had the same skinny neck and preposterously large head. Coincidence?
I think not.
MtD
-
(http://i53.tinypic.com/beu6c3.jpg)
YES, I WOULD!
(http://i54.tinypic.com/2qnw977.jpg)
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
(http://i52.tinypic.com/10xenlu.jpg)
Drop those trunks boy and come to Papa!
-
And William and Harry would have been such ugly children, that not even a steak hung around their neck, would entice the family dog to play with them.
Can't argue with that!
What's Harry's real father's name again?
I can't remember his name, but I remember he was a famous rugby player. :o
-
Can't argue with that!
I can't remember his name, but I remember he was a famous rugby player. :o
james hewlett or something like that
J
-
James Hewitt was a social climbing polo player, not rugby.
He's still quite around.
I think its a toss up about Harry's paternity - certainly the photo evidence exists of Harry looking like a Spencer, like a Windsor and like Hewitt. They all kind of look alike, could probably find pics where he looks like Camilla!
I agree that Diana wasn't discrete. I guess she could have just played along with the aristocratic old game and pursued and fulfilled her loves and passions discretely and stayed married and played her public role as well.
But it was the 80's and quite a lot changed - all celebrities private lives became very public and the Windsor and particularly Diana became celebrities just like rock stars and movie stars.
She clearly had a lot of emotional problems. Clearly was willing participant in the global celebrity she became, yet also a bit of a victim of historical circumstances and the media glare. Maybe she had basic very modern needs like the rest of us - feel loved by her man, romance, etc. She wasn't educated to serve any great public role, but managed finally to do good works.
I never thought she was the great beauty the media told us she was, but certainly very pretty. Cause she was who she was, she had star wattage and mystique, like Jackie O had, and Jackie wasn't a great beauty either.
Anyway William turned out right enough and Harry is dim but hot and we enjoy him well enough for that.
William was a beautiful young man, we got good return on that for a long time didn't we? But probably not aging into a stunning man. Harry's looks might be there for the long haul.
I don't think the Windsor's are a great drain on the tax payers or British wealth generally - certainly less than other royals around the world, probably considerably less than most. They do work for those millions. Meanwhile other royals around the world don't do nearly as much, but can lob off huge chunks of a nation's GNP, billions and billions sometimes.
-
All royals are parasites. The Romanovs were treated leniently in my opinion.
MtD
-
James Hewitt was a social climbing polo player, not rugby.
Ah, that's right. I was thinking of Will Carling:
(http://distorted-loop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/willanddi.jpg)
(http://www.omwrfc.co.uk/admin/images/stories/willpolo.jpg)
But it was Hewitt who was suspected to be Harry's biological father.
-
But it was Hewitt who was suspected to be Harry's biological father.
Suspected? I thought these monarchy types were obsessed with bloodlines. Even American talkshow hosts know to use paternity tests. If these people want to be an elite ruling class I think they need to demonstrate genetic superiority, like on Gattaca.
I confess I don't understand the British obsession with royalty. It is the 21st century... Let it go.
-
Suspected? I thought these monarchy types were obsessed with bloodlines. Even American talkshow hosts know to use paternity tests. If these people want to be an elite ruling class I think they need to demonstrate genetic superiority, like on Gattaca.
I confess I don't understand the British obsession with royalty. It is the 21st century... Let it go.
I wonder how fast Harry would be left in the cold if he took a paternity test and found out charles is not his father?
-
Who knows (or cares) whether or not Harry ever had a paternity test. What is speculated upon in the British red-top tabloid press and what happens in reality often have no relation whatsoever.
-
Who knows (or cares) whether or not Harry ever had a paternity test.
Then why have you made numerous posts about it?
-
Then why have you made numerous posts about it?
Numerous posts? Two? Or three if you count me saying that it was only speculation in the British tabloids? Who got out of the bitchy side of the bed again, eh? Matilda brought up the question of Harry's paternity in the first place. ::)
-
Get a cup of coffee girl...
(http://i56.tinypic.com/2w7ffxv.jpg)
-
Get a cup of coffee girl...
(http://i56.tinypic.com/2w7ffxv.jpg)
Talk about ironic. That cat's expression is the same look Diana had before her Benz hit the pole.
Animals are amazing, Diana not so much.
-
I confess I don't understand the British obsession with royalty. It is the 21st century... Let it go.
I think you'll find Americans and Canadians are far more obsessed with them than we are.
Leese
-
I really don't think they get that much obsessional interest by almost all Americans. They are major celebrities, bigger than Octomom and weightier than Angelina Jolie (skinny "do gooder" that she is).
However for those Americans who ARE celebrities or social climbers, to meet them or better be invited, is a major coup. Tom Hanks was going on and on about it on some talk show.
