Just now on CNN
Breaking: William and Kate expecting
|by Anonymous||reply 84||12/04/2012|
That's great. Hope the morning sickness eases. Britain just took one collective huge sigh.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||12/03/2012|
Oh FUCK. Here we go.....
|by Anonymous||reply 2||12/03/2012|
[quote] Britain just took one collective huge sigh.
Nobody really gives a fuck about the Royal family in the UK. Americans probably give more of a crap.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||12/03/2012|
I should bring her some mousse. I hope she doesn't notice the chalky undertaste.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||12/03/2012|
Bookcase if it's a boy, and Hat if it's a girl!
|by Anonymous||reply 5||12/03/2012|
[quote] Britain just took one collective huge sigh.
Maybe the Britain of your fantasies. But in reality, no one in the UK under the age of 90 cares two shits about the royal family.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||12/03/2012|
All hail Princess iPhone!
|by Anonymous||reply 7||12/03/2012|
[quote]Nobody really gives a fuck about the Royal family in the UK.
[quote]But in reality, no one in the UK under the age of 90 cares two shits about the royal family.
British people always like to say this. And yet, if you look at the headlines for British papers and magazines, it's all royals, royals, royals.
If really no one cared, the newspapers and magazines wouldn't sell.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||12/03/2012|
here is the link to the story
|by Anonymous||reply 9||12/03/2012|
r6, you'd give two shits if the only tourist attraction in your country no longer existed.
Seriously, I think Disneyland is ridiculous, too, however you don't hear Floridians complaing about it.
That's the proper perspective on the Royals-they're the equivalent of any other major tourist atraction.
Face it- your shithole economy needs the royals, otherwise who would bother with the UK?
|by Anonymous||reply 10||12/03/2012|
W&W for R4
|by Anonymous||reply 11||12/03/2012|
Someone must give a shit because after their wedding there were thousands outside that balcony.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||12/03/2012|
Upping the original thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||12/03/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 14||12/03/2012|
It will be a boy. Is this Kate's big "fuck you" to Japanese Crown Princess Masako?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||12/03/2012|
[quote]Seriously, I think Disneyland is ridiculous, too, however you don't hear Floridians complaing about it.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||12/03/2012|
[quote] Maybe the Britain of your fantasies. But in reality, no one in the UK under the age of 90 cares two shits about the royal family.
So all those people in the streets for the weddings and the Queen's jubilee are tourists?
|by Anonymous||reply 17||12/03/2012|
We'll be hearing about this child for the rest of our fucking lives, so you'd better get ready.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||12/03/2012|
Disneyland is in California. Disney World is in Florida.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||12/03/2012|
[quote] So all those people in the streets for the weddings and the Queen's jubilee are tourists?
Many of them are. The rest are silly royalists, insanely old people, BNP-ers, and fraus taking the kids out for the day.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||12/03/2012|
Britain has had so many dull kings but no dull queens. I hope they have a I n girl.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||12/03/2012|
Ayb, comment please.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||12/03/2012|
[quote] Seriously, I think Disneyland is ridiculous, too, however you don't hear Floridians complaing about it.
That's because Disneyland isn't in Florida.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||12/03/2012|
Isn't this how Anne Boleyn started?
|by Anonymous||reply 24||12/03/2012|
[quote]Many of them are. The rest are silly royalists, insanely old people, BNP-ers, and fraus taking the kids out for the day.
But at r3 you said quite clearly, "Nobody really gives a fuck about the Royal Family in the UK." Now you're admitting that there are many in the UK who do.
