To think prince Charles isn't that bad

[Julia2016]

The princes trust does good work. Yes he didn't treat Diana well but she also manipulated the media and they were an odd match from the start.

Take the other night, why did Charles not meet Obama? Or was this William picking a job he liked doing?? It looks to me like Charles is being sidelined, perhaps there are plans to bypass him in the line of succession. Or maybe the media are not bothered about him.

I kinda like him.. 😌

Well I wouldn't vote for him.

Yabu.
It gives me the creeps that he will one day be head of the church. If he had an ounce of decency he would have chosen between marrying Camilla and his role as heir to the throne. But no, he wants it both ways, he wants the privileges of his position and the freedom of commoners to marry whoever they want.

I have no doubt he is intelligent (although his interference in politics doesn't point in that direction) and I am told his watercolours are remarkable... but like a pp said his actions are immoral and also hypocritical.

If Charles abdicated then William would be next, it wouldn't be Andrew. He can't abdicate on behalf of anyone else. The only reason Edward's abdication included all his descendants was because he didn't have any and they didn't want a potential messy situation later on. Charles can't take William out of the line of succesion.

ric incorrect. PC has kids so they form the line of succession. PA would only get the crown if PC abdicated after the deaths of PW, PH, and babies George and Charlotte.

One of the reasons why I think the monarchy should be abolished on the Queen's death.

Yes Ohtoblazes. My mother used to spit feathers about Princess Margaret, as back in the day she was presented in the papers as a tragic princess prevented from marrying the man she loved. Truth was she could have married anyone she liked, but she couldn't have done that and kept her position and all the perks. TBF I suppose it was a sore subject and her sister might never have spoken to her again. She must have been bitter when PC said 'I'm marrying this woman and staying as heir to the throne, back me or sack me'.

I have no doubt he is intelligent (although his interference in politics doesn't point in that direction) and I am told his watercolours are remarkable...

Must be intelligent. He got into Cambridge.

(ok ok it was on two E grades at A-level, but hey, he had a lot of disadvantages that I'm sure the admissions tutor took into account)

He's been educated far beyond his intelligence.

Wrt Charles and Diana I think it was 6 of one and half a dozen of the other personally.

Andrew as king is definitely NOT somewhere where we want to go

Where on earth do people get the idea that if Charles abdicated the crown would go to Andrew. I've seen this asserted a few times, and it staggers me that people genuinely believe this.

PC has kids so they form the line of succession.

Indeed. But that act of abdicating removes both him and his heirs from the line of succession, as they are only in the line of succession by virtue of their (living) parent being so. It wouldn't have mattered, for example, had David Windsor had children prior to abdicating, the crown would still have passed to his brother. The precedent is His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936, but it codified long-established constitutional theory.

Obviously, this can be fixed by primary legislation, but I rather suspect that the Houses of Parliament wouldn't be quite as quick to pass it as they were in 1936, nor would there be the universal feeling that Prince Charles is a wrong 'un on the scale that there was towards David Windsor.

In practice, it wouldn't arise. Charles would just deem himself unfit by reason of health (or whatever) and Prince William would become the Prince Regent until Charles's (eventual) death.

I got it from Ricardian's post

Plans to bypass Charles??

That's just not going to happen.

I did chuckle at the way Charles and Anne both snorted a little when they laughed on the Elizabeth at 90 programme.

In that case Ricardian, would it not be Princess Anne who succeeded PC, now we have done away with primogeniture ?
She would be a great monarch Imo.

Agree with Charles and Diana it seemed a bloody disaster from both sides - and if they were like any other couple, he'd have been allowed to marry Camilla in the first place so he'd have been happily married and never met Diana (didn't he date Diana's sister for a while as well?)

It does seem like Charles is handing more work over to William, but then a) there's only so many high profile things to do that can be done by someone other than the Queen, William and Harry are both now in need of jobs to do (and William does only seem to do the fun ones), b) he's 67, it is very unusual for someone of his age to be working full time, I would expect him to be 'easing up' on engagements, and c) he might well never get the 'top job' - just because his mother has made it to 90 and his Gran to 101, doesn't mean he is going to get another 2/3 decades.

oh yes, and I can see Charles taking the throne then declaring himself unfit and William being Prince Regent.

Mind you, if it did turn i nto a populartiy contest, it would be Queen Anne or King Harry

n that case Ricardian, would it not be Princess Anne who succeeded PC, now we have done away with primogeniture ?

No, because that agreement only applies to people born after 2011. Which is a shame, because she's far and away the most impressive of Elizabeth's children.

YABU Charles is a nasty piece of work and pretty stupid to boot. Have a look at this article.

'The fact that he privately bombarded ministers with wheedling letters, contrary to his constitutional position, was an open secret but the government fought to keep the details under wraps. Understandably, because the man they eventually revealed is a nightmare: credulous, reactionary and gripped by the illusion that he is a radical thinker to boot'

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/20/queen-reign-failure-monarchy

I like him. Has anyone read his book "Harmony" ? Anyone met him? I thought we were going to a 'watch Charles and Camilla drive by and wave' when they were in our area but no, their limo stopped right in front of us and we were the second people they spoke to. I was so flabbergasted that I forgot to tell him I liked his book. Camilla too was lovely, I wanted to ask her how she managed to get out of her limo with her pale cream silk dress (and the rest of her) so immaculate, if it was me it would have been creased to blazes. They both came across as genuinely nice people, no airs and graces as is often reported.

His Prince's Trust has achieved so much for kids who would never have had an opportunity to make a good life for themselves. His ideas can be somewhat different to mainstream, but IMO are not as loopy as the redtops like to make out.

How many of us would be still standing in the face of the public criticism and ridicule he's had to endure for most of his life?

and if they were like any other couple, he'd have been allowed to marry Camilla in the first place

Private Eye for many years referred to Andrew Parker Bowles as the man who laid down his wife for his country.

I had it in my head that Charles couldn't be king because of the divorce? Can anyone clarify?
Find this so confusing!

If he had an ounce of decency he would have chosen between marrying Camilla and his role as heir to the throne. But no, he wants it both ways, he wants the privileges of his position and the freedom of commoners to marry whoever they want

This ^

He's a hypocrite, who dares to lecture the rest of us (whom he clearly despises) about the way we live.

So does that mean if the Queen abdicated none of her children would become King/Queen?

He comes across as indulged and self-indulgent, emotionally stunted, meddling and irritating.

In that case ric, who would take the crown if the queen abdicated, therefore removing all her heirs from the succession? And why has there been suggestions over the years that she might abdicate and let Charles become king?