Prince Charles? - Page 9

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@stevieb wrote:
There might be some dip in revenue, but I suspect the fabulous and historical locations tourists most visit in the UK would still see action with or without the royals. After all, it isn't as if the queen invites visitors to tea when they drop in to visit...

*********************************

@stevieb

The weddings, the Queen's birthday celebration, the Jubilee, the births of George and Charlotte, etc. are examples of the royal family bringing in the big money by way of tourism.

I'll be happy to post a report on it tomorrow when I am not using the iPad.

daisyk · ‎05-20-2011

I can remember shortly after William was born, I read in an Astrology magazine where someone made the prediction that the throne would most likely pass Charles and go to William. This was based somehow on their respective astrological charts. I just find it interesting in lieu of everything that has transpired in the Royal family through the years. I know it's silly, but I never forgot it and think it's not out the realm of possibility. I don't live my life by Astrology, just have an interest for what's it worth.

Silver Lining · ‎04-16-2010

@Noel7 wrote:
@Silver Lining wrote:
@cherry wrote:
I have a friend in London, she was the biggest Diana fan there was. She has told me Camilla is a very charming woman, and Di's boy like her very much

I have lots of British relatives who say the same thing. I think Americans enjoy thinking Dianna was some kind of sainted victim when that is not at all true.
********************************

@Silver Lining

Diana was barely twenty when she married Charles. She was in love with him by all reports and believed he loved her.

In reality, Charles did not love her, he loved Camilla. He married Diana to be his broodmare.

False pretenses, and she was young enough to believe it.

That made her a victim.

@Noel7

Diana was a member of British nobility before she ever met Prince Charles. Her title was Lady Diana as her father was an Earl. She knew she would become Princess Dianna upon marriage to Charles who is also heir apparent to the throne. She would achieve the highest title in the United Kingdom as his wife.

She also had to have known that any children they had would be the highest level of nobility and royalty and sons would be heirs to the throne. (Daughters can now ascend to the throne.)

Princess Diana lived like a queen, no pun intended. She had the best of everything - travel, designer clothing, hobnobbing with "high society" of the rich and famous celbrities and politicians during and after her marriage to Prince Charles. She had lovers during their marriage.

She appeared to enjoy playing the victim in her interviews but, of course, I don't know. That part is my opinion and that of my British aunts, uncles and cousins who were there at time and still live in England.

Irshgrl31201 · ‎03-18-2010

@Noel7 wrote:
@Silver Lining wrote:
@cherry wrote:
I have a friend in London, she was the biggest Diana fan there was. She has told me Camilla is a very charming woman, and Di's boy like her very much

I have lots of British relatives who say the same thing. I think Americans enjoy thinking Dianna was some kind of sainted victim when that is not at all true.
********************************

@Silver Lining

Diana was barely twenty when she married Charles. She was in love with him by all reports and believed he loved her.

In reality, Charles did not love her, he loved Camilla. He married Diana to be his broodmare.

False pretenses, and she was young enough to believe it.

That made her a victim.

I agree, Diana WAS the victim. She was such a young girl and so naive. She loved him and was treated horribly, IMO. I cannot imagine being so young and being thrust into the constant scrutiny that she was. Of course there are those that say she knew what she was getting into. Well there is being told what to expect and then actually having it happen. I don't think that anyone can be prepared for that. I remember myself at that age and my goodness, I just cannot imagine how difficult that would be, I think she handled it much better than the average person.

I also don't think that Americans think that Diana was a saint but they certainly think she was a victim, because she was. The royals had a serious image problem at the time and they most certainly used Diana to help them with that and she did a marvelous job and did that while becoming more popular than all of them, with the whole world and with the Brits. She was a wonderful mother too.

While Charles and Camilla's reputation has gotten much better as Camilla used to be hated by the Brits in the beginning, Diana's still much more popular than either even with the Brits. I do believe she had everything to do with William and Harry's popularity as her empathetic and charismatic personality rubbed off on them. She was a hands on mother.

Of course she wasn't a saint but i do believe that the royals deception with her played a role in that too.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
JFK

Carmie · ‎10-25-2010

@Carriestp wrote:
From what I have seen of both William and Harry, I think Harry would make a better king for the people.

I am not swayed by William's marriage, kids and photo ops.

I don't have much of an opinion on Charles...he reminds me of the color tan.

As for Camilla 😵...well, there's that saying about not being able to say anything nice...

Harry will probably never be King. He is in the back of the line behind Charles, William, George and Charlotte.

Because he is so far removed, he pretty much is just himself and does not watch his image of royalty. He has gotten better as he matured. He seems like a fun down to earth fellow.

faeriemoon · ‎03-14-2010

I loved Diana, but she had her flaws and issues.

I like Charles.

I like Camilla. (And I think she's attractive; not sure why some make fun of her looks. Not on this board; IRL.)

SANNA · ‎04-23-2010

@willomenia wrote:
Camilla is as royal as Kate, which means not at all. Kate is really a commoner as well. Charles deserves to be the next king, he's prepared his whole life for this.

Camilla is not Kate. I love Kate, but she is a commoner. Camilla is a Lady Cornwall and I think her lineage is noble. So she is not a commoner. I think by blood she is more noble than Windsors. But since she is a catholic she probably will not be Queen

These days it is not important anymore, probably.

Charles not only deserves to be King, he is the first in line by the law and he has to perform his duty. Yes, William and Kate are wonderful and great looking royal couple, but law is a law. But who knows, Charles might step down and pass it on his son.

Plaid Pants2 · ‎03-14-2015

@Carriestp wrote:
From what I have seen of both William and Harry, I think Harry would make a better king for the people.

I am not swayed by William's marriage, kids and photo ops.

I don't have much of an opinion on Charles...he reminds me of the color tan.

As for Camilla 😵...well, there's that saying about not being able to say anything nice...

Harry will never sit on the throne.

Here is the order of succession:

First Charles

Then William

Then George

Then Charlott

THEN Harry.

So, there are FOUR people ahead of him, who whould have to either die, or abdicate, in order for him to sit on the throne.

lulu2 · ‎03-09-2010

@faeriemoon wrote:
I loved Diana, but she had her flaws and issues.

I like Charles.

I like Camilla. (And I think she's attractive; not sure why some make fun of her looks. Not on this board; IRL.)

As a young woman Camilla was very attractive. Now, as a mature woman I still think she's attractive, has quite a nice figure and dresses well. I do not get the horseface jokes that are made about her.

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

@Carriestp wrote:
From what I have seen of both William and Harry, I think Harry would make a better king for the people.

I am not swayed by William's marriage, kids and photo ops.

I don't have much of an opinion on Charles...he reminds me of the color tan.

As for Camilla 😵...well, there's that saying about not being able to say anything nice...

@Carriestp

What is it about Harry that you believe makes him a better king candidate? He has no wife and children, and less life experience. A ruler with no family won't see decisions the same way as a family man. JMO