The Cambridges News and Updates ( Prince William, Kate Middleton, George, Charlotte and Louis)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does William have a project he organized like Invictus for Harry? I know they had that Heads Together thing but that was William, Kate and Harry together so that doesn’t count. I mean something that’s just his that he obviously cares about. Anything?

William doesn’t have to do shi$… he will be King. Harry will just be… Harry. Indict us helps for sure to keep them in lights but nothing else much.

William doesn’t have to do shit but the Queen and Charles do? How does that work lol?

He makes plenty of appearances and is regularly at events, championing causes, etc. He’s also a father of three little kids and maybe he wants to be a more present father and husband than his father and grandfather. Or maybe he’s depressed. Or facing other issues. We have no idea. But William seems as engaged and devoted to his role as one could expect and these criticisms seem mean spirited.

I gave you the court circular link. No, he doesn’t show up regularly. Look at what his grandma was doing. Look at what his father, his step mom, Sophie, Edward, Meghan and Harry were doing. He’s by all accounts not a present father and that’s not the arrangement. He is a lazy man.

But hey, he’s going to finish off the monarchy when the people revolt at him being unable to keep up his end of the bargain.

Kate is more important to the continuation of the monarchy than he is. And she's doing fine.

I think you could make that argument if the monarchy status quo was generally positive-- scandal free and stable-- but, it's not. You described Kate as fine. She is, but only fine. She doesn't have the endearing or sparkly qualities that garner significant affection or loyalty. That's what you need to counter the damage that's been done in recent years.

She does. She is a good mother and she is unflappable. The queen is loved now because she has endured. Not out of a sense of godliness but because she's been there forever. People have gotten used to Camilla, but Kate is not an interloper, she is steady. And she'll remain steady, there's no question of it.

The Queen is popular not just for her steadiness but because she has worked tirelessly for 75 years in service to the people. You can't say the same for Kate. (And you can't use the excuse of small children. She didn't work before they were born, either.)

What a bunch of crock. Work tirelessly?? Doing what? What exactly did she do for all the Caribbean nations that are now rejecting her? Please describe all the work she has tirelessly done for them.

She showed up and didn't wait until she was forced at 40 to visit her realms. Same with Charles. Same with Anne. Point blank. Sad to say the bar is that low and the Cambridges can't even do that.

She visited her realms and did what for them?? What has she done for all the countries that have been sending her money for decades upon decades???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does William have a project he organized like Invictus for Harry? I know they had that Heads Together thing but that was William, Kate and Harry together so that doesn’t count. I mean something that’s just his that he obviously cares about. Anything?

William doesn’t have to do shi$… he will be King. Harry will just be… Harry. Indict us helps for sure to keep them in lights but nothing else much.

William doesn’t have to do shit but the Queen and Charles do? How does that work lol?

He makes plenty of appearances and is regularly at events, championing causes, etc. He’s also a father of three little kids and maybe he wants to be a more present father and husband than his father and grandfather. Or maybe he’s depressed. Or facing other issues. We have no idea. But William seems as engaged and devoted to his role as one could expect and these criticisms seem mean spirited.

I gave you the court circular link. No, he doesn’t show up regularly. Look at what his grandma was doing. Look at what his father, his step mom, Sophie, Edward, Meghan and Harry were doing. He’s by all accounts not a present father and that’s not the arrangement. He is a lazy man.

But hey, he’s going to finish off the monarchy when the people revolt at him being unable to keep up his end of the bargain.

Kate is more important to the continuation of the monarchy than he is. And she's doing fine.

I think you could make that argument if the monarchy status quo was generally positive-- scandal free and stable-- but, it's not. You described Kate as fine. She is, but only fine. She doesn't have the endearing or sparkly qualities that garner significant affection or loyalty. That's what you need to counter the damage that's been done in recent years.

She does. She is a good mother and she is unflappable. The queen is loved now because she has endured. Not out of a sense of godliness but because she's been there forever. People have gotten used to Camilla, but Kate is not an interloper, she is steady. And she'll remain steady, there's no question of it.

The Queen is popular not just for her steadiness but because she has worked tirelessly for 75 years in service to the people. You can't say the same for Kate. (And you can't use the excuse of small children. She didn't work before they were born, either.)

What a bunch of crock. Work tirelessly?? Doing what? What exactly did she do for all the Caribbean nations that are now rejecting her? Please describe all the work she has tirelessly done for them.

