Does anyone else think that Kate Middleton's wedding dress was a little dull?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Philip Treacy hats are ghastly - he is designing hats for weirdos and making them look even more strange than they did before they started wearing his ugly creations. His hats have the effect of making women look like farting peacocks - one expects them at any moment to start strutting around a barnyard.

Haha "farting peacocks". That is an excellent comparison of Eugenies hat. You are funny!

[Anonymous]

I think pp is wrong about Diana not being admirable. She could have just done token charity work. Made an appearance here or there.... she really put her heart into it. She went beyond the call of what she had to do for appearance's sake.

As an aside....Can you image what would happen if overnight, Paris Hilton became a philanthropist?

[Anonymous]

Why on earth would they be angry their mom wasn't there? Who invites the ex-wife of their uncle to their wedding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think pp is wrong about Diana not being admirable. She could have just done token charity work. Made an appearance here or there.... she really put her heart into it. She went beyond the call of what she had to do for appearance's sake.

As an aside....Can you image what would happen if overnight, Paris Hilton became a philanthropist?

Can you imagine what would happen if everyone who had more than a million dollars gave away half or more of it? The world would truly be a better place for many. The few haves have too much and the many have nots have little to nothing. Maybe they worked hard to earn it but maybe it is morally wrong to hoard God's resources meant for all.

[Anonymous]

I'm know she's required to cover her arms and shoulders in the church and I think she did this successfully. I hope this style catches on and ends a decade of off the shoulder horrors I've seen. Really tired of that look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kate's dress was ok and her veil was ok, but neither suitable for a future queen. This girl had a choice of half a dozen or more stunning tiaras. She needed to wear one of them. Her dress and veil were both suitable for a country bride marrying the local milkman in the village church - this was a future king marrying a future queen. Simple is nice but its not for a royal wedding. The tiara was a non starter, almost apologetic, as if the wearer was uncomfortable with making a statement in diamonds. Also, the veil for that dress and in that cathedral should have had a cathedral length and should have trailed over the dress in layers. The veil and hair style lacked height at the back. The bouquet was too small and again needed to make a bigger statement. At a wedding where the groom is more ornate than the bride it is a shame nobody advised her - or perhaps someone did - Camilla!

Just have to point out that the tiara was originally purchased by the royal family (apparently from Cartier) in the 30s and first belonged to Queen Elizabeth (later the Queen Mother) and now belongs to Queen Elizabeth II. I suspect they are/were (as the case may be) comfortable wearing tiaras -- as understated as this one may be ....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't know if anyone's mentioned it yet but Fergies girls are fugly, just like the rest of the clan.

And you've got a fugly soul. Or the soul of a teenage troll.

Honestly, you must be having a very bad day. We all have our insecurities, but calling anyone's children ugly is beneath contempt.

You do know they are adult women?

You do know that even adult women are still referred to as the children of xyz...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why on earth would they be angry their mom wasn't there? Who invites the ex-wife of their uncle to their wedding?

Point well taken. Their anger may not seem reasonable to you but Fergie was snubbed by the royal family all during the marriage. It would be possible that the kids feel ambivalent at the very least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why on earth would they be angry their mom wasn't there? Who invites the ex-wife of their uncle to their wedding?

Point well taken. Their anger may not seem reasonable to you but Fergie was snubbed by the royal family all during the marriage. It would be possible that the kids feel ambivalent at the very least.

She's William's aunt and she was close friends with his mother. She certainly seems to be upset about the snub. She talked about it on Oprah.

[Anonymous]

Oh no...it wasn't the gown at all! Kate is just not that good looking.Diana was way..........MORE of a beauty, you can't even compare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think pp is wrong about Diana not being admirable. She could have just done token charity work. Made an appearance here or there.... she really put her heart into it. She went beyond the call of what she had to do for appearance's sake.

As an aside....Can you image what would happen if overnight, Paris Hilton became a philanthropist?

Someone would have had to rewire her brain.

[Anonymous]

ridiculous exaggeration

They're NOT babies; they're adults.

And they're not at all attractive.

Unless royal blood is in your veins, who is offended?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't know if anyone's mentioned it yet but Fergies girls are fugly, just like the rest of the clan.

And you've got a fugly soul. Or the soul of a teenage troll.

Honestly, you must be having a very bad day. We all have our insecurities, but calling anyone's children ugly is beneath contempt.

You do know they are adult women?

You do know that even adult women are still referred to as the children of xyz...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you imagine what would happen if everyone who had more than a million dollars gave away half or more of it? The world would truly be a better place for many. The few haves have too much and the many have nots have little to nothing. Maybe they worked hard to earn it but maybe it is morally wrong to hoard God's resources meant for all.

Yes, THEY worked hard to earn it, but it's meant for MEEEEEEE!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think pp is wrong about Diana not being admirable. She could have just done token charity work. Made an appearance here or there.... she really put her heart into it. She went beyond the call of what she had to do for appearance's sake.

As an aside....Can you image what would happen if overnight, Paris Hilton became a philanthropist?

Someone would have had to rewire her brain.

OK, this statement makes no sense...because Paris only has air in her head as far as I can tell. I need evidence of said brain's existence.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I don't like it at all.