Shouldn't we expect just a little bit more of the Duchess of Cambridge.

[sweetgrape]

Never turned up for one single memorial service for the armed forces, but there at Center Court, Wimbledon, rubbing shoulders with a load of celebs,and entertaining Brad and Angelina Pitt at Kensington Palace. Is this what her royal life boils down to.

If it was a 'meritorious' system you could be pretty sure that a huge proportion of the population didn't think those chosen merited it!

I can't, in fact, think of a worse system.

In your opinion. There will be plenty who can't think of a better system. Incredibly damaging? Again, others think otherwise. I like the fact the Queen is a-political (if there is such a word.) She is the Head of state but her position is beyond political competition, I like that.

After Diana's death there was a youGov poll and even then far less than a third wanted the monarchy abolished. Today, apparently, the figure is around 13%.

There we go... I can quote data too!

The republican demonstrations have not got anywhere! You get a tiny gathering which isn't even newsworthy - when the vast majority are at the royal celebrations.
You would think from this thread that William and Kate were very unpopular whereas the opposite is true.

Very well said ego.

As we have seen, if people use taxpayers money to pay for prostitutes to snort cocaine off, public pressure can compel them to resign. Prince Charles could do the same thing in the street and he would still be the Heir to the Throne. It is highly unlikely he will though, because there is a risk he would bring down the whole monarchy, and end the life of luxury enjoyed by him and his children forevermore.

I like the Irish system as well. It would be much like the British system, where the Prime Minister did the day to day government stuff but the president was the Head of State and overseer, except the Head of State would be elected and we wouldn't have to support numerous hangers on and their grace and favour homes. I actually dont mind the monarchy, but would much rather they were slimmed down to a more Continental monarchy where they have jobs and are like ordinary people, just the head of the family happens to be a ceremonial head of state.

For about the tenth time, I don't consider myself a Republican in the way you would define it, I just did not like the personal nature of the criticism towards KM here. You have now turned this into a Republican versus a Monarchist thread.

Have you RTT Ego? Many times positives have been talked about over 14 pages of this thread by many posters of which I am just one. Bringing in tourism (undeniable I'm afraid), stability, non partisanship, moral figurehead in the Queen, national pride etc etc. I like it the way it is. As does about 80% of the British public.

I'm a tad bored of this thread now so I'm toddling off to see if anyone has put up "What's for dinner?". In case they haven't, it's salmon with a herb crust and couscous.

I just did not like the personal nature of the criticism towards KM here well obviously if someone is being criticised it is bound to be personal isn't it. If someone in the royal family is deserving of criticism then why shouldn't they be. I never understand this loyalty and protectiveness that some show to people who not only doesn't give a damn about you but isn't in need of that loyalty either. KM has obligations and duties, we are all entitled to speak about her if its felt she's not fulfilling them.

I don't like the personal nature of the criticism either.

But any female in the limelight is liable to be slated, not just KM. Funny it doesn't happen so much to men.

Sweetgrape - the thing is you're picking on someone who has 2 babies. You're saying she's bone idle. Well I can't see it myself.

Why don't you pick on one of the others. How about Prince Andrew??

Believe me if was the time of Andrews sordid carryings on I would be talking about him. Its whatever is relevant at the time. But I really don't see what KMs being a mother of 2 has to do with it. Its not as though they would give her much to do, someone else does all that. She has responsibilities, it cant be all take.

'someone else does all that.'

Sweetgrape - you don't know.

That's just mean. Stop it!

scooby that's not true at all. David Cameron doesn't get slated??? I wish people would stop all this"its because she's a woman" nonsense. Totally irrelevant.

That's just mean, stop it oh for goodness sake, I've heard it all.

Sweetgrape, I don't think you can say with any confidence that she doesn't look after her own children. Until George was almost one they didn't have a nanny. An old lady who used to be Williams nanny babysat occasionally. The idea of palming your kids off to nannies full time when you have no employment is out of date even for the royals.

What does the nanny do then? Its not mean, its a fact.

scooby I hope you never pick on any politician, that would be of a personal nature you know.

lazylohan they've had nannies and ser ants from day one for both children.

Really. And where did you get this information from? Link please? Because everything I've read about them has said quite the opposite, and that they have no more staff than any other upper middle class family of their generation. Eg just a housekeeper, initially a part time nanny and later one nanny. Lots of parents have a nanny for part of the time. It certainly doesn't mean that they never do any childcare themselves.

I suspect you're just making it up...

Are you serious, google it. They have 12 in house staff. Its common knowledge. Before they had their first child William made the much publiced remarks that they weren't getting a nanny. They've made no secret of the fact that they changed their minds. You seem very defensive of the royal family. I'm sure they'll be grateful.

Googled it and can't find anything saying that. Lots of things saying they keep staff to a minimum though.

I dislike inherited privilege generally but can't get over worked up either way about RF.

Female over 60 here. I do not "belong to a group" with a particular set of views-I think for myself thanks. Do women in their 40s "belong to a group"who all think alike? Will you all be sheep when you turn 60 and start acting like clones?

Why KM in particular is coming in for so much flack puzzles me.