She showed up and didn't wait until she was forced at 40 to visit her realms. Same with Charles. Same with Anne. Point blank. Sad to say the bar is that low and the Cambridges can't even do that.

She visited her realms and did what for them?? What has she done for all the countries that have been sending her money for decades upon decades???

The stupidity on this thread is out of control. You have no clue what the commonwealth is or does. It’s a voluntary association. They benefit from a network of civic, cultural, professional and other intergovernmental organizations. The queen is a unifying symbol of the commonwealth. Again- it’s entirely voluntary and the member countries see plenty of benefit in it otherwise they wouldn’t be part of it. And if they aren’t part of it fine- the monarchy supports that too- see when Charles went to Barbados after they left as a sign of friendship even without the formal commonwealth ties.

As for this constant drumbeat of lazy Kate - it’s truly baffling why you care. The cambridges have been to Australia, multiple European counties, the South Pacific, Canada, the US multiple times… they go at the behest of the UK government. So when they are scheduled to go, they go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People keep calling them "lazy" but what exactly do you want them to do? they are not allowed to have any political power or opinions. Being a patron of a charity isn't even raising money for it, its just shwoing up at events and smiling to publicize a call. they cannot lobby govt for anything. So thats what they do, they show up to dozens of events, nothing controversial and cut ribbons and shake hands. its not on them to "read the binders" of research, their staff should be advising them better on the bad look of the caribean tour. The problem is that the palace staff is full of stuffy old white peopel who refuse to see the writing on the wall.

I think you've sort of encapsulated to a tee the uselessness of monarchy.

The British Royal Family is a symbol of tradition, heritage, and culture. They are important to the country, despite accusations of "uselessness".

To some extent, our First Family fills the role here. Since they switch out every 4 or 8 years, though, there's no stability or permanence.

They also bring in much more than they cost: https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/they-cost-us-a-mint-but-bring-in-much-more/amp/

This is such a lazy and inaccurate claim that's been debunked so many times. You really have to be reaching if you think people are traveling to the UK because of the royal family, lol. Funny how just across the Channel, Versailles brings in way more tourist money than Buckingham Palace ever would. If you spend just a little more than a minute really thinking this through, it becomes immediately apparent just how paper-thin this argument is.

Hit a nerve, I see.

DP. But why do you need the actual people rather than just the palaces?

Right. Italy and France don’t have royal families and their tourism industries seem to be going just fine. In fact, better than the UK.

Italy and France have great food and culture. The UK does not have great food and the culture is much more classist - the royal family is arguably a huge tourism draw. But the concept of a monarchy is incredibly outdated. All William and Kate have done to “modernize” it is prioritize spending “more time” at home with their kids and doing fewer official engagements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does William have a project he organized like Invictus for Harry? I know they had that Heads Together thing but that was William, Kate and Harry together so that doesn’t count. I mean something that’s just his that he obviously cares about. Anything?

William doesn’t have to do shi$… he will be King. Harry will just be… Harry. Indict us helps for sure to keep them in lights but nothing else much.

William doesn’t have to do shit but the Queen and Charles do? How does that work lol?

He makes plenty of appearances and is regularly at events, championing causes, etc. He’s also a father of three little kids and maybe he wants to be a more present father and husband than his father and grandfather. Or maybe he’s depressed. Or facing other issues. We have no idea. But William seems as engaged and devoted to his role as one could expect and these criticisms seem mean spirited.

I gave you the court circular link. No, he doesn’t show up regularly. Look at what his grandma was doing. Look at what his father, his step mom, Sophie, Edward, Meghan and Harry were doing. He’s by all accounts not a present father and that’s not the arrangement. He is a lazy man.

But hey, he’s going to finish off the monarchy when the people revolt at him being unable to keep up his end of the bargain.

Kate is more important to the continuation of the monarchy than he is. And she's doing fine.

I think you could make that argument if the monarchy status quo was generally positive-- scandal free and stable-- but, it's not. You described Kate as fine. She is, but only fine. She doesn't have the endearing or sparkly qualities that garner significant affection or loyalty. That's what you need to counter the damage that's been done in recent years.

She does. She is a good mother and she is unflappable. The queen is loved now because she has endured. Not out of a sense of godliness but because she's been there forever. People have gotten used to Camilla, but Kate is not an interloper, she is steady. And she'll remain steady, there's no question of it.

The Queen is popular not just for her steadiness but because she has worked tirelessly for 75 years in service to the people. You can't say the same for Kate. (And you can't use the excuse of small children. She didn't work before they were born, either.)

