The Queen

[Damocles]

Like most leaders none of the above was wholly bad nor wholly good. We the people give political power to elected politicians, and notwithstanding that they all seem to be cunts of the highest order that is as it should be. For better or worse, we get the political leadership we choose at the ballot box. We better bloody well had do, as well - some of the the social choices made under Thatcher, for instance, or some of the economic choices made under Blair are still being paid for.

A head of state however does not wield political power (not in our constitution anyway). Our head of state has largely a representative role, acknowledging that there is some real benefit in building trade relations and so forth. As a head of state, in what is a non-political role however, it is to my mind a good thing to have a person who transcends politics (though many people wouldn't be that surprised if they found that HMQ's actual political beliefs are not dissimilar to Nigel Farage's).

The Queen has little if any real political power but our head of state has nonetheless an important role on the world stage. Anachronistic or not, I am much happier that the role is undertaken by Elizabeth II than I would be by a President Blair or a President Thatcher. I am far happier that the nation I live in is represented by her than by a career politician.

This is far too sensible an opinion to be posted in this thread. You didn't call anybody a **** and didn't once wish for genocide.

 

[Anonymous]

'I was wrong' would have been quicker to type and more accurate.
What is it with you southern cunts - is it hardwired into your DNA to tug your forelock and doff your cap to a family of Nazi-appeasers who are about as English as Brie?
And you elected that Bullingdon albino pissflap as mayor.
The sooner that fucking flood barrier is opened the better.
The north will rise again, as Mark E Smith so succinctly put it.

Yes but that was glaringly obvious was it not
I have no love for the Royal Family really I just could not give a fuck as you keep saying you dont despite getting angry on the subject.
I did not live in London when he was first voted in and was not registered to vote the second time so nothing to do with me
The flood barrier has only been operated 43 times since 1983 and most of those are precautionary measures just in case
The North may well rise again. Are we saying north of Watford or north of Birmingham as constituting north though?

Anyone south of Macclesfield has to die.
I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is - beyond that point you all vote Conservative, and love the monarchy, and are usually rags.
You just have to be eradicated from the food chain.
Clearly I would allow sufficient time for ex-pat northerners to sell up and head home, say an afternoon, but then the barrier will be opened on a permanent basis and the city flooded.
Think of it as ethnic cleansing, northern style.
We don't like your pie mash, or your expensive flat beer, or your lack of mushy peas.
In short, you are all incestuous cockney vermin and we hate you.

And the gravy. Don't forget the gravy. Fucking splitters.

 

[Anonymous]

The thought of the Queen in a cage in Piccadilly Gardens does have some comedy mileage, notwithstanding my earlier comments about HRH.

Her very lowness with a head in a sling? I'm truly sorry but it sounds like a wondrous thing.

 

[Anonymous]

Like most leaders none of the above was wholly bad nor wholly good. We the people give political power to elected politicians, and notwithstanding that they all seem to be cunts of the highest order that is as it should be. For better or worse, we get the political leadership we choose at the ballot box. We better bloody well had do, as well - some of the the social choices made under Thatcher, for instance, or some of the economic choices made under Blair are still being paid for.

A head of state however does not wield political power (not in our constitution anyway). Our head of state has largely a representative role, acknowledging that there is some real benefit in building trade relations and so forth. As a head of state, in what is a non-political role however, it is to my mind a good thing to have a person who transcends politics (though many people wouldn't be that surprised if they found that HMQ's actual political beliefs are not dissimilar to Nigel Farage's).

The Queen has little if any real political power but our head of state has nonetheless an important role on the world stage. Anachronistic or not, I am much happier that the role is undertaken by Elizabeth II than I would be by a President Blair or a President Thatcher. I am far happier that the nation I live in is represented by her than by a career politician.

This is far too sensible an opinion to be posted in this thread. You didn't call anybody a **** and didn't once wish for genocide.

