So what kind of King will Charles be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Camilla’s non royal family participates then Harry and wife should participate.

Why would an American participate in a coronation?

Which “American”? The American married to the born in England Prince? Funny, I thought DCUM tended to applaud wealthy international families doing wealthy international family things.

Harry and his wife have no justifiable role in the coronation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kate would never be Queen Consort, she will just be Queen. Queen Consort is a new title that Elizabeth created as a compromise to Charles’ nonstop badgering for over a decade to make Camilla Queen. Elizabeth wanted her to stay with Princess after Charles took the thrown. Elizabeth never wanted Camilla to take a Queen title because Elizabeth always took positions that were best for sustaining the monarchy over her family’s wishes. She knew that there was still a sizable portion of the UK that loves Diana and see Camilla as the home wrecker, affair partner. No amount of PR rehabilitation or buying off the media will change this so best to avoid risking the monarchy just to make Camilla happy. Charles does not share his mothers devotion to the monarchy. He’s planning on dropping the consort title which is a stupid mistake.

The next mistake is allowing Camilla’s grandchildren to play a larger role in the coronation. They are breaking with tradition to include them in lieu of more traditional roles. This will occur in contrast to not including his blood grandchildren from Harry. It doesn’t matter whether Harry s popular or not. The visual of the affair partners grandkids front and center while two of Charles and Diana’s grandkids are excluded is ugly. This also won’t play well with the younger generation that already doesn’t support Charles. It looks like he’s making a big show of presenting his blended family while glaringly excluding the ones f mixed race,

There’s a reason why Charles and Camilla face protesters every time they go out in public.

+1

Charles is just one unforced error after another. Camilla really plays him like a fiddle as the coronation has kind of become her weird “victory”. But she’s too weird to see it’s a Pyrrhic victory for the monarchy as an institution.

You’re incorrect. Prince Phillip, Elizabeth’s husband, was Prince Consort with respect to his British title; he was also a Prince of Greece in his own right though.

I repeat:

consort
noun [ C ]
US /ˈkɑːn.sɔːrt/ UK /ˈkɒn.sɔːt/

a wife or husband, especially of a ruler:
The Emperor Napoleon III and his consort lived sedately in an apartment in the Tuileries.
When her husband was crowned she became Queen Consort.
Philip was Elizabeth's prince consort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the canopy tradition that Camilla is giving to her grandchildren traditionally belonged to duchesses. There are a bunch who aren’t part of the circus, some of whom are very wealthy and some who do more patronages and charity work than several of the working royals. I wonder if they were snubbed from the role in favor of Camilla’s pack because they snubbed Camilla. Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth detested Camilla. She might be persona non grata within aristocratic circles as well as many in the general public.

I always thought the Queen had much more in common with Camilla than Diana. They were both outdoorsy types and liked horses and hunting.

The Queen would not have made her Queen Consort if she detested Camilla. Camilla will be welcome in any place Charles is.

It was rumored that the Queen approved Camilla’s title in return for settling Andrew’s case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the canopy tradition that Camilla is giving to her grandchildren traditionally belonged to duchesses. There are a bunch who aren’t part of the circus, some of whom are very wealthy and some who do more patronages and charity work than several of the working royals. I wonder if they were snubbed from the role in favor of Camilla’s pack because they snubbed Camilla. Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth detested Camilla. She might be persona non grata within aristocratic circles as well as many in the general public.

I always thought the Queen had much more in common with Camilla than Diana. They were both outdoorsy types and liked horses and hunting.

The Queen would not have made her Queen Consort if she detested Camilla. Camilla will be welcome in any place Charles is.

It was rumored that the Queen approved Camilla’s title in return for settling Andrew’s case.

This is disgusting. I know there is great love for the Queen but I can't get over her protection of her "best boy" son.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the canopy tradition that Camilla is giving to her grandchildren traditionally belonged to duchesses. There are a bunch who aren’t part of the circus, some of whom are very wealthy and some who do more patronages and charity work than several of the working royals. I wonder if they were snubbed from the role in favor of Camilla’s pack because they snubbed Camilla. Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth detested Camilla. She might be persona non grata within aristocratic circles as well as many in the general public.

I always thought the Queen had much more in common with Camilla than Diana. They were both outdoorsy types and liked horses and hunting.

The Queen would not have made her Queen Consort if she detested Camilla. Camilla will be welcome in any place Charles is.

It was rumored that the Queen approved Camilla’s title in return for settling Andrew’s case.