You need to get your story straight.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||12/03/2012|
Did they pass the law where the first born is the monarch, regardless of sex?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||12/03/2012|
R25 If you are too stupid to not realize that R3 and R20 are not the same person, then you're too stupid do be using a computer.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||12/03/2012|
Wait till William finds out who the real father is!
|by Anonymous||reply 28||12/03/2012|
As if the bitch isn't lazy enough, Kate will be spending a week in the hospital...due to morning sickness?! Considering her reaction to the daunting mission of carrying a fetus for a whole two weeks (if that), I doubt she'll make it to the first trimester. But at least the Christmas holiday will be filled with some good manufactured cheer before Phil croaks.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||12/03/2012|
Savannah Guthrie just shit her pants!
|by Anonymous||reply 30||12/03/2012|
I just had on BBC. England is very excited. All gushing and happy that I could see.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||12/03/2012|
[quote]Bookcase if it's a boy, and Hat if it's a girl! by: Gwyneth
I couldn't stop laughing at this one. Except I can't figure out if they're supposed to be her suggestions for appropriate names or a christening gift for the baby.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||12/03/2012|
The Queen and Prince Charles were first told of the pregnancy this morning.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||12/03/2012|
It's interesting the report says she was admitted to the hospital with acute morning sickness. I recall reading that the family was very unsympathetic to Diana during her bouts of morning sickness when pregnant with William. They thought she should tough it out. Princess Ann was particularly bitchy about it. Apparently, the Windsor women hadn't experienced it (some women never do) so they thought no one else should or would.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||12/03/2012|
Not a good sign that she's in hospital. Let's hope that the media leave them alone - now and over the next 38 weeks.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||12/03/2012|
[quote]You need to get your story straight.
Yeah, because this topic is of such crucial importance.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||12/03/2012|
It'll be a girl. Kate will not outdo Diana with two boys right off the bat.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||12/03/2012|
R3 needs to put in bigger ear spacers and increase her Prince Albert gauge so she can still appear "edgy."
Petal, if you think nobody in the UK cares about this you are seriously deluded.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||12/03/2012|
What a clever little minx. When Diana was carrying Wills she regularly threw herself down the stairs to get someone to pay attention to her. Charles could have given a fuck. Kate upchucks her dinner and gets to rest up and have the whole country fell sorry for her. Her mother trained her well. And as an added bonus, she can't eat anything for a week.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||12/03/2012|
[quote]Nobody really gives a fuck about the Royal family in the UK. Americans probably give more of a crap.
You tried this last year, hon. Brits are obsessed with the Royals. They were even polled. Come to grips with your country.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||12/03/2012|
[quote]Britain has had so many dull kings but no dull queens. I hope they have a I n girl.
Well, there's the whole debate over whether a girl can be next in line to the throne. It's always been the boy, even if he's born after the first-born girl.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||12/03/2012|
The irony about Florida: it's the Brits #1 holiday destination. All that sun on their pasty white skin.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||12/03/2012|
The British government has agree to change the law making the first born the first child in line regardless of sex.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||12/03/2012|
They'll probably change it, being that they have the most popular queen in history, and everyone all for equality, and blah, blah, blah. Watch it pop out a boy though. Stupid, Kate.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||12/03/2012|
[quote]The irony about Florida: it's the Brits #1 holiday destination. All that sun on their pasty white skin.
I'd much rather see some pasty-white Brits than one more goddamned Mexican.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||12/03/2012|
Primetime must be off.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||12/03/2012|
[quote]I'd much rather see some pasty-white Brits than one more goddamned Mexican.
When I read this, I hear Roger The Alien's voice from "American Dad" in my head. lmao
|by Anonymous||reply 47||12/03/2012|
Actually r47 I was aiming for this, but close enough.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||12/03/2012|
I'm r45 at r48. Sorry, one cocktail too many.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||12/03/2012|
Ladbroke's current odds for the baby's name:
I am frankly surprised "John" is given such high odds, since that is famously an unlucky name for British royal princes.
I am also surprised these are not higher on the list:
Michael (the name of Kate's adored father)
Caroline (the name of two previous British queens, and a feminine form of "Charles"--and also akin to "Carole," the name of Kate's mother)
Charlotte (another feminine form of "Charles," and the name of a much beloved former English queen)
Philippa (the full name of Kate's sister Pippa, and also the name of a much beloved former British queen)
I can tell you that though they will almost certainly give Diana as one of the middle names for a girl, they will NOT give it to her as a first name. The current queen would not brook a future Queen Diana for a second.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||12/03/2012|
r44 -they've already changed it.
