Today everyone's favorite monarch figurehead marks a milestone. She has reigned as queen longer than ANY English royal in history. That's pretty cool.
Today everyone's favorite monarch figurehead marks a milestone. She has reigned as queen longer than ANY English royal in history. That's pretty cool.
No Freddie Mercury?
Nope, Freddy didn't come close to Elizabeth II's numbers.
aircooled wrote:
^That's her sister.
Elizabeth doesn't have any gold records. But I doubt he could change a tire on a lorry.
So will she NOW step down and let poor Charles have a crack at it?
If Charles' choice in cars or women is indicative of how he rules .....
spitfirebill wrote: So will she NOW step down and let poor Charles have a crack at it?
I wouldn't hold your breath on that. I generally get the impression most of the UK would rather see the crown skip Charles and go directly to William. Not entirely sure Charles wouldn't as well.
she will live to be 1000 before she'll give the crown to that old haggard fool.
^ her words. (roughly)
Appleseed wrote: Elizabeth doesn't have any gold records. But I doubt he could change a tire on a lorry.
Not only that, drive a truck during the Battle of Britain.
During the first dark days of the war, it was suggested the royal family move to Canada. They didn't.
not that the queen (or king) does much anymore.. but I don't think anybody wants to see Charles wear the crown
All I got:
Charles is far from being the buffoon that many people seem to think that he is. I agree that he may very well step aside for his son when the big day comes.
In reply to Shadetree: Not the whole family, just the two princesses (who were then about 10 and 14.) The idea did not last long. The present Queen's mother replied, "The children won't go without me. I won't leave without the King. And the King will never leave."
I know Monarchs are a thing of the past and this one is still going strong regardless of the fact that they do not have as much of a reign as they did in the past, but I think that when it continues, it will go straight to William.
I like Queen Elizabeth, I think it's awesome she still likes to take a Land Rover out for a spin now and again.
Woody wrote: Charles is far from being the buffoon that many people seem to think that he is. I agree that he may very well step aside for his son when the big day comes.
It will be interesting when the time comes. If one remembers, Elizabeth only became Queen because her uncle abdicated the throne and the crown fell to her father. So if Charles were to abdicate it would fall to his next younger sibling, which appears to be Princess Anne (next oldest) or Andrew (next son). So if the UK public wants William as the eventual King, they may have to put up with Charles for awhile.
And I agree Charles is definitely no idiot, at least on matters not concerning women... There are concerns he would be a more vocal and meddling monarch than the Queen is. He has a number of strong opinions about a number of issues (like the environment) and isn't afraid to voice them.
Ian F wrote:Woody wrote: Charles is far from being the buffoon that many people seem to think that he is. I agree that he may very well step aside for his son when the big day comes.It will be interesting when the time comes. If one remembers, Elizabeth only became Queen because her uncle abdicated the throne and the crown fell to her father. So if Charles were to abdicate it would fall to his next younger sibling, which appears to be Princess Anne (next oldest) or Andrew (next son). So if the UK public wants William as the eventual King, they may have to put up with Charles for awhile. And I agree Charles is definitely no idiot, at least on matters not concerning women... There are concerns he would be a more vocal and meddling monarch than the Queen is. He has a number of strong opinions about a number of issues (like the environment) and isn't afraid to voice them.
In further defense of HRH Charles Prince of Wales: Are we not all idiots on matters concerning women?
In reply to Woody:
True... true...
Ian F wrote:Woody wrote: Charles is far from being the buffoon that many people seem to think that he is. I agree that he may very well step aside for his son when the big day comes.It will be interesting when the time comes. If one remembers, Elizabeth only became Queen because her uncle abdicated the throne and the crown fell to her father. So if Charles were to abdicate it would fall to his next younger sibling, which appears to be Princess Anne (next oldest) or Andrew (next son). So if the UK public wants William as the eventual King, they may have to put up with Charles for awhile.
It fell to the queen because Edward had no children when he abdicated and she was the next oldest sibling. It will not go to Anne, it would go directly to Willy.
Woody wrote: Are we not all idiots on matters concerning women?
Not to the point of ditching this:
for this:
That's a special level of idiocy right there.
Camilla was no Amy that's for sure.
Why don't they just abolish the whole concept of a royal family when the queen either dies or steps aside. I don't get it. They have no purpose AFAIK.
In reply to T.J.:
I have a better question. Why do we care at all?
You'll need to log in to post.