"It was rumored...". This thread has tanked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the canopy tradition that Camilla is giving to her grandchildren traditionally belonged to duchesses. There are a bunch who aren’t part of the circus, some of whom are very wealthy and some who do more patronages and charity work than several of the working royals. I wonder if they were snubbed from the role in favor of Camilla’s pack because they snubbed Camilla. Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth detested Camilla. She might be persona non grata within aristocratic circles as well as many in the general public.

I always thought the Queen had much more in common with Camilla than Diana. They were both outdoorsy types and liked horses and hunting.

That's a superficial connection. You can be outdoorsy on your own or with any superficial acquaintance. And I'm sure the Queen had dozens of people to go riding and hunting with. But that kind of shared-hobby connection is not enough to make up for a total lack of shared values. Like: Putting family and the institution first, or Don't F*** My Married Son You Creep, or marital fidelity, or caring about humanitarian causes.

I'm not saying the Queen and Diana were besties because they weren't. Nor do I argue that Princess Diana was a morally perfect woman because she certainly was not. But I can't think of any reason why a deeply religious woman like the Queen, who stuck by her own imperfect marriage for decades and dedicated her whole life to her personal ideal of Britain, would have any desire to befriend a woman like Camilla Parker-Bowles.

[Anonymous]

Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

Are your private conversations squeaky clean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the canopy tradition that Camilla is giving to her grandchildren traditionally belonged to duchesses. There are a bunch who aren’t part of the circus, some of whom are very wealthy and some who do more patronages and charity work than several of the working royals. I wonder if they were snubbed from the role in favor of Camilla’s pack because they snubbed Camilla. Supposedly, Queen Elizabeth detested Camilla. She might be persona non grata within aristocratic circles as well as many in the general public.

I always thought the Queen had much more in common with Camilla than Diana. They were both outdoorsy types and liked horses and hunting.

That's a superficial connection. You can be outdoorsy on your own or with any superficial acquaintance. And I'm sure the Queen had dozens of people to go riding and hunting with. But that kind of shared-hobby connection is not enough to make up for a total lack of shared values. Like: Putting family and the institution first, or Don't F*** My Married Son You Creep, or marital fidelity, or caring about humanitarian causes.

I'm not saying the Queen and Diana were besties because they weren't. Nor do I argue that Princess Diana was a morally perfect woman because she certainly was not. But I can't think of any reason why a deeply religious woman like the Queen, who stuck by her own imperfect marriage for decades and dedicated her whole life to her personal ideal of Britain, would have any desire to befriend a woman like Camilla Parker-Bowles.

I can think of one: her son was in love with Camilla. Clearly, you have never had to make compromises on behalf of your adult children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Camilla’s non royal family participates then Harry and wife should participate.

Why would an American participate in a coronation?

Which “American”? The American married to the born in England Prince? Funny, I thought DCUM tended to applaud wealthy international families doing wealthy international family things.

Harry and his wife have no justifiable role in the coronation

Neither do Camilla’s children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

He made a joke. If anything it makes him seem more human and likable because he has a sense of humor. Unlike the people who didn't understand or can't take a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

He made a joke. If anything it makes him seem more human and likable because he has a sense of humor. Unlike the people who didn't understand or can't take a joke.

I'm not the PP you responded to but you sound so desperate . If anything his tampon reveals a serious lack of self awareness ( to the surprise of exactly no one ) and decorum. That you think it somehow makes him more likable says less about him and more about ass kissers like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

He made a joke. If anything it makes him seem more human and likable because he has a sense of humor. Unlike the people who didn't understand or can't take a joke.

I'm not the PP you responded to but you sound so desperate . If anything his tampon reveals a serious lack of self awareness ( to the surprise of exactly no one ) and decorum. That you think it somehow makes him more likable says less about him and more about ass kissers like you.

He said it in a private moment that was caught and leaked. You’re all acting like he announced it while addressing Parliament.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is such a sucker. Really hard to respect anything about the man who wanted to be Camilla’s tampon.

He made a joke. If anything it makes him seem more human and likable because he has a sense of humor. Unlike the people who didn't understand or can't take a joke.

I'm not the PP you responded to but you sound so desperate . If anything his tampon reveals a serious lack of self awareness ( to the surprise of exactly no one ) and decorum. That you think it somehow makes him more likable says less about him and more about ass kissers like you.

+1

Plus, there's so much about their toxic relationship that has leaked over the decades that makes it clear that they have some very iffy dynamics. It's not and never has been about "true love" for these two. It's about ambition and insecurity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Camilla’s non royal family participates then Harry and wife should participate.

No one wants to see those grifters. If they go, I hope they get booed. Pathetic losers.

- Canadian