What a bunch of crock. Work tirelessly?? Doing what? What exactly did she do for all the Caribbean nations that are now rejecting her? Please describe all the work she has tirelessly done for them.

She showed up and didn't wait until she was forced at 40 to visit her realms. Same with Charles. Same with Anne. Point blank. Sad to say the bar is that low and the Cambridges can't even do that.

She visited her realms and did what for them?? What has she done for all the countries that have been sending her money for decades upon decades???

The stupidity on this thread is out of control. You have no clue what the commonwealth is or does. It’s a voluntary association. They benefit from a network of civic, cultural, professional and other intergovernmental organizations. The queen is a unifying symbol of the commonwealth. Again- it’s entirely voluntary and the member countries see plenty of benefit in it otherwise they wouldn’t be part of it. And if they aren’t part of it fine- the monarchy supports that too- see when Charles went to Barbados after they left as a sign of friendship even without the formal commonwealth ties.

As for this constant drumbeat of lazy Kate - it’s truly baffling why you care. The cambridges have been to Australia, multiple European counties, the South Pacific, Canada, the US multiple times… they go at the behest of the UK government. So when they are scheduled to go, they go.

I’m one of the Canadians here. I think (and I think this is the sentiment of a lot of younger Canadians) that during the war and in the years after, the Queen was an important unifying force that helped Commonwealth countries recover from the devastation of the Second World War. And that recovery took a very long time, well into the 1970s and 1980s. The Queen was wildly popular in Canada for that reason: she was a symbol of the commonwealth and there was a perception (albeit probably an inaccurate one) that the Queen worked for Canadians. I remember as a little kid my mom taking me to line the streets holding a Canadian flag on one of the Queen’s visits.

I cannot in a million years imagine doing the same with my kids if William and Kate visit, because they do not do anything for Canada. They take from Canada, but they don’t make any effort to raise the profile of Canada, to think about Canadian issues, to strengthen the Commonwealth. They just want Canadian tax money so they can go to Mustique for weeks each year.

Charles is in the middle although not beloved like his mother. Environmental issues are important to Canadians. His trust has specifically made efforts with Canadian native causes. So he at least seems to know Canada exists other for a purpose other than to fund extensive beach vacations, which is a start.

I hope Canada leaves the Commonwealth soon, or at the minimum starts refusing to send money as soon as the Queen passes. Her degenerate kids and grandkids should not get Canadian money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People keep calling them "lazy" but what exactly do you want them to do? they are not allowed to have any political power or opinions. Being a patron of a charity isn't even raising money for it, its just shwoing up at events and smiling to publicize a call. they cannot lobby govt for anything. So thats what they do, they show up to dozens of events, nothing controversial and cut ribbons and shake hands. its not on them to "read the binders" of research, their staff should be advising them better on the bad look of the caribean tour. The problem is that the palace staff is full of stuffy old white peopel who refuse to see the writing on the wall.

I think you've sort of encapsulated to a tee the uselessness of monarchy.

The British Royal Family is a symbol of tradition, heritage, and culture. They are important to the country, despite accusations of "uselessness".

To some extent, our First Family fills the role here. Since they switch out every 4 or 8 years, though, there's no stability or permanence.

They also bring in much more than they cost: https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/they-cost-us-a-mint-but-bring-in-much-more/amp/

This is such a lazy and inaccurate claim that's been debunked so many times. You really have to be reaching if you think people are traveling to the UK because of the royal family, lol. Funny how just across the Channel, Versailles brings in way more tourist money than Buckingham Palace ever would. If you spend just a little more than a minute really thinking this through, it becomes immediately apparent just how paper-thin this argument is.

Hit a nerve, I see.

DP. But why do you need the actual people rather than just the palaces?

Why do millioms of people around the world tune into the royal weddings? You need to ask the fans.

Another DP. A royal wedding is once or twice a generation, and Brits aren't making money from people watching them on TV.

People don’t tune in to see the castles.

No, but the Brits aren't making money off of people tuning in, for whatever reason. Unless I'm wrong and the BRF is selling TV rights to broadcast like it's the NFL. The weddings/coronations/jubilees are news events, covered by the world's journalists.

[Anonymous]

I do have to think that, on some level, being a royalist reflects spinelessness and degeneracy and a lack of self-esteem. You’re basically submitting yourself to a worldview and mindset in which you are categorically inferior, by nature, to a certain class of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prince Louis turns 4 tomorrow!
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/photos-prince-louis-released-4th-birthday/story?id=84242804

Adorable!!

