Actually I think it is less propaganda and more they have done a deal with the press, we give you some pics every now and again and you let our kids have their first few years without you climbing up trees a mile away to take a pic of them in the garden.
I agree, I said the same to my dad this morning.
And I think both children look lovely. All these comments about the way they're dressed just sound pathetic.
What lovely photos. George is going to be a handsome young man one day and I'm sure Charlotte will be a beauty too if she has her mother's looks.
They are lovely children and their parents can treat them as exactly that. One day, William is going to have to explain to his son that he was born to be a king and he will have to learn the lessons of kingship. Selfless devotion to duty for the rest of his life..... how his every move will be scrutinised, judged, criticised and often condemned out of hand by people who could never do the job themselves......
His father will tell him how he will have to be a representative of this country to the whole world and earn the respect of world leaders in the same way that his great grandmother has, to show Britain in the best possible light, and how he will live in a goldfish bowl from which there is no escape...... how he will be required to set an example to the nation for all to follow, and of course, how he will never be able to retire. His will be, literally, a job for life.
The palaces, the wealth, the adulation of the people all come with an obligation that will take his entire lifetime to discharge......
He has absolutely no say in the matter. This is the life that is pre-ordained for him. The people demand it and he must deliver. It is what he was born for.
Who amongst us could do such a job..?
The photos show a beautiful little boy and his sweet little sister in all the innocence of their infancy. I hope they have a happy childhood, because for them it will be over all too soon.
George and Charlotte look adorable in these photos! I hope we get more soon. Charlotte looks more like her mum I think at this early stage.
I really don't understand how people make these claims. To me, infants all look exactly the same. If they had swapped the baby girl for some random baby boy, I wouldn't know the difference.
Cute family portraits though. But calling Kate an "excellent photographer", as I have seen some people do, might be just a tad over the top. A good camera and an expensive sharp lens does not make a person a photographer
One day, William is going to have to explain to his son that he was born to be a king and he will have to learn the lessons of kingship. Selfless devotion to duty for the rest of his life..... how his every move will be scrutinised, judged, criticised and often condemned out of hand by people who could never do the job themselves......
His father will tell him how he will have to be a representative of this country to the whole world and earn the respect of world leaders in the same way that his great grandmother has, to show Britain in the best possible light, and how he will live in a goldfish bowl from which there is no escape...... how he will be required to set an example to the nation for all to follow, and of course, how he will never be able to retire. His will be, literally, a job for life.
The palaces, the wealth, the adulation of the people all come with an obligation that will take his entire lifetime to discharge......
He has absolutely no say in the matter. This is the life that is pre-ordained for him. The people demand it and he must deliver. It is what he was born for.
.
A cogent argument for the dissolution of the monarchy, it seems to me. Quite apart from what the 'people' want, why should royal babies be effectively born into slavery?
A cogent argument for the dissolution of the monarchy, it seems to me. Quite apart from what the 'people' want, why should royal babies be effectively born into slavery?
Ahhhhh, so you picked up on my "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox. I was hoping somebody would.
I'm as ardent a Royalist as anybody and I love and respect our Royals, but I'm throwing this into the discussion for the sake of argument.
So often we hear this anti-monarchy "spongers living in the lap of luxury at the expense of the workers" claptrap from those who haven't given the faintest thought to what the individuals sacrifice of themselves, usually for life.
Buckingham Palace may be a very luxurious prison, but it's still a prison nonetheless, it's inmates are let out on licence for State occasions and then returned to incarceration when their day on the chain-gang of Royal duties is fulfilled. Kept supervised and guarded over at all times, followed everywhere by cameras and deprived the everyday privacy that we poor forelock tugging proles take for granted (Data Communications Act nothwithstanding).
Of course, there are many differences between their lives and that of common criminals in prison, that's a given. But I think most will understand the comparison I'm making. Please try to see where I'm coming from.
Some may argue that any of them could abdicate at any time, but that isn't problem resolution it is problem relocation. Had Edward VIII stayed King and produced an heir instead of abdicating in 1937, Princess Elizabeth would never have become the Queen and her life would have been radically different. I wonder how much different Britain would be today had that happened.?
Our unwritten constitution demands that we have a Monarch as Head of State and at this time in our history, the House of Windsor provides that monarch, decided by the rule of Primogeniture. Prince George's path of life was set for him at the moment of his conception. is that fair? The law of our land says it is. Is the "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox grounds for dissolution? That depends on your point of view.
Who would want such a life? Who would accept such a harsh sentence when the only "crime" they had committed was to be born?
What a load of gubbins. There's no-one holding a gun to their heads and they can remove themselves from their positions anytime they want to. They obviously revel in their privileged lifestyles.
What a load of gubbins. There's no-one holding a gun to their heads and they can remove themselves from their positions anytime they want to. They obviously revel in their privileged lifestyles.
Those are just the right words .... A load of gubbins. I laughed the whole way reading the original post about their life sentence as royals. :D:D
In fact my heart now bleeds for the royals. ;-)
Of course they can remove themselves from their positions at any time. None of them do though because they just love it all ..... The money, the homes, the holidays, the servants, the pomp and ceremony, the fact they don't have to do proper work and the money just keeps flooding in. All they have to do is wander around a bit, wave their hands a bit and look as if they're slightly interested in the loony fans who stand there cheering and grinning.
Ahhhhh, so you picked up on my "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox. I was hoping somebody would.
I'm as ardent a Royalist as anybody and I love and respect our Royals, but I'm throwing this into the discussion for the sake of argument.
So often we hear this anti-monarchy "spongers living in the lap of luxury at the expense of the workers" claptrap from those who haven't given the faintest thought to what the individuals sacrifice of themselves, usually for life.
