So what kind of King will Charles be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shall we place bets on who Charles gives new titles to? I think Edward will be named Duke of edinborough, but Archie and Lili will not be named prince or princess due to “slimming down the monarchy. Going forward George’s children will have titles but not Charlotte or Louis’s children.

The Sussex children became prince and princess as soon as their grandfather became king.

Theoretically. But not officially. Check the Royal website. The Wales were updated but not Archie and Lili.

https://www.royal.uk/succession

It’s possible it’s not going to happen.

There’s nothing official. They are prince and princess, providing their parents want to call them that. The only question is whether they get the HRH.

If they are going to be Prince and Princess, that sight will be updated. Someone has made a conscious choice not to do it (yet.) I’d be surprised if they are given HRH being that their parents are not allowed to use HRH.

I have to admit it would irritate me to no end that there's a Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and my kids didn't get the same title. And I understand there is protocol and minutiae and differentiation between HRH and Prince/Princess, but it's these little digs that continue to drive gossip and create more ill will. If I was Charles, that would be my primary concern with my family legacy. Because there's no mistake about it, if God forbid a plague wipes out everyone from Charles to Louis, Harry is the monarch. Everyone knows that. Don't create an artificial distinction under the guise of slimming down the Royal family. It can be decided/implemented in William's generation.

Maybe it’s also a lesson to not go out and publicly trash your family and then expect that everything will remain peachy.

Maybe they should have treated his wife better.

Maybe she could have taken 5 minutes to figure out what she was getting herself into ahead of time. She could have spared everyone all the pain by storming off before her fairytale wedding. But we all know why that didn’t happen. If she wants the features of royal life, she has to live there and participate.

No one would want to marry Harry under the circumstances you are describing. Which is probably why he was so old when he did get married.

Harry would be utterly bored with a woman like Kate.
She was everything he wanted her to be, someone with her own mind, who has made her own success
Independent grown woman

Get them young, treat them rough is not for him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

While I agree with your point, she was not (and will not be) "literally buried." Her coffin will be placed in the George IV Memorial Chapel in St. George's at Windsor with her parents, sister and husband, none of whom were or will be buried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

While I agree with your point, she was not (and will not be) "literally buried." Her coffin will be placed in the George IV Memorial Chapel in St. George's at Windsor with her parents, sister and husband, none of whom were or will be buried.

When I saw the room there were no caskets but the stones indicating where they were “buried”. I suspect there’s another room below that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shall we place bets on who Charles gives new titles to? I think Edward will be named Duke of edinborough, but Archie and Lili will not be named prince or princess due to “slimming down the monarchy. Going forward George’s children will have titles but not Charlotte or Louis’s children.

The Sussex children became prince and princess as soon as their grandfather became king.

Theoretically. But not officially. Check the Royal website. The Wales were updated but not Archie and Lili.

https://www.royal.uk/succession

It’s possible it’s not going to happen.

There’s nothing official. They are prince and princess, providing their parents want to call them that. The only question is whether they get the HRH.

If they are going to be Prince and Princess, that sight will be updated. Someone has made a conscious choice not to do it (yet.) I’d be surprised if they are given HRH being that their parents are not allowed to use HRH.

I have to admit it would irritate me to no end that there's a Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and my kids didn't get the same title. And I understand there is protocol and minutiae and differentiation between HRH and Prince/Princess, but it's these little digs that continue to drive gossip and create more ill will. If I was Charles, that would be my primary concern with my family legacy. Because there's no mistake about it, if God forbid a plague wipes out everyone from Charles to Louis, Harry is the monarch. Everyone knows that. Don't create an artificial distinction under the guise of slimming down the Royal family. It can be decided/implemented in William's generation.

Maybe it’s also a lesson to not go out and publicly trash your family and then expect that everything will remain peachy.

Maybe they should have treated his wife better.

Maybe she could have taken 5 minutes to figure out what she was getting herself into ahead of time. She could have spared everyone all the pain by storming off before her fairytale wedding. But we all know why that didn’t happen. If she wants the features of royal life, she has to live there and participate.

I suspect before marriage Harry already told her he was not staying to do RF business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My money is on George abdicating and we’ll have Queen Charlotte. Just wait.

You’re adorable!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shall we place bets on who Charles gives new titles to? I think Edward will be named Duke of edinborough, but Archie and Lili will not be named prince or princess due to “slimming down the monarchy. Going forward George’s children will have titles but not Charlotte or Louis’s children.

The Sussex children became prince and princess as soon as their grandfather became king.

Theoretically. But not officially. Check the Royal website. The Wales were updated but not Archie and Lili.

https://www.royal.uk/succession

It’s possible it’s not going to happen.

There’s nothing official. They are prince and princess, providing their parents want to call them that. The only question is whether they get the HRH.

If they are going to be Prince and Princess, that sight will be updated. Someone has made a conscious choice not to do it (yet.) I’d be surprised if they are given HRH being that their parents are not allowed to use HRH.

I have to admit it would irritate me to no end that there's a Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and my kids didn't get the same title. And I understand there is protocol and minutiae and differentiation between HRH and Prince/Princess, but it's these little digs that continue to drive gossip and create more ill will. If I was Charles, that would be my primary concern with my family legacy. Because there's no mistake about it, if God forbid a plague wipes out everyone from Charles to Louis, Harry is the monarch. Everyone knows that. Don't create an artificial distinction under the guise of slimming down the Royal family. It can be decided/implemented in William's generation.

Maybe it’s also a lesson to not go out and publicly trash your family and then expect that everything will remain peachy.

Maybe they should have treated his wife better.

