Who's watching the british royal wedding!!

BSR.Gaming · Post by **BSR.Gaming** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:48 am

Post here if you are watching the british royal wedding on TV right now!!

Congrats to them both on this day!!

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 4:44 am

I'm not. I wouldn't watch two irrelevant strangers wedding even if they paid me.

BSR.Gaming · Post by **BSR.Gaming** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:55 am

why not

Well 2 billion people like it,more than any sports game in history!!

more than the moon landing.

Its good for the world to move on,and see some thing good,get sick of watching afgan crap,they need to ban that on tv.

DesR85 · Post by **DesR85** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:57 am

Well, I am watching it now. Kinda like a once in a lifetime thing.

Congrats to the both of them and wish them the best.

By the way, welcome to GB.

Stworca · Post by **Stworca** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:35 am

Who's getting married anyway?

Here is a list of things i care as little about as two complete strangers from a royal family getting married :
- Everything about celebrities that is not directly related to the movies i watch
- Non-comedy, non-criminal TV series
- Reality shows and all reality show-related programs
- American Idol
- South American Idol
- Papua New Guinea Idol
- IPads, Iboards, Ibillboards
oh.. and Catholic Church Industry

This is not to say that the above things are meaningless. It's just that my life is interesting enough to not NEED above mentioned diversions waste my time.

Sincere Regards

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:55 am

Are there really 2bil seriously sad people in the world? Sheesh, you'd think they'd have something better to do, like watch paint dry!

I gather it's even more popular in the US than most countries. Most people in this country are just doing their best to avoid two spoiled rich kids costing the country a fortune.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 8:55 am

Worst is that recently we had to welfare clients from our royal family getting baptised in Denmark which took up all media for weeks and weeks.
And now the wedding in the UK which have for some reason also caused a stir in our media.

Sucks that I have to pay for such television, and welfare programs for people who were born into a specific family. The millions used, could be used to feed poor people - but noooo, it's our "culture" and it must be protected.

I am very much anti-royalist. :mischief:

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:33 am

I used to be a republican, but it occurred to me one day that given a choice between a constitutional monarch and a politician as head of state was a no brainer. I mean Thin Lizzy or someone like George W Bush? I don't have any time for the world's worst mother, but rather have that old baggage than any slime ball politician with actual power.

Stworca · Post by **Stworca** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:18 am

Did you know that there are no evidence that viking helmets had horns?

What? This conversation was so pointless that offtopic is justified by law. Which one? Law of sanity.

Gil-galad · Post by **Gil-galad** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:20 pm

Stworca wrote:Did you know that there are no evidence that viking helmets had horns?

I for one would love to hear about that.

And for the wedding: 20 millions out of British tax-payers pockets for that? Ouch!

Rad · Post by **Rad** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:34 pm

I have absolutely no interest in a pair of rich Brits getting married.

No offense to the rest of you Brits out there.

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:57 pm

The ones I can't understand are the Americans. They fought a bloody war to get shot of royalty, now millions of them seem to be obsessed with it!

Rad · Post by **Rad** » Sat Apr 30, 2011 7:31 am

galraen wrote:The ones I can't understand are the Americans. They fought a bloody war to get shot of royalty, now millions of them seem to be obsessed with it!

I'm an American, and I don't get it either...

Sykar · Post by **Sykar** » Sun May 01, 2011 4:07 am

Could not care less for so called "royalties".
The obsessions with those people who burn millions(billions even?) of tax payer money is beyond me.

Denethorn · Post by **Denethorn** » Wed May 04, 2011 1:29 pm

Gil-galad wrote: And for the wedding: 20 millions out of British tax-payers pockets for that? Ouch!

Would chip in again

. While holding Social Democratic views I'm still a staunch monarchist. The Monarchy forms an integral part of the British Constitution, and provides the last failsafe against a maniac government. The Queen holds a meeting with the Prime Minister every Wednesday morning to discuss issues of state and countless PMs, most recently Tony Blair, have noted that such time was invaluable. The woman has decades of experience in domestic and international affairs and diplomacy, rather useful for a PM who has never been at the helm before.