Buckingham Palace may be a very luxurious prison, but it's still a prison nonetheless, it's inmates are let out on licence for State occasions and then returned to incarceration when their day on the chain-gang of Royal duties is fulfilled. Kept supervised and guarded over at all times, followed everywhere by cameras and deprived the everyday privacy that we poor forelock tugging proles take for granted (Data Communications Act nothwithstanding).
Of course, there are many differences between their lives and that of common criminals in prison, that's a given. But I think most will understand the comparison I'm making. Please try to see where I'm coming from.
Some may argue that any of them could abdicate at any time, but that isn't problem resolution it is problem relocation. Had Edward VIII stayed King and produced an heir instead of abdicating in 1937, Princess Elizabeth would never have become the Queen and her life would have been radically different. I wonder how much different Britain would be today had that happened.?
Our unwritten constitution demands that we have a Monarch as Head of State and at this time in our history, the House of Windsor provides that monarch, decided by the rule of Primogeniture. Prince George's path of life was set for him at the moment of his conception. is that fair? The law of our land says it is. Is the "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox grounds for dissolution? That depends on your point of view.
Who would want such a life? Who would accept such a harsh sentence when the only "crime" they had committed was to be born?
OMG that's the best laugh I've had in years! :D With your comedic talent you really should be writing the royal sketches for Newzoids. That is hilarious.
Comments
I agree, I said the same to my dad this morning.
And I think both children look lovely. All these comments about the way they're dressed just sound pathetic.
Just after she'd spat on a tissue to wipe your face?
My grandma used to do that with the corner of her pinny, in the house though, she wouldn't have been seen out in her pinny
They are lovely children and their parents can treat them as exactly that. One day, William is going to have to explain to his son that he was born to be a king and he will have to learn the lessons of kingship. Selfless devotion to duty for the rest of his life..... how his every move will be scrutinised, judged, criticised and often condemned out of hand by people who could never do the job themselves......
His father will tell him how he will have to be a representative of this country to the whole world and earn the respect of world leaders in the same way that his great grandmother has, to show Britain in the best possible light, and how he will live in a goldfish bowl from which there is no escape...... how he will be required to set an example to the nation for all to follow, and of course, how he will never be able to retire. His will be, literally, a job for life.
The palaces, the wealth, the adulation of the people all come with an obligation that will take his entire lifetime to discharge......
He has absolutely no say in the matter. This is the life that is pre-ordained for him. The people demand it and he must deliver. It is what he was born for.
Who amongst us could do such a job..?
The photos show a beautiful little boy and his sweet little sister in all the innocence of their infancy. I hope they have a happy childhood, because for them it will be over all too soon.
I'm pretty sure I heard that it was given to them by Canon. However I'm sure a 5D Mk 2 is no expense for them *if* they did buy it.
Cute family portraits though. But calling Kate an "excellent photographer", as I have seen some people do, might be just a tad over the top. A good camera and an expensive sharp lens does not make a person a photographer
No expense for them, because we pay for it.
I am far happier for my taxes to 'pay' for the royal family than some other things that my taxes pay for and I am not even a royalist.
On topic the pictures are very cute
A cogent argument for the dissolution of the monarchy, it seems to me. Quite apart from what the 'people' want, why should royal babies be effectively born into slavery?
As tax payers we contribute to security costs nothing else as they do not receive the Sovereign Grant.
Ahhhhh, so you picked up on my "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox. I was hoping somebody would.
I'm as ardent a Royalist as anybody and I love and respect our Royals, but I'm throwing this into the discussion for the sake of argument.
So often we hear this anti-monarchy "spongers living in the lap of luxury at the expense of the workers" claptrap from those who haven't given the faintest thought to what the individuals sacrifice of themselves, usually for life.
Buckingham Palace may be a very luxurious prison, but it's still a prison nonetheless, it's inmates are let out on licence for State occasions and then returned to incarceration when their day on the chain-gang of Royal duties is fulfilled. Kept supervised and guarded over at all times, followed everywhere by cameras and deprived the everyday privacy that we poor forelock tugging proles take for granted (Data Communications Act nothwithstanding).
Of course, there are many differences between their lives and that of common criminals in prison, that's a given. But I think most will understand the comparison I'm making. Please try to see where I'm coming from.
Some may argue that any of them could abdicate at any time, but that isn't problem resolution it is problem relocation. Had Edward VIII stayed King and produced an heir instead of abdicating in 1937, Princess Elizabeth would never have become the Queen and her life would have been radically different. I wonder how much different Britain would be today had that happened.?
Our unwritten constitution demands that we have a Monarch as Head of State and at this time in our history, the House of Windsor provides that monarch, decided by the rule of Primogeniture. Prince George's path of life was set for him at the moment of his conception. is that fair? The law of our land says it is. Is the "prisoner in a gilded cage" paradox grounds for dissolution? That depends on your point of view.
Who would want such a life? Who would accept such a harsh sentence when the only "crime" they had committed was to be born?
As Liberace once said in the face of criticism, "I cried all the way to the bank".
My mum did that with me too. She also licked her hanky and used it to wipe my face if it was dirty.
Those are just the right words .... A load of gubbins. I laughed the whole way reading the original post about their life sentence as royals.
In fact my heart now bleeds for the royals. ;-)
Of course they can remove themselves from their positions at any time. None of them do though because they just love it all ..... The money, the homes, the holidays, the servants, the pomp and ceremony, the fact they don't have to do proper work and the money just keeps flooding in. All they have to do is wander around a bit, wave their hands a bit and look as if they're slightly interested in the loony fans who stand there cheering and grinning.
I bet your Mums spit wasn't pure essence of roses and strawberries though was it?
OMG that's the best laugh I've had in years!
The door's wide open...