Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Bush was elected was he not, even if this was a bit dodgy? The American system is far from ideal, but are you honestly telling me you can't see the difference? 36462[/snapback] Bush would never have been elected if it wasn't for his father. His brother is the governer of Florida which was a key area and his cousin is a big cheese at Fox news. If that ain't nepotism I don't know what is. 36465[/snapback] But its not ingrained in the system as it is here - a lot of people here say"if we didn't have the Queen we'd have <name someone, anyone> as head of State" well why not? the rest of the world does pretty well that way I doubt it saves money on the actual HoS - look at France or the USA for example - but at least we don't pay for all their relatives for ever and ever................ 36473[/snapback] We pay for all France's farmers instead-who incidentally replaced the monarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21627 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Renton, can't tell there's any Scottish in you! My leftist heart would love to agree with your sentiments about equality but the reality is that it's not a level playing field. Some people work alot harder than others and sometimes that benefits us all, should they not be rewarded for that? We all want to treat our kids as best we can so when a few of these better rewarded people get together and hire the best teachers what can we really do about that? Once you propagate that scenario through a few generations you're going to end up with some inequality. If anyone has a solution I'd love to hear it, it would cheer me up no end. It's jars my idealogy to realise that it's not as simple as helping people, but it's not. It's easy to rail against a perceived enemy but alot tougher to sit back and look at what all sides are doing wrong here and what we can do to change it. 36471[/snapback] Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! 36489[/snapback] No, you just have old Tony+Cherie grinning at you everywhere you went! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! 36489[/snapback] No, you just have old Tony+Cherie grinning at you everywhere you went! 36496[/snapback] but NOT their kids, aunties, nephews etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! 36489[/snapback] The only sensible solution would seem to be a choice. Either drop down to in line with the social assistance of other non-working types and more suitable accommodation or take part in BBC's new reality show 'The Windsors'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! 36489[/snapback] No, you just have old Tony+Cherie grinning at you everywhere you went! 36496[/snapback] but NOT their kids, aunties, nephews etc 36543[/snapback] What do you think would happen to their kids? They'd get cushy "jobs" and make a fortune. Their contacts would be such that they's always be ok. Look at the Churchills or the Kennedys or the Thatchers on the Annans. What's worse too is that it would all be away from the public gaze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21627 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Very true what you say. I just can't help thinking that abolishing the monarchy would be a symbollic step in the right direction for this country, that's all. Plus it would save me 37 pence a year AND I wouldn't have to put up with their ugly inbred mugs in the media! 36489[/snapback] No, you just have old Tony+Cherie grinning at you everywhere you went! 36496[/snapback] but NOT their kids, aunties, nephews etc 36543[/snapback] What do you think would happen to their kids? They'd get cushy "jobs" and make a fortune. Their contacts would be such that they's always be ok. Look at the Churchills or the Kennedys or the Thatchers on the Annans. What's worse too is that it would all be away from the public gaze. 36547[/snapback] They wouldn't be certain to be the king one day, though would they? Honestly, I don't know why you are not acknowledging the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 They wouldn't be certain to be the king one day, though would they? Honestly, I don't know why you are not acknowledging the difference. 36572[/snapback] No you're right, there would be a difference, just not much of one IMO. If you want to abolish the monarchy, I totally respect your view. My opinion is that what would replace it would be just as bad, possibly worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21627 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 They wouldn't be certain to be the king one day, though would they? Honestly, I don't know why you are not acknowledging the difference. 36572[/snapback] No you're right, there would be a difference, just not much of one IMO. If you want to abolish the monarchy, I totally respect your view. My opinion is that what would replace it would be just as bad, possibly worse. 36595[/snapback] So you would prefer the president of the country to be chosen by right of birthright rather than elected? Don' t worry, this is what most people want - incredibly even the australians! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 So you would prefer the president of the country to be chosen by right of birthright rather than elected? Don' t worry, this is what most people want - incredibly even the australians! 36600[/snapback] Oh come on, the Queen is like the Irish President - a figurehead with no real power, not like the US president. Would you honestly rather live in the US than the UK, as a socialist. You live in a democracy with an outdated relic, where being typically English no one's had the courage to ask them to leave. As the chav class grows that problem of politeness will disappear and they'll propbably be burnt at the stake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 So you would prefer the president of the country to be chosen by right of birthright rather than elected? Don' t worry, this is what most people want - incredibly even the australians! 36600[/snapback] As daft as it probably sounds to you, yes. It means we don't have to bother with unnecessary bother, corruption and hassle every 4 years. The system is unfair, but it's straightforward. Like Churchill said about democracy: "It's the worst option, but it's the least worst option". (or something along those lines) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 "Democracy is the worst form of Goverment except for all the others which have been tried from time to time" I think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 "Democracy is the worst form of Goverment except for all the others which have been tried from time to time" I think.. 36618[/snapback] Much obliged! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21627 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 So you would prefer the president of the country to be chosen by right of birthright rather than elected? Don' t worry, this is what most people want - incredibly even the australians! 36600[/snapback] Oh come on, the Queen is like the Irish President - a figurehead with no real power, not like the US president. Would you honestly rather live in the US than the UK, as a socialist. You live in a democracy with an outdated relic, where being typically English no one's had the courage to ask them to leave. As the chav class grows that problem of politeness will disappear and they'll propbably be burnt at the stake. 36613[/snapback] Yeah I know, like I say I resent the symbolism, I'm not really that bothered about it. Though a French style revolution would be cool! I'd love to see Charles's head in a basket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 "Democracy is the worst form of Goverment except for all the others which have been tried from time to time" I think.. 36618[/snapback] Much obliged! 36620[/snapback] "Democracy is the worst form of Goverment except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" Love my Oxford Electronic Dictionary, Thesaurus, Quote Thingy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Yeah I know, like I say I resent the symbolism, I'm not really that bothered about it. Though a French style revolution would be cool! I'd love to see Charles's head in a basket. 36623[/snapback] I know what you mean, to be honest calling Bobby Robson or Alex Ferguson, Sir Bobby and Sir Alex gets on my tits. Makes the English look like knobs I feel when I hear that. I quite like Charles, William and Harry, I reckon there kind of victims of circumstance in a way. Would sooner stab the Queen or Prince Phillip in the face than look at them though. There's not much exaggeration in that comment either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Yeah I know, like I say I resent the symbolism, I'm not really that bothered about it. Though a French style revolution would be cool! I'd love to see Charles's head in a basket. 36623[/snapback] I know what you mean, to be honest calling Bobby Robson or Alex Ferguson, Sir Bobby and Sir Alex gets on my tits. Makes the English look like knobs I feel when I hear that. I quite like Charles, William and Harry, I reckon there kind of victims of circumstance in a way. Would sooner stab the Queen or Prince Phillip in the face than look at them though. There's not much exaggeration in that comment either. 36632[/snapback] Nice point about knighthoods. I hadn't considered that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Every country ahs sooem form of recognition - knighthoods aren't bad becasue they aren't hereditary - if it was called "Gold Badge of Britain" no-one would complain......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Every country ahs sooem form of recognition - knighthoods aren't bad becasue they aren't hereditary - if it was called "Gold Badge of Britain" no-one would complain......... 36660[/snapback] I would, that's a shit name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Every country ahs sooem form of recognition - knighthoods aren't bad becasue they aren't hereditary - if it was called "Gold Badge of Britain" no-one would complain......... 36660[/snapback] And I'll take umbrage at that bit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now