Re: Happy 4th
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2023 6:30 pm
It’s funny with Coleslaw, it’s one of those things that I seem to either love or hate depending on how it’s been made. Made right I think it’s brilliant to go with a steak.
Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration.
https://tboverse.com/
It’s funny with Coleslaw, it’s one of those things that I seem to either love or hate depending on how it’s been made. Made right I think it’s brilliant to go with a steak.
Yes, coleslaw is actually a better choice. It should be either fries or mac and cheese, since they are more substitutes for each other.
The original poster clarified later that the mac and cheese was offered as a separate dish, the vegetarian option to the burger.
You are correct, but you have to make allowances for foreigners.
Of course, they don't.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:03 amI saw a few with King Charles on it, they didn't work nearly as well.
Or Marilyn, or pretty much any other significant figure of adoration from 1930, on.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:21 pm Calder, very good.
It also helps when you remember the seasoned formidable monarch could also pull out "When I had lunch with Winston" card.
Personally, what does it for me is she actually served in WWII. (As a mechanic but still, she served in the armed forces in wartime.) I have a great deal of respect for that tough old bird.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:21 pm Calder, very good.
It also helps when you remember the seasoned formidable monarch could also pull out "When I had lunch with Winston" card.
King Charles is in much the same position as King Edward VII - he can’t really do anything as the Heir, especially as the monarchy is modernizing. He can’t be risked doing something dangerous the way his siblings, younger child and nieces and nephews can. He can’t weigh in on major affairs of state, because those are political, and the Heir doing or misstepping is consequential in a way that someone further down in the order of succession isn’t. Nor can he go out and get a job, enter business overtly or make major contributions in fields of learning.Calder wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:35 pmPersonally, what does it for me is she actually served in WWII. (As a mechanic but still, she served in the armed forces in wartime.) I have a great deal of respect for that tough old bird.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:21 pm Calder, very good.
It also helps when you remember the seasoned formidable monarch could also pull out "When I had lunch with Winston" card.
As for the currently monarch.... He seemed to be born into the wrong family. He just doesn't seem up to the weight of the office.
And her Dad was not only at Jutland, but joined the brand new RAF as a pilot when learning to fly was more dangerous than flying combat. of course, as the Spare, he was allowed to risk being killed.
His Brother was at the Falklands and both sons saw combat in the sandbox.
I'd agree with comparing him to Edward VII. Too long as the heir just waiting around for his mother to pass on, not having substantive duties that no one else could have taken on except begetting his own heir, and excluded from high level decision making. Edward was never appointed a high position like a viceroy, Charles was after such positions lost much of their importance. Another comparison point is that Alice Keppel, one of Edward's mistresses, is Camilla's great-grandmother.Calder wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:35 pmPersonally, what does it for me is she actually served in WWII. (As a mechanic but still, she served in the armed forces in wartime.) I have a great deal of respect for that tough old bird.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:21 pm Calder, very good.
It also helps when you remember the seasoned formidable monarch could also pull out "When I had lunch with Winston" card.
As for the currently monarch.... He seemed to be born into the wrong family. He just doesn't seem up to the weight of the office.
He won’t abdicate, for the same reason his mother didn’t. Even if Uncle Edward hadn’t screwed that up, neither Her Majesty nor His Majesty are skipping out and duping the mess on their son just to make their own lives more comfortable.kdahm wrote: ↑Thu Jul 06, 2023 2:39 amI'd agree with comparing him to Edward VII. Too long as the heir just waiting around for his mother to pass on, not having substantive duties that no one else could have taken on except begetting his own heir, and excluded from high level decision making. Edward was never appointed a high position like a viceroy, Charles was after such positions lost much of their importance. Another comparison point is that Alice Keppel, one of Edward's mistresses, is Camilla's great-grandmother.Calder wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 11:35 pmPersonally, what does it for me is she actually served in WWII. (As a mechanic but still, she served in the armed forces in wartime.) I have a great deal of respect for that tough old bird.jemhouston wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2023 10:21 pm Calder, very good.
It also helps when you remember the seasoned formidable monarch could also pull out "When I had lunch with Winston" card.
As for the currently monarch.... He seemed to be born into the wrong family. He just doesn't seem up to the weight of the office.
Another comparison would be the sons of George III, especially William IV. While George IV was regent for 9 years and ruled for ten, he didn't have a male heir and was a caretaker. William IV was more complicated, had issue with several mistresses, but none surviving with his late married wife. Both ascended to the throne very late and were caretakers rather than being influential.
Charles will most likely be a short-reigning monarch. Other than the honor of being King, it's a high stress position that will age him more rapidly and doesn't benefit him greatly. I'd expect he'll either pass on or abdicate within five years.