Louis is such a cutie!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Louis turns 4 tomorrow!
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/photos-prince-louis-released-4th-birthday/story?id=84242804

Adorable!!

Darling! Thanks for posting, pp.

You are welcome! I actually prefer this than the constant negativity that Kate, William get which gets very old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do have to think that, on some level, being a royalist reflects spinelessness and degeneracy and a lack of self-esteem. You’re basically submitting yourself to a worldview and mindset in which you are categorically inferior, by nature, to a certain class of people.

I suppose there’s that way of thinking, but humans always put themselves in the better category/they don’t really believe in the tenets of monarchy. They like the idea of monarchy - hence all those of us Americans who have an opinion one way or another about a system that no longer officially affects us. Plus I found that the worse the Trump years were, the more I paid attention to the royal drama. It’s this big dumb problem or drama or beauty pageant (however a person likes to think about it) that is so made up, so pretend. It’s escapism.

[Anonymous]

Is anyone planning to read Tina Brown’s new book?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone planning to read Tina Brown’s new book?

Definitely! Sounds like a juicy read: https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2022/04/23/meghan-markle-royal-family-book-tina-brown/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does William have a project he organized like Invictus for Harry? I know they had that Heads Together thing but that was William, Kate and Harry together so that doesn’t count. I mean something that’s just his that he obviously cares about. Anything?

William doesn’t have to do shi$… he will be King. Harry will just be… Harry. Indict us helps for sure to keep them in lights but nothing else much.

William doesn’t have to do shit but the Queen and Charles do? How does that work lol?

He makes plenty of appearances and is regularly at events, championing causes, etc. He’s also a father of three little kids and maybe he wants to be a more present father and husband than his father and grandfather. Or maybe he’s depressed. Or facing other issues. We have no idea. But William seems as engaged and devoted to his role as one could expect and these criticisms seem mean spirited.

I gave you the court circular link. No, he doesn’t show up regularly. Look at what his grandma was doing. Look at what his father, his step mom, Sophie, Edward, Meghan and Harry were doing. He’s by all accounts not a present father and that’s not the arrangement. He is a lazy man.

But hey, he’s going to finish off the monarchy when the people revolt at him being unable to keep up his end of the bargain.

Kate is more important to the continuation of the monarchy than he is. And she's doing fine.

I think you could make that argument if the monarchy status quo was generally positive-- scandal free and stable-- but, it's not. You described Kate as fine. She is, but only fine. She doesn't have the endearing or sparkly qualities that garner significant affection or loyalty. That's what you need to counter the damage that's been done in recent years.

She does. She is a good mother and she is unflappable. The queen is loved now because she has endured. Not out of a sense of godliness but because she's been there forever. People have gotten used to Camilla, but Kate is not an interloper, she is steady. And she'll remain steady, there's no question of it.

The Queen is popular not just for her steadiness but because she has worked tirelessly for 75 years in service to the people. You can't say the same for Kate. (And you can't use the excuse of small children. She didn't work before they were born, either.)

What a bunch of crock. Work tirelessly?? Doing what? What exactly did she do for all the Caribbean nations that are now rejecting her? Please describe all the work she has tirelessly done for them.

She showed up and didn't wait until she was forced at 40 to visit her realms. Same with Charles. Same with Anne. Point blank. Sad to say the bar is that low and the Cambridges can't even do that.

Are you DENSE? She became Queen when she was 25, it was her freaking job. William and Kate are the grandchildren of the monarch, I mean, he's not even first in line. What do you expect him to do? You're so dumb.

[Anonymous]

Canadian here- Most of us love the Queen, at least those of us over 25. I am proud to be part of the commonwealth. However, I did not support or want to pay for Megan and Harry’s security costs. I thought it was outrageous that they thought they could just waltz in and stay on Canada’s dime. I don’t mind paying for William and Kate, because they are the future. I would feel very differently if Charles hadn’t committed to downsizing the monarchy. I’m happy there are now less mouths to feed and fully support them cutting off Royals who don’t do anything.

[Anonymous]

I’m the Canadian who doesn’t like the BRF and doesn’t want to pay for William and Kate, and I reported the nasty posts about Louis. Criticizing a young child is pathetic. And I would be happy to never hear about the BRF again and in particular I don’t want any money going to them. But there is no need to be cruel about a child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A British reporter shared some interesting conclusions last night

Yikes. That's pretty strongly worded from a reporter.

Oof. The British media landscape will look quite different when they're finally able to speak about William freely without threat of repercussion.