So Prince William is getting married.

[stevedeshazer]

Who gives a crap?

I don't get it.

We're Americans. We fought a war, actually two wars, to get rid of this royal bullshit.

Nonstop coverage of the British royals is nauseating, don't you think?

So what?

Meanwhile, back on the farm, Congress can't wait to give the American royalty another huge tax break.

What the hell is wrong with us?

Today my son got laid off. Totally unexpected. Now he and my daughter are unemployed through no fault of their own.

Jobs disappear; the British and American royal families are doing just fine.

Screw royalty. Power to the people.

[av8rdave]

1. His parents upstaged my first wedding, and now Bill and Kat will probably upstage my son's

It's just not polite, I tell you!

[Jackpine Radical]

2. I gotta say I fully echo those sentiments. (nt)

[Mojambo]

3. Is it his sister, cousin or niece?

I agree. Fuck royalty.

Divine right, my ass.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

4. I understand your point of view, and I'm sorry about your son.

For me, the interest in royalty is historic only...

I don't want it here, but I respect it and its traditions elsewhere.

I really don't think the wedding of Prince William and his fiancee Kate has anything to do with joblessness...

[stevedeshazer]

12. True, Peggy

But taking over the US news cycle for potentially weeks does take the focus off what really matters here at home.

To be fair, football and basketball and stuff like that does the same thing, though.

Whenever millions of Americans are focused on all this extraneous crap, a Republican gets his/her wings.

Peace.

[Darth_Kitten]

69. No, maybe not, but with the cuts being made in the U.K...

would you like to be a Brit hearing about Waity Katie's partying and wedding dress plans when you are unemployed, under-employed, or bearing the brunt of government cuts? :(

My interest in royalty is historic as well. I just don't take to people being so shiftless and lazy, ALL the time. :)

[somone]

5. Inbred leeches

[eShirl]

6. It's just another celebrity wedding.

Not really important enough to upstage any other wedding, IMO.

[RKP5637]

7. Sadly we have royalty here, we just call it different names. Yeah, the coverage

on it got revolting today. Like OK, so they're getting married, that's nice. And end of story, but no, the MSM will try to sensationalize every detail. Some were starting it today, like how quickly will they have a child and all. I get tired of media heads talking to media heads, and many of them thinking "they (MSM)" are the news.

I hope your son and daughter find jobs OK. What an outrageous mess has been given to the next generation.

EXACTLY! Screw royalty. Power to the people.

[proteus_lives]

8. Royals are like celebs.

They get media coverage.

Who cares either way?

People probably gossiped about nobles and temple-priests 5000 years ago too.

[Hannah Bell]

54. tv coverage of celebs wasn't always this way.

particularly news coverage. there used to be a rather solid division.

there was *real* news (TV/radio/print), & there was tabloids, movie magazines, national enquirer, etc.

now there's basically only celebrity gossip with a few news items thrown in.

[EmilyKent]

9. I've never understood why Americans

feel it necessary to trash the British royal family.

It's not your family, it's not even your country, it's just an item in the news.

Like a Swedish royal wedding, or a Japanese one except nobody calls them names, or makes ridiculous claims about their ancestry.

[FarLeftRage]

10. I don't either and I'm American.

When was the last time a Swedish or Japanese royal wedding was given this much attention or was even extensively televised about?

I know that the American media, sad and pathetic as they are, are just using this event as another distraction to keep the people from thinking about the more serious issues that will never be addressed...

[EmilyKent]

11. Well people here certainly complain

about stories on white women being kidnapped, or shark attacks, instead of hard-hitting headlines all the time. I know that's frustrating, but goodness there's no need to go on an entire anti-royalty kick about a wedding. Different country, different culture.

Any day now I'm expecting to see someone complain as though 'off with his head' or 'we are not amused' was true, and happening in present-day America. I saw complaints about the 'divine right of kings' yesterday. :shrug:

[Posteritatis]

29. Heh, I'm occasionally told by people here that Canada's an absolute monarchy

Imagine my surprise at learning I'd been living under such a regime all my life and never noticed, or something.