****.













(I know, I know, ridiculously obvious. Sorry)

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Like most leaders none of the above was wholly bad nor wholly good. We the people give political power to elected politicians, and notwithstanding that they all seem to be cunts of the highest order that is as it should be. For better or worse, we get the political leadership we choose at the ballot box. We better bloody well had do, as well - some of the the social choices made under Thatcher, for instance, or some of the economic choices made under Blair are still being paid for.

A head of state however does not wield political power (not in our constitution anyway). Our head of state has largely a representative role, acknowledging that there is some real benefit in building trade relations and so forth. As a head of state, in what is a non-political role however, it is to my mind a good thing to have a person who transcends politics (though many people wouldn't be that surprised if they found that HMQ's actual political beliefs are not dissimilar to Nigel Farage's).

The Queen has little if any real political power but our head of state has nonetheless an important role on the world stage. Anachronistic or not, I am much happier that the role is undertaken by Elizabeth II than I would be by a President Blair or a President Thatcher. I am far happier that the nation I live in is represented by her than by a career politician.

This is far too sensible an opinion to be posted in this thread. You didn't call anybody a **** and didn't once wish for genocide.

Nobody called another poster subhuman scum or told them to fuck off either, but then this isn't the Madeleine McCann thread.
I'm not sure this new-found lofty ivory tower really suits you, if I'm being honest.

 

[CTID1988]

What's her personal opinion of manchester then?!

 

[Ban-jani]

What's her personal opinion of manchester then?!

It's only got 2 restaurants & 1 football team.

 

[Damocles]

Like most leaders none of the above was wholly bad nor wholly good. We the people give political power to elected politicians, and notwithstanding that they all seem to be cunts of the highest order that is as it should be. For better or worse, we get the political leadership we choose at the ballot box. We better bloody well had do, as well - some of the the social choices made under Thatcher, for instance, or some of the economic choices made under Blair are still being paid for.

A head of state however does not wield political power (not in our constitution anyway). Our head of state has largely a representative role, acknowledging that there is some real benefit in building trade relations and so forth. As a head of state, in what is a non-political role however, it is to my mind a good thing to have a person who transcends politics (though many people wouldn't be that surprised if they found that HMQ's actual political beliefs are not dissimilar to Nigel Farage's).

The Queen has little if any real political power but our head of state has nonetheless an important role on the world stage. Anachronistic or not, I am much happier that the role is undertaken by Elizabeth II than I would be by a President Blair or a President Thatcher. I am far happier that the nation I live in is represented by her than by a career politician.

This is far too sensible an opinion to be posted in this thread. You didn't call anybody a **** and didn't once wish for genocide.

Nobody called another poster subhuman scum or told them to fuck off either, but then this isn't the Madeleine McCann thread.
I'm not sure this new-found lofty ivory tower really suits you, if I'm being honest.

Not my fault that the person was sub-human scum who needed to fuck off. I call them as I see them.

And you've confused normality for an ivory tower due to your position in the gutter.

 

[Anonymous]

What's her personal opinion of manchester then?!

I probably got myself mixed up. She expressed an opinion on an official visit during a "press the flesh" session to a Russian student that Manchester "...is not a nice place..."

I should have said that she should hold that opinion privately and that as our "...head of state..." she does great damage by bad mouthing her second city and, by extension, its people.

She's a fucking ****.

At this point I will duck out as I've been drinking since 12 but the above and all other posts on the parasite genuinely reflect my opinion.

Anything from hereon in I cannot vouch for.

Good night.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

This is far too sensible an opinion to be posted in this thread. You didn't call anybody a **** and didn't once wish for genocide.

Nobody called another poster subhuman scum or told them to fuck off either, but then this isn't the Madeleine McCann thread.
I'm not sure this new-found lofty ivory tower really suits you, if I'm being honest.

Not my fault that the person was sub-human scum who needed to fuck off. I call them as I see them.

And you've confused normality for an ivory tower due to your position in the gutter.

Frankly I'd be happier there than being a so-called moderator when it suits then trying to take the moral high ground when I'm not bending the Code of Conduct to suit myself.
Because that would render me a hypocrite, and that would never do.