Spare a Moment for H&M, Part 3

[kiko]

I think they should sit that one out and hope for a King Ralph moment. 

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

I don't think it was ever realistic that Charles would not invite them, the real question is will they go or not.  I think they will go because it's possibly the last big royal event they will be participating in for some time.  My guess is they will go and do as they've previously done, leak to the media their displeasure at how they perceive their treatment by the media and the family is unfair.

 

Maybe incorporate it into The Worldwide Privacy Tour.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

Jesus Christ. Who the hell are these ghouls? 

Who the hell talks about people like this? The pasty blonde is actually getting aroused at the idea of the marriage failing and Harry returning to ROTA slavery. 

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

15 hours ago, Heartofice said:

So when Chris Rock isn't giving Will Smith a metaphorical slap in his new comedy special he also had time to lay into SMeghan Markle.

https://nypost.com/2023/03/05/chris-rock-brilliantly-rips-into-will-smith-and-meghan-markle/

"The comic nimbly eviscerated Prince Harry’s wife’s never-ending outrage over the British royals’ alleged racist tendencies.

The phrasing is interesting here. 

Quote

“It’s the royal family!,” he said. “You didn’t Google these motherf—ers? What the f–k is she talking about ‘she didn’t know’?!” 

He went on: “That’s like marrying into the Budweiser family and going, ‘They drink a lot.’”

He follows this up with, "She didn’t know? It’s the royal family! They’re the original racists!"... conveniently  out of the NY post review. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

Would I rather be an OG racist, or a clueless naif who probably knew about the OG racists-in-law but went ahead with the marriage anyway. What a tough question to ponder.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

57 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Would I rather be an OG racist*, or a clueless naif who probably knew about the OG racists-in-law but went ahead with the marriage anyway. What a tough question to ponder.

*OG inbred racists. Get your facts straight. 

[Heartofice]

Seems the worldwide 'Pity Parade' tour and endless 'We want our privacy' interviews and media work has had pretty much the exact opposite effect Meghan and Harry were hoping for. They are now polling below Prince Andrew in the popularity stakes. Ouch!

How is brand Harry and Meghan faring in the US? News just in: not good

 

Quote

Is America finally getting bored of Harry and Meghan? It’s starting to look that way. Only a few months ago the pair were media darlings in the US; now they have become a bit of a joke. 

 

Quote

I’ll tell you what’s really boring: the neverending pity-me-please performance the two are foisting upon us. As a staunch anti-royalist I was sympathetic to the couple to begin with – my enemy’s enemy is my friend and all that – but the constant oversharing has jumped the shark. Particularly since it becomes more obvious by the day that their grievances are less to do with systemic inequality and more to do with feeling they didn’t get a big enough slice of the born-with-privilege pie. 

 

[Cas Stark]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

*OG inbred racists. Get your facts straight. 

Although it's a fun joke, it's not so true much anymore.  The queen's children didn't marry their 'royal' cousins, like previous generations did.  Sophie Wessex, Sarah Ferguson, Anne's hubands aren't aristocrats, even Diana, who was, was only Charles cousin 16X removed. Their children have not married other royals either.  Even Princess Margaret's husband wasn't any kind of aristocrat or cousin.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

14 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Seems the worldwide 'Pity Parade' tour and endless 'We want our privacy' interviews and media work has had pretty much the exact opposite effect Meghan and Harry were hoping for. They are now polling below Prince Andrew in the popularity stakes. Ouch!

How is brand Harry and Meghan faring in the US? News just in: not good

Quote

Polls also reflect a shift in US-based attitudes towards the pair: their approval ratings have plummeted since the South Park episode. According to pollingcommissioned for Newsweek, Harry’s popularity has dropped 48 points since December and Meghan’s is down 40. Now Prince Andrew, the guy who palled around with a convicted sex offender, has higher US approval ratings than the Sussexes. Though, to be fair, that seems to be because fewer people in the US know about Andrew’s tawdry dealings than they do in the UK. Because Andrew isn’t parading himself on the US media 24/7 like Harry and Meghan, it’s easier for someone stateside to forget who he is. If only we all had that luxury.

Right. When was the last time MM actually sat down for an interview or gave a statement to anyone regarding the royals or anything else? The Oprah interview was almost 2 years ago. It seems to me that she hasn't been doing any actual "parading" for quite some time. You can even find all sorts of clips of the sad little man and Priers Morgan asking, "Where's Meghan?" Actually, not asking; more screaming like children. 

As for Harry, after the initial burst media appearances promoting his book, he's not done much either. 7 weeks at #1 on the NYT best seller list BTW. She doesn't mention that. 

And by all means, let Andrew do some more parading. I'd love to hear more about his sweat glands. 