I bet the interest and ass-kissing by British celebrities is even HIGHER! They are your royals, Britain. Don't foist the blame onto other countries for the Windsors being relevant.
-
I really don't think they get that much obsessional interest by almost all Americans. They are major celebrities, bigger than Octomom and weightier than Angelina Jolie (skinny "do gooder" that she is).
However for those Americans who ARE celebrities or social climbers, to meet them or better be invited, is a major coup. Tom Hanks was going on and on about it on some talk show.
I bet the interest and ass-kissing by British celebrities is even HIGHER! They are your royals, Britain. Don't foist the blame onto other countries for the Windsors being relevant.
Who's talking about celebrities? Oh, you again! ;D
Leese
-
Get a cup of coffee girl...
(http://i56.tinypic.com/2w7ffxv.jpg)
This is what I imagine 90% of the posters on this forum look like as they post.
-
This is what I imagine 90% of the posters on this forum look like as they post.
HA HA HA :D
-
I think you'll find Americans and Canadians are far more obsessed with them than we are.
Leese
so prove your point with statistics, not empty assertions (on the face of it I'd probably agree with Canada, absolutely not with Americans if you pro-rate anything by viewership/readership by total population)
-
This is what I imagine 90% of the posters on this forum look like as they post.
You'd be wrong.
(http://tool.shagnasty.net/wiki/images/6/60/Thisiswhatyoulooklikerightnow.jpg)
In the interests of remaining on topic, The Collected sayings of Phil the Greek. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ninety-gaffes-in-ninety-years-2290148.html)
MtD
-
I think you'll find Americans and Canadians are far more obsessed with them than we are.
Leese
I think you are underestimating American ignorance. Based on your observation I asked 6 people in my office, all college educated, to name as many members of the royal family as possible. Three said Charles, Diana, William and Harry. One said Queen Elizabeth. One said Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Fergie and "Diana's two kids." One said Queen Elizabeth, Charles and Charles Jr. No one could name who William married.
-
lulz
Can you imagine the responses if you asked Americans on the street to say who Princess Anne was, or if she was dead or alive?
-
so prove your point with statistics, not empty assertions (on the face of it I'd probably agree with Canada, absolutely not with Americans if you pro-rate anything by viewership/readership by total population)
Oh my bad, thought this was more of a lighthearted conversation. I don't have stats, It's just my opinion having had very dull conversations with Americans about mugs and plates with royals on them once they've realised I'm a Brit. Can't say I've ever had the misfortune of having these conversation with Brits around a dinner table. We usually talk about sex.
-
You'd be wrong.
(http://tool.shagnasty.net/wiki/images/6/60/Thisiswhatyoulooklikerightnow.jpg)
In the interests of remaining on topic, The Collected sayings of Phil the Greek. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ninety-gaffes-in-ninety-years-2290148.html)
MtD
It's as London to a brick that Matty has kangaroos loose in the top paddock!
-
lulz
Can you imagine the responses if you asked Americans on the street to say who Princess Anne was, or if she was dead or alive?
Princess who? I know Prince Albert :P :-*
-
Oh my bad, thought this was more of a lighthearted conversation. I don't have stats, It's just my opinion having had very dull conversations with Americans about mugs and plates with royals on them once they've realised I'm a Brit. Can't say I've ever had the misfortune of having these conversation with Brits around a dinner table. We usually talk about sex.
I love when a Brit wilts under my Republican leash.
-
I think you are underestimating American ignorance. Based on your observation I asked 6 people in my office, all college educated, to name as many members of the royal family as possible. Three said Charles, Diana, William and Harry. One said Queen Elizabeth. One said Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Fergie and "Diana's two kids." One said Queen Elizabeth, Charles and Charles Jr. No one could name who William married.
Well I guess we both made sweeping statements then...
-
In the interests of remaining on topic, The Collected sayings of Phil the Greek. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ninety-gaffes-in-ninety-years-2290148.html)
MtD
I liked this one..he was a straight talker if nothing else.
78. "It looks like a tart's bedroom." On seeing plans for the Duke and then Duchess of York's house at Sunninghill Park.
Aroha
Jan :-*
-
Sunninghill Park.
You think any Americans here actually know what the fuck that is?
-
You think any Americans here actually know what the fuck that is?
Oh settle down Paula Revere. No one doubts that you're a patriot of the truest stripe.
I'm sure most Americans have little to no interest in the antics of the cretinous inbreds who top the pommy totem pole by virtue of birth, but I'm reliably informed that Canadians are monarchy mad.
Well the English speaking ones at least.
MtD
-
Can't say I've ever had the misfortune of having these conversation with Brits around a dinner table. We usually talk about sex.
But only after a thorough discussion about the weather. ;D
-
But only after a thorough discussion about the weather. ;D
Of course! lol
-
You think any Americans here actually know what the fuck that is?