[EmilyKent]

32. Really?? Even England isn't that!

Goodness you'd think we attended beheadings at the Tower all the time! :rofl:

Other than the occasional portrait in Canada, I haven't seen much 'monarchy' at all.

[Posteritatis]

34. Yeah, it spiked with the last couple of prorogations

Never mind that, whatever the constitutional mechanisms for those were, it was one hundred percent Harper's doing, but it led to no shortage of mocking news reports and people ranting here about how I'm clearly just a slave and need to go kill the governor-general or something. ;P

It's weird; it's usually a level of black-and-white nonthinking that I only see from libertarians, but this place can get pretty ridiculous about stuff like that as well, as you're also seeing in this thread. ;)

[EmilyKent]

35. Ahh thank you.

I was wondering whatever was going on! It's like some personal grudge between here and William, and it's really nothing to do with Americans.

[Posteritatis]

45. I'd say it's that too, really. (nt)

[Zanzobar]

14. Because Americans like to vote on stuff.

It's in their blood to have an opinion and express it.

Certainly, old world bowing and groveling to an undeserving inbred mentally deficient hick is part of the British Heritage, but Americans would rather bow and grovel to a newmonied simpleton with connections to a Hollywood actor.

It's not trashing. It's...newsy.

[EmilyKent]

17. LOL hasn't changed much though I see.

World still runs the same old way.

It just astonishs me, so I thought I'd ask.

[Zanzobar]

20. Yes, it hasn't changed.

It never will. I know this for a fact. You can quote me. I only request a royalty, say...10% if you can sell the idea.

[stevedeshazer]

15. We didn't have to fight wars to gain independence from Sweden or Japan.

Talk about missing the point.

And I did not call them names or make ridiculous claims about their ancestry.

The point is that the American media is dominated by this talk to the detriment of the actual issues that need to be discussed in the media, like jobs, the economy, and the failure of US government and business community to deal with these problems.

If you wish to be entertained by the British Royal Family, go ahead.

This is far more than just a news item.

[EmilyKent]

22. Well that was 2 centuries ago!

None of you were even born.

Wow, talk about holding a grudge! :rofl:

What about all the other 'distractions' on the news?

The Olympics, football, baseball, beauty pageants, volcanos, earthquakes, cholera etc?

It's all 'news' after all.

[Posteritatis]

31. This may come as a surprise to you, but the US and UK haven't been enemies for some time. (nt)

[Lucian]

62. Because it's been dominating the news.

It's not like a Swedish or Japanese royal wedding because we don't hear about those.

[AngryAmish]

74. It is because they are scum

And they think that God has ordained them to be better than other people.

[HuckleB]

13. Uh, apparently you give a crap.

:shrug:

[Zanzobar]

16. And I just did!

SNL?

[stevedeshazer]

18. To the ridiculous worship of this story by the US media, yeah, I give a crap.

[HuckleB]

19. So don't make it worse.

[stevedeshazer]

21. By discussing it?

Huh?

[EmilyKent]

23. The wedding will get big ratings around the world.

Just like when Charles and Diana got married. People like a happy story now and then, it can't be all gloom and doom.

[HEyHEY]

24. I agree

I'm a commonwealther and the royals can fuck off.

[EmilyKent]

25. Well that's pretty silly.

There wouldn't be a Commonwealth without the Royals.

[HEyHEY]

26. They'd like us to believe that

We can though. I just object to the intended sentiment of the idea of royalty. I'd like us to elect the head of state, or at least have the ruling party appoint one.

[EmilyKent]

30. You can't elect a Queen.

Then the 'head of state' would be just another politician. The idea is to represent the country as a whole, and be above politics.

[HEyHEY]

38. Oh, I know, I get that

I just resent the way that person is chosen.

