To think Prince William and his wife are lacking appreciation of their position

[fideline]

and good fortune?

He just seems a bit of an over-privileged posh boy?

I know everyone says he has lovely manners, but we can expect a bit more than that, surely?

They have just hired a 'forrin' nanny a) after making an enormous PR fuss about not having one b) at a time of high UK unemployment.

The list of god-parents for their baby was a bit multi-barrelled and No foreign royals, as is traditional, but Not the slightest whiff of any demographic diversity either.

There seem to be a LOT of luxury holidays going on with these two.

The uni course he is doing has been especially designed for him and seems designed to prepare him for inheriting the enormous (private) Duchy of Cornwall. Not exactly public-spirited?

In the much-hyped first post-baby interview, he was keen to promote a charity saving Kenyan Rhinos. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but the line between animals he shoots for fun and animals he wants to save is unclear and anyhow a charity for under-privileged (UK?) children would have been the nice, publicity-shrewd thing to do, maybe?

For a couple with a great deal of expensive PR expertise at their disposal they seem to be slightly missing the mark a bit too often.

i really couldn't give a flying fuck about this couple, as someone else said, they are relatively inoffensive compared to eg Stella McC or Tamara Ecclestone.

Re voting for President - well however crap they might be, the difference is WE GET TO CHOOSE. We don't choose this lot, they are foisted on us just because they happen to have the money and the titles and call themselves the Royal Family. WTF does that actually mean anyway?

well as dds accident happened in France too as I am sure you know the system is different.

look no one is playing 'top trumps' in tragedy here. I certainly am not. to be honest I remember Diana's death and the faces of her boys with great compassion as my own older lads are similar ages to William and Harry. of course they have feelings and I don't think anyone normal would disagree.

however it does not alter the fact that if you are rich and looked after, as the princes were, you do not then have to struggle with not only your grief and loss but actual practical issues too.

I had to wind up my business after dds accident as I had to spend the time with her. other parents lost their jobs and businesses too.

some of the girls have been disabled for life, no compensation as yet.

we were assured by the local authority that psychologists would be by our girls 'every step of the way' they stayed in school for a week while most of the children were still reviving medical aid and not even there.

we too had the press hassling us.

my point is shock, grief, illness and loss are dreadful but far worse when you are in your own with no help.

that was specifically to tiggys post.

I think Ireland has had some pretty impressive presidents in the last few years, Mary Robinson, Mary McAleese

"WTF does that actually mean anyway?"

That they bring in loads of dosh through tourism & hardly cost the tax payer a thing, apparently!

He was trying to escape the press, Nancy. That's true. It is also true that he was also exceedingly drunk. If either factor had been removed, things would have happened entirely differently.

It is also true that none of those photographers would have been there if they hadn't known that getting a good shot of a Prince's ex-wife in a car would sort out next month's mortgage payment. In this respect, I suspect most of the people who crowded those railings at the funeral helped precipitate her death; just a month before, they were buying newspapers for the sake of pictures of her on a yacht.

They seem ok but the British obsession with this silly family is a pita. I think they are irrelevant and become more so as time passes No one is fooled any more they are not special and unnecessary

The RF do have their own hardships to bear, no one is arguing that. But they are also disgustingly wealthy and have everything handed to them on a plate whilst their "subjects" die and suffer beneath them.

They haven't earnt their place and I'm a big believer in earning your position in life.

It's a perfectly reasonable position to disagree with the concept of the royalty. I'm not that bothered either way, but it is rather anachronistic. What I don't get is why make it personal? It's the institution that people have issue with, not the individuals involved, yet somehow it's ok to slag them off as lazy, hypocritical etc??

And why do people think that if we abolished the monarchy we could open up the palaces etc? They are owned by the family, and it would be up to them what they did with it all. Unless, of course, it's OK to nick property off rich people.

Diddl No. There was no protocol that said the children had to be there. Prince Charles and her brother, possibly.

But not the boys. They were there at Tony Blair's urging. In the years since, some people claim it was to make the Royal Family look more human, and others to protect Prince Charles from the public hatred being expressed.

There isn't a british obsession with "this silly family" there are a small percentage f people who really care and a slightly higher percentage who pay attention because it has legal and cultural implication for the way our country is.

The vast majority really (IMVHO) really don't much care either way.

Some of the Media are a bit obsessed with them though.

For example, the boys could have travelled in a car. Not walked the whole way, past the crowds.

I don't agree.

We should not have held a state funeral for her .

Diana did not have a state funeral.

"We should have not have held a state funeral for her"
oh were you arranging things then?
btw it was not a state funeral.

well bow and scrape to your hearts content. I personally have far too much self respect to do that to people I don't admire or respect.

these qualities are earned not inherited.

about time we grew up in Britain and stopped being so bloody creepy.

they have had their day. we should move on.

If the ceremony had been any less formal and state-ish than it was, there would probably have been riots.

I've heard about this 'duty trip' all morning on the news, what work are they actually doing??

I'm genuinely interested.

How far back do you want to go kim147. Before 1066? And would you treat them any differently to other hereditary land owners?

The only thing I keep thinking when seeing this thread title is,

Does Catherine not deserve a mention by name or is "William's wife" all she gets?

tbh no hereditary land owners or royals are going to come from 'nice' ancestors, they come from power crazed and ruthless stock!! who cares really...?

brighteyedbusytailed trying to win Australian hearts and minds, in a ill-fated attempt to stave off Australia leaving the Commonwealth and becoming a republic.

As soon as Charles ascends the throne, Australia will leave!