Maybe she could have taken 5 minutes to figure out what she was getting herself into ahead of time. She could have spared everyone all the pain by storming off before her fairytale wedding. But we all know why that didn’t happen. If she wants the features of royal life, she has to live there and participate.

I suspect before marriage Harry already told her he was not staying to do RF business.

Sure didn’t seem that way. They were pretty all-in until right before Archie was born. Then they wouldn’t announce where he would be born or even that he was born until they were home. And it all went downhill from there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shall we place bets on who Charles gives new titles to? I think Edward will be named Duke of edinborough, but Archie and Lili will not be named prince or princess due to “slimming down the monarchy. Going forward George’s children will have titles but not Charlotte or Louis’s children.

The Sussex children became prince and princess as soon as their grandfather became king.

Theoretically. But not officially. Check the Royal website. The Wales were updated but not Archie and Lili.

https://www.royal.uk/succession

It’s possible it’s not going to happen.

There’s nothing official. They are prince and princess, providing their parents want to call them that. The only question is whether they get the HRH.

If they are going to be Prince and Princess, that sight will be updated. Someone has made a conscious choice not to do it (yet.) I’d be surprised if they are given HRH being that their parents are not allowed to use HRH.

I have to admit it would irritate me to no end that there's a Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie and my kids didn't get the same title. And I understand there is protocol and minutiae and differentiation between HRH and Prince/Princess, but it's these little digs that continue to drive gossip and create more ill will. If I was Charles, that would be my primary concern with my family legacy. Because there's no mistake about it, if God forbid a plague wipes out everyone from Charles to Louis, Harry is the monarch. Everyone knows that. Don't create an artificial distinction under the guise of slimming down the Royal family. It can be decided/implemented in William's generation.

Maybe it’s also a lesson to not go out and publicly trash your family and then expect that everything will remain peachy.

Maybe they should have treated his wife better.

Maybe she could have taken 5 minutes to figure out what she was getting herself into ahead of time. She could have spared everyone all the pain by storming off before her fairytale wedding. But we all know why that didn’t happen. If she wants the features of royal life, she has to live there and participate.

No one would want to marry Harry under the circumstances you are describing. Which is probably why he was so old when he did get married.

Harry would be utterly bored with a woman like Kate.
She was everything he wanted her to be, someone with her own mind, who has made her own success
Independent grown woman

Get them young, treat them rough is not for him

But it is for his wife, lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

So? Let the main grieve. He doesn't need to jump when she asks. Have you lost a parent? It's a pretty audacious request given everything going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

Oh my word! For her to request that at this time is incredibly self-absorbed and beyond rude.

Like he nedds another thing on his plate right now or to add an additional chapter to their book.

If she really was concerned about clearing the air, they would give him time to rest a grieve first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if he will be able to remain as politically neutral as the Queen. I think he could be a great champion for environmental causes if he chose to speak up.

I hope this is true but if you read any of the numerous letters he wrote 10-15 years ago, he actually isn't very bright and may be a little nuts.

He seems to have a low IQ. Just another spoiled brat who was mostly ignored by his busy parents.

Good thing his post is ceremonial and largely dictated by protocol. The Queen, by her own admission, was not given a proper education by her parents (she and her sister were tutored at home) and yet she still managed her job quite well. Charles will be fine - they aren't giving him the nuclear codes.

He’s temperamental child... with a short fuse. His behavior with a pen speaks volumes. Poor little rich boy.

Diana was a saint next to him.

Totally agree! He still acts like a spoiled, entitled, aloof brat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if he will be able to remain as politically neutral as the Queen. I think he could be a great champion for environmental causes if he chose to speak up.

I hope this is true but if you read any of the numerous letters he wrote 10-15 years ago, he actually isn't very bright and may be a little nuts.

He seems to have a low IQ. Just another spoiled brat who was mostly ignored by his busy parents.

Good thing his post is ceremonial and largely dictated by protocol. The Queen, by her own admission, was not given a proper education by her parents (she and her sister were tutored at home) and yet she still managed her job quite well. Charles will be fine - they aren't giving him the nuclear codes.

He’s temperamental child... with a short fuse. His behavior with a pen speaks volumes. Poor little rich boy.

Diana was a saint next to him.

Totally agree! He still acts like a spoiled, entitled, aloof brat.

Diana was spoiled, entitled and reckless. She would have been there for her children today if she had bothered to buckle up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

While I agree with your point, she was not (and will not be) "literally buried." Her coffin will be placed in the George IV Memorial Chapel in St. George's at Windsor with her parents, sister and husband, none of whom were or will be buried.

Charles is an old man 73. I really doubt he is grieving. It is a lot different when your parents die when you are older vs younger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

While I agree with your point, she was not (and will not be) "literally buried." Her coffin will be placed in the George IV Memorial Chapel in St. George's at Windsor with her parents, sister and husband, none of whom were or will be buried.

Charles is an old man 73. I really doubt he is grieving. It is a lot different when your parents die when you are older vs younger.

I think losing a parent is hard no matter your age. My 70something aunts and dad had a rough time when their mom died at 95.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A petty king apparently. His overseas daughter in law has requested a private audience to clear the air and he has hightailed it to Balmoral.

To be fair, the King literally buried his mother last night and has spent the last 12 days in public and unable to mourn in private. Perhaps he just wanted to be alone and grieve?

While I agree with your point, she was not (and will not be) "literally buried." Her coffin will be placed in the George IV Memorial Chapel in St. George's at Windsor with her parents, sister and husband, none of whom were or will be buried.

Charles is an old man 73. I really doubt he is grieving. It is a lot different when your parents die when you are older vs younger.

They knew her health was declining. She was lucky she could still walk, had her kind, and went quickly.