[Warpy]

27. It's THEATER!

nothing more, nothing less. I'm sure given their druthers, the couple would prefer a small ceremony in a small chapel with just friends and family instead of a massive cathedral full of strangers, but creating theater is how they justify their existence.

[EmilyKent]

33. And it represents the nation. Continuity.

Politicians come and go, but the monarchy is the backbone of the country.

Royals actually work incredibly hard. Not a life I'd care to have, but it's how the British Empire was built.

'For God, Queen and country.'

[Warpy]

39. You're right about that, they do work very hard

and constantly live under a magnifying glass. There's no way I'd do it, either, not that there was ever the slightest chance for it.

[DonCoquixote]

58. Not to Montreal

The french killed their Kings :)

[jancantor]

60. I'll defer to Johnny Rotten

And note... he wasn't an American...

[leftstreet]

28. We've Got the Circuses, now Where's the Bread?! n/t

[Kievan Rus]

36. I agree. It's all just bread and circuses

[Liberal_Dog]

37. Yeah

All of the coverage of the British royals just drives me crazy.

[Texasgal]

40. I watch and enjoy it

So what? Your right...who cares? I don't... I just like to watch and read the stories. Sorry If i don't live up to your standard in brooding everything.

[pipi_k]

46. Me too...I love English History...

and the Monarchy plays a big part in that history.

I guess some of us are just creepy little lowlifes with nothing better to do....


;)

[Raine]

66. I do too

I love that kind of thing plus I'm a history buff. :-)

[Liquorice]

41. There is far too much coverage of it, but I do have some interest

in royalty in general. They are fascinating from a sociological and psychological (and historically a political) viewpoint for me.

[Canuckistanian]

42. Why do Americans care so much about the British royalty?

I'm Canadian and we don't even care that much.

The Royal Family is a tourist draw - nothing else. They have negligible political power in Britain and ZILCH in Commonwealth countries like ours.

I really don't know why Americans obsess over them.

[eShirl]

43. I don't know anyone that does, but the news media can't get enough of them

I can only surmise it's been good for ratings in the past

[Canuckistanian]

44. I think they're trying to capture the past magic of the Chuck-Di wedding

THAT was a spectacle.

But the Royal family really hasn't done much since.

[theHandpuppet]

47. A lot of us really DON'T give a crap

I'm already sick of all the coverage of this non-event.

[Canuckistanian]

49. Perfectly understandable

They're really not that relevant.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. The media does

and the wedding of the century was something to behold. Then again the economy was better... world wide and we had time for navel gazing.

These days... not so much.

[JVS]

57. British royalty is to American foundational ideology as the Tsar was to Soviet foundational ideology

We don't like them.

[Canuckistanian]

59. Of course not

Nor do we in Canada. I just wonder why the American media pays them so much attention.

Trying to manufacture ratings, I guess.

[Darth_Kitten]

70. We poor Canadians have to call Waity Katie Queen some day...

:(

Help. :)

[CrawlingChaos]

48. Couldn't agree more

The media coverage of these useless parasites disgusts me. As I was saying on another thread, their very existence as "royalty" is symbolic of a class system that is the very antithesis of social justice.

[Rage for Order]

50. She's hot. I'd hit it.

Beyond that, I don't have an opinion one way or the other except for this: please get it over with as soon as possible so I don't have to hear about it for very long.

[AmandaMae]

51. I don't get it either. The coverage is really excessive.

[rainbow4321]

52. The media will use it as a filler til the pre 2012 election stuff kicks in

I read somewhere yesterday that the reason the couple picked the "spring or summer 2011" timeframe was they wanted to get it done before some other huge UK national events in 2012---I think there is a Queen related celebration in 2012 (sorry UK DUer's, can't remember, think they called it a Jubilee happening in 2012?). So it was spring/summer 2011 or wait til 2013, I guess.
So the US M$M will be happy, they will have a high rating filler with the lead up to the wedding and then the wedding itself.

