The Excessive Coverage of the Royal Baby

[rdubwiley]

[Diclotican]

1. rdubwiley

rdubwiley

It might be "excessive" as it is, the coverage of a Royal baby - and a Heir to the English throne - but it is what it is - and you can always just shut the TV off, if you are not caring for the royal baby..

Or you can be a pissed off republican, who want the family to go away and the institution the Royal household really is disbanded - but I doubt England will get rid of their royal family anytime soon - as long as they are not doing the real stupid thing, it is doubtfully England, the United Kingdom and the rest will be a republic anytime soon...

For us, who live under in a kingdom - that be the united kingdom - or in the few ones who still have a royal head of state - it is about continuity - and it is about traditions going back centuries... And for the most part, our royal heads of states do not have the Almighty power they once had - when US was rebelling against England who had been their masters for a couple of centuries... They are as much servants as the state, as the local major for a city... And they do their job, much more honest...

Diclotican

[freshman22]

2. Who gives a fart?

I can't find a job.They are going to cut my food stamps.I an sick and tired of Royal white folks who don't have to work

[zebonaut]

3. Nobody anywhere is my King

I don't bow to anyone

[maddiemom]

4. And poor Harry gets knocked back a place in the "order of succession."

Bet he's relieved. All the royal offspring who get all the perks without the pressure of having to potentially perform in the stultifying roll of "monarch" are the ones who really hit the jackpot simply due to birth. Who knows what the rest of Charles's royal siblings are doing these days? With each new birth that puts them further back in the order of succession, they fade further away from the public spotlight and just get to enjoy their privileges.