"At the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting 2011, it was announced that the 16 heads of government had agreed unanimously that laws governing the succession would be changed,[bold] so that sons of any future monarch would no longer be preferred over daughters.[/bold] This change will not apply retroactively, and will only affect the descendants of the current heir apparent, Charles, Prince of Wales.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||12/03/2012|
Kate is expecting. William is awaiting.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||12/03/2012|
What happens if she has boy + girl twins delivered by C-section? Would they pluck the boy out first?
|by Anonymous||reply 53||12/03/2012|
R40, it's not just the Brits - Americans are fascinated by Royalty and the aristocracy. Look at how popular British shows like Downton Abbey are.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||12/03/2012|
[quote]Caroline (the name of two previous British queens, and a feminine form of "Charles"--and also akin to "Carole," the name of Kate's mother)
[quote]Charlotte (another feminine form of "Charles," and the name of a much beloved former English queen)
While they are better than the other female names, would they choose the names of women from another prominent royal family even if they're considered lesser or tacky royals?
Jessica? Where did this come from? It's too modern and doesn't have royal precedent, does it?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||12/03/2012|
The real tragedy of this is what a script it is, and an old one too. They've followed the previous Charles/Diana story to the letter except that Kate isn't as good at PR and if she does start opening her mouth the plebs probably won't like her.
She is curiously silent at the moment, is she not?
The other pathetic thing is it was wheeled out the last time the Establishment were busy taking more from the poor than they had previously, in the early-mid 80s.
It's worked though. People really are that easily programmable, I'm sorry to say.
I think this year was a watershed for the UK- we finally completely lost it. The last vestiges of critical thinking in the general public consigned to the dustbin on a tide of Union Jack waving, fireworks and sport. All masking the most callous set of government policies since the Industrial Revolution.
All of this, was a script that began anew with the Royal Wedding. Which came at a time when Republicanism (not your kind) was gaining a lot of public support. But that's all been quashed again for *another* generation. 80% of the UK are idiots.
There you go, my 2p.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||12/03/2012|
It will never be Jessica. William's ex is named Jessica (Jecca Craig). But it's an old name, my grandmother was Jessica and she'd be over 100 if she was still around.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||12/03/2012|
[quote]While they are better than the other female names, would they choose the names of women from another prominent royal family even if they're considered lesser or tacky royals?
Yes. All these kinds of names are considered fair game among all the European royal families: remember, the crown princess of Sweden was named "Victoria" (a name that sounds to most people it belongs to the British if ever there were one).
Also, the British royal family just doesn't much care about what the Grimaldis do one way or the other--they're not even genuinely "royal" at all (that is, they have no king or queen), but only a princely family. (Thus they cannot use the honorific "His/Her Royal Highness," but only "His/Her Serene Highness.")
|by Anonymous||reply 58||12/03/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 59||12/03/2012|
[quote]She is curiously silent at the moment, is she not?
Nausea, gagging, vomiting, and hospital walls do tend to get in the way.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||12/03/2012|
Do you think Prince Harry got Kate pregnant?
|by Anonymous||reply 61||12/03/2012|
[quote] it was announced that the 16 heads of government had agreed unanimously that laws governing the succession would be changed, so that sons of any future monarch would no longer be preferred over daughters. This change will not apply retroactively, and will only affect the descendants of the current heir apparent, Charles, Prince of Wales.
Forgive my ignorance, but isn't there a rather large difference between agreeing that the succession laws would be changed and *actually* changing them in 16 legislatures?
If they haven't done it by the time the kid's born and it's not retroactive, wouldn't a baby girl be SOL?
|by Anonymous||reply 62||12/03/2012|
[quote]Forgive my ignorance, but isn't there a rather large difference between agreeing that the succession laws would be changed and *actually* changing them in 16 legislatures?