[muriel_volestrangler]

67. Yes, the Queen's diamond jubilee (60 years) is in 2012, plus the London Olympics

I haven't heard of any plans for the diamond jubilee yet - I'd guess they'll do something rather like they did in 2002 (a sort of tour around the UK, plus some Commonwealth countries, and a few events like a pop concert at Buckingham Palace). They actually made the 25 year Silver Jubilee in 1977 more of an occasion - a public holiday, and lots of street parties, which I don't think happened much in 2002. They were a bit afraid that in 2002, being the first major royal event after Diana died, that there'd be quite a lot of bad feeling, because they thought some people still saw royalty as a 'Diana vs. Them' fight; but in fact either people ignored it, or enjoyed it, and it ended up feeling just a bit like a 'national day' celebration - which the UK doesn't actually do normally.

Ooh - just checking on that, I see we're going to get an extra holiday for the diamond jubilee. And apparently we got one in 2002, which I had totally forgotten. Ah well then, I've converted to be a fervent monarchist, then :D

[rainbow4321]

53. dupe

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. If I may... the anger at the TSA worker bees

is connected to your question.

While we blame worker bees, the french take to the streets. All this bread and circus is part of the reason... the people will not go to the streets. We are too busy hating each other, instead of developing some class solidarity to use an ancient term...

As to the British Royal Family... one of these days even them will get tired of them... but realize unlike our elites, they actually serve.

When was the last time you saw a child of a very wealthy or influential person ( I will give props to John McCain on this since his son is in the Marines) serving in the armed forces? The Prince insisted on leading his troops...even when he was told no for ahem safety reasons.

But your answer again is... while we point at workers and blame THEM instead of management... the british took to the streets last week. And it was not about the Mother Queen either... they are willing to fight. we are willing to fight each other.

Oh and good luck to your kids. This economy it more than sucks.

[jancantor]

61. Well I hate to bring up Sarah Palin...

but...

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. You are aware of why right?

Kid was given a get out of jail card by joining the Army. McCain's son sounds more like fuck it old man, I want to serve, not just in YOUR navy.

[canetoad]

63. Good points Nadin

It's far too easy to rant about the imagined injustices in another country's social system and ignore the erosion of your own rights.

Not to mention the time and effort taken to post that you couldn't give a fuck. Lol, what a contradiction.

[Imagevision]

65. Willie boy is fortunate...

[Darth_Kitten]

68. Lots of royals get married all the time....

except they just try to live like normal, regular working people. Look at the European royals, they keep to themselves.

I'm not a fan of the Windsors; the Queen, I like, because she seems like a hard-working, sincere person, but her kids and grandkids: yikes!

Prince William has always gotten a free pass from the press because he's Diana's son, but from a lot of accounts, he's just a lazy partier.
All he and Kate seemed to do was go on a lot of vacations. Must be nice.
She has yet to hold down an actual job.

Who waits 8 years for a marriage proposal? Get a life, already.

[Kaleva]

71. Just ignore it then. Concentrate on what's important.

[intaglio]

72. Being British, I patriotically support

the imposition of a republic as soon as possible.

Who gives a damn except to wish them - like any other engaged couple - a long and happy life together

[deutsey]

73. I think many of the elites in this country have always envied aristocracy

That's why, imo, FDR calling them "economic royalists" was so fitting.

[LeftinOH]

75. The Lamestream media has determined that sheeple will be fascinated by this-

and they will be.

[hlthe2b]

76. Do you not remember how the world "stopped" for Di's funeral?...

It is compelling to many-- public interest stories have their place in moderation (and yes, I realize this will be sensationalized as was everything about Diana when she was alive).... But, the fact is, is that many people do find it compelling for whatever reason. On a personal level, I just think there is something very human about the interest shown for a young person dying well before their time who had been so much in the public eye and going forward, what happened to the (then) young children she left behind. My interest is pretty superficial, but I do believe it is widely held.