That and the Royals make great ambassadors/representatives. Not to mention, that as with the Charles/Diana wedding, this has been perfectly timed to give everyone (not just the Brits) a bit of good news, and an excuse for a party. A morale booster if you will. Forget how America enthuses for it, apparently in Japan the wedding went mega-viral as the Japanese wanted something nice to think about/celebrate, and nothing like a dose of Western pop-culture. As I read in one editorial, at the end of the day, people just want to believe in the old fairy tale of a Princess meeting a Prince and living happily ever after

And has been said... there is no other event on the planet that commands an audience of 2 billion (I first heard that figure from Al-Jazeera, so no British Broadcasting Corporation bias here). While the figure astonishes me, it means that whether you like it/watched it or not, almost everyone has heard of it. That is a phenomenon.

{edit}
Although I must confess, I didn't watch it

I was too busy at the time. Walked through Hyde Park an hour two after and noted how atleast half of those there were foreign

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Wed May 04, 2011 3:18 pm

The woman has decades of experience in domestic and international affairs and diplomacy

ROFL! She was good at reading her lines and doing what the real diplomats told her you mean I tke it!

That and the Royals make great ambassadors/representatives.

Yep, nothing like Phil the Greek referring to the Chinese as 'Slitty eyed Chinks' to improve our relations with China!

provides the last failsafe against a maniac government

Didn't do us much good when the Wicked Bitch of the West was in power did it?

Denethorn · Post by **Denethorn** » Sat May 07, 2011 5:15 am

Labelling the Thatcher government as maniacs is a bit OTT isn't it?

As for Phil well every family has a black sheep. Thankyou for filling out the picture of the Royals, warts and all

best to balance my advocacy with a touch of realism.

As for Queeny, yes she reads her lines very well the Opening of Parliament and suchlike. I can be a tremendous cynic when I want to, but I'd like to thing she old girl has a brain and has observed what goes on around her. I respect what people such my grandparents tell me simply by virtue of the fact they've been on this planet decades longer than I. I don't always heed their words/opinions but I respect them. And no doubt almost every PM spoke in praise of their meetings with QEII where they shared their love of tea and corgis and little else because she is a complete airhead

Let's face it the principal reason most hate on the Royal Family is the nature of inheritance. Economically and morally I disagree with the concept of hereditary power, title and material inheritance. The Royal Family isn't even in the top strata of our strata.

Regrettably that's reality. Don't hate the players, hate the game.

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Sat May 07, 2011 11:24 am

Denethorn wrote:Labelling the Thatcher government as maniacs is a bit OTT isn't it?

Not in my book, there's no politician I hate more than the Wicked Bitch of the West, you know the one who made deals with Sadam Hussein!

I don't actually hate them, I don't even hate the game in their instance, in fact I feel a lot of sympathy with them. It must be tough going through your whole life without being able to fart without worrying if come paparazzi has caught it on film. No sympathy for those who marry into it as they know full well what they are letting themselves in for, especially Diana, who effectively conned Phil into shoving a shotgun into Charlie's back. Indeed if they had let Charles marry who he wanted to in the first place, Camilla, there wouldn't have been all the fuss and bother.

As for respecting you elders, I'm 61 and I can't help but wonder if your grandparents are as old as me.:laugh:

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Sun May 08, 2011 12:22 pm

I'm with Denethorn on this issue.
Living in Canada, though my politics lean Centre/Centre Left, I see the monarchy as a last bulwark against an excessive government (especially after our recent election).

As to watching it.. nope. I don't hate the Royal Wedding, but neither am I interested enough to get up at 3 am to observe the thing.

The Americans? For them the royal family are just exotic celebrities, and they have a celebrity-obsessed culture.

What I'm curious about though... how long will it be before Charles (nudged by his mother) steps aside in favour of William?

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Sun May 08, 2011 1:18 pm

dragon wench wrote:What I'm curious about though... how long will it be before Charles (nudged by his mother) steps aside in favour of William?

If Chas renounces his claim to the throne, he has to do so on not just his behalf, but on his descendets behalf too. You can only abdicate if you're actually crowned. If Charles does renounce his claim, the next monarch would be Andrew.

PS I don't understand why so many think Chas should step down anyway; I can see much more logic to Lizzy retiring than Charlie giving up.