What are your honest opinions of Camilla Parker Bowles today in 2022 ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I was a British citizen I’d be “royally” pissed about this family sucking the teat of their taxpayers. It’s archaic and ridiculous. Enough already.

So does your theory involve the state seizing the property that has belonged to the crown for centuries? Because they generate income from their wealth (the Crown Estate), donate it all to the country and the Parliament gives them back a small portion of their income for operating costs. Nothing actually comes from the taxpayer. And they get to listen to ill-informed people complaining about "spending their tax dollars."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was a British citizen I’d be “royally” pissed about this family sucking the teat of their taxpayers. It’s archaic and ridiculous. Enough already.

So does your theory involve the state seizing the property that has belonged to the crown for centuries? Because they generate income from their wealth (the Crown Estate), donate it all to the country and the Parliament gives them back a small portion of their income for operating costs. Nothing actually comes from the taxpayer. And they get to listen to ill-informed people complaining about "spending their tax dollars."

The family doesn’t own the Crown Estate - they only own certain properties like Balmoral outright. The lands and jewels will be returned to the state just as they were in Italy, Ireland, Greece, France, the United States, India, South Africa and every other former territory or colony that kicked out its moochers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m neutral to slightly positive. I strongly disliked her during the Diana days but have realized she and Charles were the victims of time and circumstances beyond their control. I admire her for taking a backseat, not seeking the limelight and paying her dues with her charity work, unlike the Meghan Markles of the world. She’s never complained publicly and has always been supportive of the BRF, even though they treated her like a second-class citizen for years and didn’t consider her good enough to be a marriage prospect for Charles. She held her head high despite being one of the most despised woman in the world. You’ve got to admire her for that, if nothing else.

This. Not a fan of the BRF but I am a fan of long lost and rekindled love. I think they had the real deal. Charles is not a prize to me but I admire that he had a true love when he had lots of options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I was a British citizen I’d be “royally” pissed about this family sucking the teat of their taxpayers. It’s archaic and ridiculous. Enough already.

So does your theory involve the state seizing the property that has belonged to the crown for centuries? Because they generate income from their wealth (the Crown Estate), donate it all to the country and the Parliament gives them back a small portion of their income for operating costs. Nothing actually comes from the taxpayer. And they get to listen to ill-informed people complaining about "spending their tax dollars."

The family doesn’t own the Crown Estate - they only own certain properties like Balmoral outright. The lands and jewels will be returned to the state just as they were in Italy, Ireland, Greece, France, the United States, India, South Africa and every other former territory or colony that kicked out its moochers.

They bring more in with tourism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m neutral to slightly positive. I strongly disliked her during the Diana days but have realized she and Charles were the victims of time and circumstances beyond their control. I admire her for taking a backseat, not seeking the limelight and paying her dues with her charity work, unlike the Meghan Markles of the world. She’s never complained publicly and has always been supportive of the BRF, even though they treated her like a second-class citizen for years and didn’t consider her good enough to be a marriage prospect for Charles. She held her head high despite being one of the most despised woman in the world. You’ve got to admire her for that, if nothing else.

This. Not a fan of the BRF but I am a fan of long lost and rekindled love. I think they had the real deal. Charles is not a prize to me but I admire that he had a true love when he had lots of options.

She wasn’t ‘lost’. They’ve been having sex since the 60s. The Earl of Mountbatten, Prince Phillips adoptive father / maternal uncle, let him and Camilla use his Broadlands estate as a sex getaway before he died.

Charles was just too much of a coward to fight for her. And before you say ‘he couldn’t’, the King of Norway is 10 years older than Charles and held out for nine years - refusing to marry and eventually saying he would give up the throne if he was not allowed to marry a merchant’s daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m neutral to slightly positive. I strongly disliked her during the Diana days but have realized she and Charles were the victims of time and circumstances beyond their control. I admire her for taking a backseat, not seeking the limelight and paying her dues with her charity work, unlike the Meghan Markles of the world. She’s never complained publicly and has always been supportive of the BRF, even though they treated her like a second-class citizen for years and didn’t consider her good enough to be a marriage prospect for Charles. She held her head high despite being one of the most despised woman in the world. You’ve got to admire her for that, if nothing else.

This. Not a fan of the BRF but I am a fan of long lost and rekindled love. I think they had the real deal. Charles is not a prize to me but I admire that he had a true love when he had lots of options.

Please Charles was her second choice. If she had wanted him she would’ve waiting for him instead of marrying Andrew Parker Bowles. She only started dating Charles because Andrew temporarily dumped her. It’s not some great love story. It’s a story of a woman with no skills, no A levels, no college degree, and no career swinging like an ape to the next vine when she realized she grabbed onto a broken branch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Agreed. It’s been shrinking for decades. The Queen started out with 32 Commonwealth realms and is down to 15 - 70% of those islands no one knows exists. Her father before her was the last Emperor of India. Again a title that no longer exists. I have serious doubts George will ever be King of Scotland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

because he's past retirement age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

because he's past retirement age.

Since when is that a requirement? There’s no age to rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

Wishful thinking and a lack of understanding as to how lazy William is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

Wishful thinking and a lack of understanding as to how lazy William is.

isn’t that the start of the Harry problem. Harry and his fiancé and then wife were out and about doing events and promoting all things England and became more popular that William and his wife.

Harry was in a catch 22. Work, but not too much. Be amiable, but not too much. Get promoted in the military, but not too much. Be popular, but not too much. The knives came out when he became too popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like I said - luckiest slut and adulterer in Britain:

They look like a pair of goblins.

Oh my gosh, this made me laugh so much!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t forget the secret love letters between Charles and Camilla that were made public when Diana was still alive … bonkers nonsense about Charles wanting to be Camilla’s tampon … it was not cool of her to break up that marriage when two young kids were involved but she seems to make Charles happy …

Not sure she will ever be truly accepted … hopefully Charles will abdicate fairly quickly and let William and Kate take the reigns … if they want the monarchy, which depends on public good will and support, to survive ..

Abdicating for William and Kate is truly a horrible idea unless he is planning on still doing the same number of events that they currently do without being king and Queen consort. Which I don’t see Charles doing. Also Kate and William aren’t particularly popular with the youngest set. So the biggest argument in favor of continuing the BRF is tradition which you undermine if you skip the line.

I personally think that the monarchy is not long forgotten this world. And would be shocked if George doesn’t end up leading a greatly reduced institution.

Why would Charles abdicate at all? I really don't understand why people keep bringing this up.

because he's past retirement age.

Since when is that a requirement? There’s no age to rule.

+1. People seem to forget that the monarchy is not an elected position even if it's authority has been greatly reduced to a figurehead type of institution. They think they are chosen by God/Divine Providence. Serving until death is expected. If you start saying, Oh, Charles is too old or William is too this or that then you really do start degrading the integrity of the institution.