Good point. After all, most Americans can't even find their own country on a map of the world, never mind the British Isles.
-
Good point. After all, most Americans can't even find their own country on a map of the world, never mind the British Isles.
I can but I'm not most Americans ;)
Hell, our President has visited 57 states even though there are only 50 and Sarah Palin thinks she can see Russia from her front door. ::)
-
Good point. After all, most Americans can't even find their own country on a map of the world, never mind the British Isles.
Holding me responsible for bad education in Southern states (http://news.yahoo.com/atlanta-schools-created-culture-cheating-fear-130521276.html) is like blaming me that Southerners don't fully fund ADAP programs.
Now, if you want to compare and contrast the Northeast US and the UK (similar population numbers and land areas (though we, naturally, have a much higher GDP -- 25% of US total is from the Northeast-- because British people are lazy and drink too much) then I'm all go for it.
-
Holding me responsible for bad education in Southern states (http://news.yahoo.com/atlanta-schools-created-culture-cheating-fear-130521276.html) is like blaming me that Southerners don't fully fund ADAP programs.
Now, if you want to compare and contrast the Northeast US and the UK (similar population numbers and land areas (though we, naturally, have a much higher GDP -- 25% of US total is from the Northeast-- because British people are lazy and drink too much) then I'm all go for it.
Got a news flash for you Miss PeePee, I blame you for EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE on the entire planet. Quite rightly too, as I'm sure many in the know will agree. So there. :P
-
Oh wow, Miss Piss and Ann going at it. Let me get some butter for the popcorn LOL! :-*
-
Oh wow, Miss Piss and Ann going at it. Let me get some butter for the popcorn LOL! :-*
That'll make nice change, considering where you normally put butter.
MtD
-
Miss PeePee, I want you to know that I hold you personally responsible for the outcome of this National Geographic survey (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/11/1120_021120_GeoRoperSurvey.html) outcome. Read it and
try to find your way out of a paper bag weep.
-
Oh wow, Miss Piss and Ann going at it. Let me get some butter for the popcorn LOL! :-*
I popped some just for you. (http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad174/dash1293_2010/Emoticons/popcorn.gif)
-
I'm going to have to use the "report" function on some of this name calling and deliberate flaming.
-
I'm going to have to use the "report" function on some of this name calling and deliberate flaming.
Good luck, but you can't hit report on your own posts. (http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad174/dash1293_2010/Emoticons/014.gif)
(http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad174/dash1293_2010/Emoticons/035.gif)
-
That'll make nice change, considering where you normally put butter.
MtD
I can afford lube Matty...real lube...I don't need butter smarty pants! ::)
-
I can afford lube Matty...real lube...I don't need butter smarty pants! ::)
So would that be axle grease or sewing machine oil?
MtD
-
HARUMPH >:(
I asked one simple question and look at what you all have made of it. From lust (though I admit Drewm's pics were um er titillating), to historical what not and blah dee blah, to cries for revolution.
I'm ashamed of all of you! ;)
Lord, is nothing sacred anymore?
RAB
-
So would that be axle grease or sewing machine oil?
MtD
LOL
-
So would that be axle grease or sewing machine oil?
MtD
Sewing machine oil? Just fill it with concrete because it can't possibly be any use to anyone now (http://www.heaven666.org/how-to-get-an-anal-prolapse-15867.php).
-
Sewing machine oil? Just fill it with concrete because it can't possibly be any use to anyone now (http://www.heaven666.org/how-to-get-an-anal-prolapse-15867.php).
Is that your best? No wonder you get your lunch eaten ad-nauseum ROFLMAO!
-
but I'm reliably informed that Canadians are monarchy mad.
Well the English speaking ones at least.
MtD
"Rumors" say we might ditch the Royals once Elizabeth dies. Could you imagine seeing Charle's face everytime you take out a 20$ bill?
-
So would that be axle grease or sewing machine oil?
MtD
Sewing machine oil would be the wise choice, what with all the needling that goes on around here!
-
Sewing machine oil would be the wise choice, what with all the needling that goes on around here!
:D..good one Ann.
Aroha
Jan :-*
-
Sewing machine oil would be the wise choice, what with all the needling that goes on around here!
(http://tool.shagnasty.net/wiki/images/e/e0/Rimshot.jpg)
"Rumors" say we might ditch the Royals once Elizabeth dies. Could you imagine seeing Charle's face everytime you take out a 20$ bill?
Nope. We stick the monarch's dolly old eek on the $5 note. Only Crown Crazy Canada would the King merit a mention on a $20. :)
MtD
-
The beauty of a monarchy is that you don't have to go through the tedium and expense of electing a head of state (or devise some other undemocratic system to appoint a head of state).
I kind of like our current situation, a monarch who lives 20,000 km away and, except in the most exceptional of circumstances, stays out of our affairs.