And then there's..... MDS

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Charles Fout, Dec 20, 2022.

  1. Charles Fout

    Charles Fout Active Member

  2. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Such hatred of Meghan astounds me. I finished watching the Harry and Meghan 6 episode Netflix series last night. I thought it was a wonderful love story. Unfortunately the royal family never seemed to lift a figure to assist them in their battles with the tabloids. Harry and Meghan both seem really nice and very good parents. I don't understand the hatred. I guess racism might be an explanation but I'm not sure? I'm guessing that misogyny makes more sense but I don't know?
    Charles Fout likes this.
  3. Charles Fout

    Charles Fout Active Member

  4. Charles Fout

    Charles Fout Active Member

    I have not followed their story at all. To say such things about any human is abominable
    I do wish them the best. Clarkson is a racist asshole. He should be denied any public voice.
  5. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Perhaps Jeremy Clarkson is the person who should be driven naked into the streets and have um - noxious things hurled at him. I'd definitely get a charge out of that. I've always liked Meghan since I first saw her - in a Canadian TV commercial, a good couple of years before Harry first saw her. (And I like Harry much more than his brother.) They and their children are a nice family -- and will do fine away from the senior Royals, who seem to be irretrievably messed up - I remember their reported muttering - about their hopes that Harry and Meghan's unborn (at the time) son "wouldn't be too dark." :(

    The things Harry and Meghan have been forced to endure are abominable. They have changed my entire outlook about the Royal family. They have shown great strength of character, by managing to keep the split as friendly as possible. And Clarkson is a toad. That's as politely as I can put it .... Squish!
    Charles Fout likes this.
  6. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Royal drama. Yawn.
    Maniac Craniac likes this.
  7. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Can it be that the good British public is told what to think by the good British press? And the good British press is a bunch of entitled wankers out to destroy the couple for daring to beat the Daily Mail in court? The simplest explanations are often the most accurate.

    It is often useful to try to reduce the situation to it's core. At it's core, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor quit a job. That's it. He left his high-profile, lucrative, but stressful job in PR field because it proved toxic for his wife. Big whoop. Not only that - he seemingly managed to find equally cushy employment, and moved from London to California (an upgrade). Good for him; he has proven himself to be infinitely better at taking care of his young bride than his daddy King Chuck II (my head of state, no less) did.

    In some ways, the Sussexes still provide an invaluable service to the Crown. The tabloids need some read meet; sans Meghan, they would have resorted to writing about Prince Andrew, King Charles, and, oh! - Her Royal Majesty Camilla the Queen Mistress. Why not sacrifice the mother of two for the Firm (again), amiright?
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  8. Asymptote

    Asymptote Active Member

    * cough cough * July 4th * cough cough *

    * cough cough * 1776 * cough cough *
    nosborne48 and Maniac Craniac like this.
  9. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Is it? There are at least two very significant reasons why it is more complicated than that.

    First, the "job" and the family are inseparable. A lot of the tension comes from this. He wants to quit the job, but that's the same as quitting his family.

    Second, the monarchy is tightly intertwined with British identity. That means Prince Harry is, too.

    I wish "The Firm" had done a better job negotiating his release. He could have remained very useful to them, even if not a "working royal" anymore. But there was a lot more going on than business. Some was related to his wife. (William was awful about that.) Some was related to his deceased mother--something William is immune to as the heir apparent. At a time when the Empire is gone and even the Commonwealth is falling apart, Harry could have remained a positive ambassador even while pursuing non-family commercial success.

    I hope Charles trims the royal family significantly and aligns it with modern sensibilities. I do believe this can be done while still retaining its symbolic role in the British identity.
  10. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    My wife--stationed in the UK for two years while serving in the Air Force--said that on a tour one day, the English tour guide asked the group what they called July 4th. The group of Americans said, "Independence Day!" The tour guide smiled and said, "In the UK we call it 'Thanksgiving'!"

    Paula and I both have a connection to the UK.
    Tireman 44444 likes this.
  11. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    I have a passport that states "In the name of Her Majesty the Queen...", so there.
    Besides, it's a celebrity story.
  12. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    "His (Harry's) daddy is King Chuck III . King Chuck II died February 6, 1685." -- said Johann, smugly. :)
    nosborne48 and Rich Douglas like this.
  13. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    In a sense, Charles II was also Charles III. Depends on how you count 'em, said Grover Cleveland (not).
    Johann likes this.
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Carry the lad who is born to be king, over the sea to Skye....
    Johann likes this.
  15. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Yes - in a sense, he was. Or Charles II, 2.0 perhaps, after the Restoration.
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  16. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    I'll spare you my concertina rendition of that song. :) I learned the melody as a kid of about 7 in school, in England. Always liked it.
  17. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    No it's not, or at least shouldn't be.

    Fair enough. However (and it goes to the first point, too): this is something that should have motivated ALL the parties involved. Meghan's safety and well-being, on the other hand, is on Harry. I came to believe that it's a moral impoerative to prioritize the safety and health of 1) your kids, 2) your spouse and 3) yourself over most institutional priorities (except maybe the time of war). The reason is, if you would not make these a priority, you can't count on ANYONE to make it a priority. Plain example: Sussexes having to fight a privacy lawsuit against the Mail all by themselves, enduring YEARS of abuse in the press, all by themselves. Despite presumably being a part of the very well-resourced Firm. I honestly can't see how one can deny that they have some very legitimate grievances.

    Besides, c'mon. He's a spare. William is the heir. Harry is not THAT important to The Very Identity of the British People to justify making his family a feeding source to the tabloids.

    Agreed. They missed a great opportunity with the couple. Then again, if you believe Harry's description (that aligns with the coverage) of the Firm as a collection of Private Secretary offices leaking stories on others to protect their Principals (who are close relatives of each other), this is not the most professional of arrangements. Part of the problem (besides racism), I believe, is how Harry & Meghan gained media profile far above their formal rank (as the spare). The old trodgers in the Firm were unable to adapt to that.
    Also, Megan's oft-repeated point that 80% of the Commonwealth are people of color may be self-serving, but this doesn't make it untrue.

    Sure, I hope this too. So far, King Chuck doesn't show either charisma or talent to be able to pull that off, though. If only they had a younger media-savvy person to assist him. Hmmm...
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  18. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I got the impression that when negotiating with Harry about the role he would play, The Firm thought that they could strong arm him into staying more active by hanging over his head the threat of cutting off all financial support. They over played their hand and Harry just carried thru with what he said he would do. Harry got 20 million upfront for his very successful book plus more for some other engagements. It looks like he made a good decision overall from a financial perspective.

    I agree with your sentiment about what Charles needs to do. I think he will succeed in this. I have more faith in Charles than William's ability to lead at this point.
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  19. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    ... and quality of life perspective. Unqualified win for Team Harry.

    I'm curious: what is this based on? I do not see any evidence of leadership qualities from either of the two. They have a decent chance to pull it off, I think, because it looks like there is some recognition for the need for change and they sit on the giant pile of goodwill left by the late QEII. But not because of any special hidden talent on the part of the King.
  20. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    It's mostly just a guess on my part. Charles seems fairly open minded to me. He seems to have progressive thoughts when it comes to climate change. Now admittedly the anti-climate anti-science sentiments are more an American Republican phenomena though. It seemed to me that William had more racists hang ups. Charles has, of course, been thinking about what the next moves the royal family needs to make much longer than William as well. So like I said it really boils down to just a guess.

Share This Page