It's already a done deal. Nothing more needs to be done--no one else needs to vote on it.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||12/03/2012|
If issa girl, she gwin'a name her "Victoria Eugenie."
|by Anonymous||reply 64||12/03/2012|
ayb's is the only opinion that matters in this thread, and once again, he offers intelligent analysis.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||12/03/2012|
r65 = ayb
|by Anonymous||reply 66||12/03/2012|
ayb is a little too anti-Royal for my liking
|by Anonymous||reply 67||12/03/2012|
Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations have not yet actually passed the legislation to change the succession, so it's not law yet.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||12/03/2012|
Crown Commonwealth realms, places where Queen Elizabeth is head of the constitutional monarchy. These are the ones that would have to agree to a change in the monarchical succession.
Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, United Kingdom
|by Anonymous||reply 69||12/03/2012|
Kate saw how Diana was treated and is doing the smart and wise thing.
Of course, it's been speculated that either Diana or her middle name will be a part of the kids name. A fitting tribute to Diana, as how it should be.
Meanwhile, the stories of Elizabeth "giving" the kids time to have a child is typical royal PR. She is is too old and senile to have much of a say in anything anymore. We all saw that when she groped Michelle Obama and did that pathetic James Bond commercial.
I would be surprised if she even knows who Will and Kate are.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||12/03/2012|
"Jessica" is being speculated as one of the possible names because it's the name of Kate's oldest and dearest friend. However, the queen forbade Fergie's attempts to name her first child "Annabel" because it had no precedent in the royal family and the girl was in possible position to inherit the throne, so Fergie fell back on "Beatrice" because it was the name of one of Queen Victoria's daughters.
So expect "Jessica" and "Spencer" (which I also heard bruited about today) to be out then as possible first names. The child will have to have a name with royal precedent: the queen will insist on it, and one of the very few powers she still has is final say over the naming of royal children.
I would think "Caroline," "Mary," "Charlotte" and "Alice" would be the most likely first names for a girl; "George," "James," "Edmund," and "Albert" to be the most likely names for a boy.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||12/03/2012|
I think if it's a boy it will be James. In a nod to Scotland where the met.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||12/03/2012|
James is also the name of Kate's brother, so it's a likely choice.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||12/03/2012|
Does anyone know how the Tuvalu parliamentary vote might go with respect to changing the rules on heredity of the monarchy? I've been hearing varying opinions. Where is Poll Troll when one needs him? What is the word on the Tuvalu street, among everyday Tuvaluvians?
|by Anonymous||reply 74||12/03/2012|
Now Harry will have another inconvenience to eliminate.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||12/03/2012|
Unfortunately, James is already taken by Prince Edward's son. I'm thinking it will be George or John. Albert brings to mind that fat sleazebag from Monaco.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||12/03/2012|
George if it is a boy (Elizabeth's father's name)
and Diana if a girl - breaking tradition, but will be enormously popular and emotionally charged.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||12/03/2012|
Diana for a girl would be a huge fuck you to Charles and especially Camilla. Queen Diana has a nice ring to it.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||12/03/2012|
[quote]Unfortunately, James is already taken by Prince Edward's son.
It won't matter--he won't even be this baby's first cousin. They don't "save" names among themselves, and they also don't think it's unlucky to share names with living relatives (i.e. they're not Jewish).
|by Anonymous||reply 79||12/04/2012|
[quote]Albert brings to mind that fat sleazebag from Monaco.
Not for the British royal family. They're barely aware he exists (because he's not HRH). Albert for them always means Albert, the Prince Consort.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||12/04/2012|
They'll almost certainly use Diana for a middle name if it's a girl, but I sincerely doubt they would use it for a first name.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||12/04/2012|
I like Ringo, for either a boy or a girl!
|by Anonymous||reply 82||12/04/2012|
Who the piss cares?!
|by Anonymous||reply 83||12/04/2012|
It'll be "Diana" over my dead body. Oh, wait...
|by Anonymous||reply 84||12/04/2012|