Jump to content

The Queen kicks the bucket


West

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So...it was the fault of the rules?

....Yeah

The only reason we have ER2 is because her Uncle couldn't marry a divorcee. 

The Church of England has a thing about divorcees ascending to the throne, or at least did. 

Camille being named Queen Consort was ER2's specific wish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said before, our opinions do not matter. The monarch in Canada is unique in that the Constitution does not permit it to be abolished. We are also unique because we are the only realm in the Commonwealth in which Her Majesty was only our second longest regning monarch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Boges said:

....Yeah

The only reason we have ER2 is because her Uncle couldn't marry a divorcee. 

The Church of England has a thing about divorcees ascending to the throne, or at least did. 

Camille being named Queen Consort was ER2's specific wish. 

Sad...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Really? That's the snarky title you choose? That's what's sad. 

Well I could've raised the fact she raised a pedophile but I did not. 

She's only viewed in a positive light because that's the narrative that's shaped around her life. In reality her family is dysfunctional af. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Hmmm...bad choice IMO.

Chuck made Diana's life living hell. I have a feeling a lot of Brits will reject him. I would predict that is Chuck become King...he will be the last British Monach.

Not really.  More to Lady Di, then we know.  Charles is s very compassionate man that has done great work, and will continue. He has already started in shrinking the monarchy and as King he will make it smaller.  Now with the death of the Queen, people will now find out the tireless worker for the poor, down trodden minorities and even animal rights that she was. God bless the Queen.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That I agree with, no Charles on the money. Put the beaver from the old penny back on coins and the $20

And when there's enough opposition to the Monarchy avoid the use of Republic completely, elect the GG with zero additional powers. Sign off on shit, go to international parties and wave from the convertible, that's it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You would prefer the personifacation of Canada would be a politician like Presidents Biden, Trump or Putin.

Not me. I would rather my leader be elected by God, not the people who voted Justin Trudeau into office.

A person elected by, say, parliament, could be vetted properly, removed relatively easily and have a limited term in office anyway. The notion of having a head of state given to us randomly by a birth lottery, and a foreign one at that, seems to me to be rather outdated at this stage. We could have been facing the prospect of King Andrew. 

 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SpankyMcFarland said:

A person elected by, say, parliament, could be vetted properly, removed relatively easily and have a limited term in office anyway. The notion of having a head of state given to us randomly by a birth lottery, and a foreign one at that, seems to me to be rather outdated at this stage. 

Which is why the effective Head-of-State is the Governor General. Appointed by the elected Prime Minister. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Boges said:

Which is why the effective Head-of-State is the Governor General. Appointed by the elected Prime Minister. 

Which, of course, is utterly wrong when problems like prorogation come up. The GG should be completely independent of the PM for obvious reasons. If we can’t grow up and get rid of our foreign king, let’s at least have a de facto head of state here chosen by, say, a secret ballot of MPs whom we can trust will stand up to the PM when required. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, West said:

Well I could've raised the fact she raised a pedophile but I did not. 

She's only viewed in a positive light because that's the narrative that's shaped around her life. In reality her family is dysfunctional af. 

You're a pathetic, immature child. Though, given the lack of thought in most of your posts that surprises me not at all.

Andrew isn't a pedophile because he had sex with a 17 year old girl. Do you even know what a pedophile is? And her family are a hell of a lot less dysfunctional than most. I wonder how others would fare under the ceaseless spotlight of cameras and microphones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, I am Groot said:

You're a pathetic, immature child. Though, given the lack of thought in most of your posts that surprises me not at all.

Andrew isn't a pedophile because he had sex with a 17 year old girl. Do you even know what a pedophile is? And her family are a hell of a lot less dysfunctional than most. I wonder how others would fare under the ceaseless spotlight of cameras and microphones. 

The dudes like 60 and paid her.. 

Amazing how disgusting people like you are defending that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, West said:

The dudes like 60 and paid her.. 

Amazing how disgusting people like you are defending that. 

She was a prostitute. And Epstein paid her. She was one of the bimbos who ran around with him and who he loaned out to friends (and were quite content to be loaned out to friends). Her story has changed a dozen times since the lawyers first told her how much money she could make by cashing in on Epstein.

You're acting awfully prudish for a guy who would sell his soul for a chance to have Donald Trump piss on him. Do you think he was disgusting for having sex with prostitutes, porn stars and strippers? Do you wonder why he's not in jail for paying them?

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Queenmandy85 said:

As grief wanes, we should understand the unprecedented situation. We now have a King who has been preparing for this role for 70 years. He is a compassionate and highly intelligent man. To my knowledge, this has never happened before and we need to celebrate his ascension.

Charles has had a number of loopy moments and has a number of strange beliefs. I can't help wondering if he'll get into trouble as monarch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,741
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    timwilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • User earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Videospirit went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...