Quote

How are Harry and Meghan responding to this seeming shift in attitudes? Well, let’s just say they haven’t exactly put out a statement saying they think Rock and South Park are hilarious and they love nothing more than laughing at themselves, ha ha ha. On the contrary, there were rumours that they were so upset by the South Park episode that they were considering legal action. While they’re certainly fans of calling their lawyers, a representative for the couple told the Guardian that reports the pair might sue were “baseless” and “boring”.

Hold on; in the previous paragraph the author said their problem is they're overexposed, now she's saying they needed to put out a statement in response to South Park? Fuck me the Brits are weird.

As for the "rumor", since when are they responsible for the bullshit the UK press makes up about them?

15 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

*OG inbred racists. Get your facts straight. 

Yeah let's face it, if Harry had married one of his cousins the British royalists would have had no problem with that. It speaks volumes that an alleged royal pedophile has a higher approval rating in the UK than the Sussexes do. It's a silly place and they're well rid of it. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

It speaks volumes that an alleged royal pedophile has a higher approval rating in the UK than the Sussexes do. It's a silly place and they're well rid of it. 

Again, I'd really love to see the approval numbers in an alternate universe if you kept everything the same about what the Sussexes were discussing except that Harry was instead married to Megan Thee Stallion.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

59 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Again, I'd really love to see the approval numbers in an alternate universe if you kept everything the same about what the Sussexes were discussing except that Harry was instead married to Megan Thee Stallion.

They'd have totally been down with it. For sure.

17 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Would I rather be an OG racist, or a clueless naif who probably knew about the OG racists-in-law but went ahead with the marriage anyway. What a tough question to ponder.

Let's not forget that, as far as grievances go, they are overwhelmingly directed at the UK press; not the family. Something that the UK press conveniently and consistently ignores.   

[Cas Stark]

Meghan did an interview with Variety at the end of October.  Their six hour Netflix show premiered in December? And her interview with the Cut was in August.  Her podcast ended in November I think?   That isn't exactly a low profile over the last 6 months.  Harry just did an interview this week.

I believe the Newsweek poll, whatever it is worth, shows that Andrew now also  has a higher rating in the US than H and M.  

I am again compelled say that having sex with a 17 year old is not pedophelia.  Pedophelia is about sexual attracting to pre pubescent children.  

ETA, also a story today about Lilibet's christening.  They intend to use the Prince and Princess titles for the children.  The titles from the evil racist family that is so terrible to them.  I guess the Guardian was right here--Harry's issue isn't with privilege, only that he does't have as  much of it as he believes he deserves.  

Edited March 8, 2023 by Cas Stark

[Heartofice]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64890702

Oh I was just posting up about that Princess Lilibet story. The levels of hypocrisy from those two is staggering really.

We want our privacy: Does a worldwide publicity tour
Lets save the planet: Goes everywhere in a private jet
We don't want to be part of the royal family any more: Oh but we'll try and keep all the titles and nice stuff as much as we can

Yeah it's pretty clear what is going on with all of this, it's just general demand for respect and privilege. Harry not cottoned on to the idea that he is (or was) second in line and so really is not that important. He's called his book 'Spare' as if to garner sympathy, but yeah, thats how it works mate, you are the spare. 

If they don't want to be part of the royal family any more, then give it all up, all of it. 

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

4 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

Meghan did an interview with Variety at the end of October.  Their six hour Netflix show premiered in December? And her interview with the Cut was in August.  Her podcast ended in November I think?   That isn't exactly a low profile over the last 6 months.  Harry just did an interview this week.

Is that it? The accusation was "Parading on US media 24/7". According to my calculations, last August is more than 6 months ago. Last October was just about 6 months ago. Shock horror, she had a podcast? 

Compare that to the endless UK media tabloid garbage, various  "royal correspondents", Jeremy Clarkson, Piers Morgan, Dan Wooton, Samantha Markle, etc.; who's doing the "parading" here?  

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

Interesting.

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

9 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

ETA, also a story today about Lilibet's christening.  They intend to use the Prince and Princess titles for the children.  The titles from the evil racist family that is so terrible to them.  I guess the Guardian was right here--Harry's issue isn't with privilege, only that he does't have as  much of it as he believes he deserves.  

 

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64890702

Oh I was just posting up about that Princess Lilibet story.

You know all those royal correspondents and Tabloid types that like to drone on about "Royal Protocol"? In the immortal words of Tony Soprano, "If you can quote the rules, you can fucking obey them." 

The law in Britain that determines who is gets the title "Prince" or "Princess" comes from the King George V's Letter Patent of November 1917.  The text can be read here.

Until King Charles issues a new LP, this is the law. I've read through this a number of times and I can't find any consideration for the wishes of the parents of the Monarch's grandchildren or conditions on whether or not the parents of the Monarch's grandchildren are working royals. In other words, it isn't clear H+M could deny the titles or the styles to their kids even if they wanted to. 

Maybe that's why psychotic H+M haters on twitter are claiming Archie and Lili aren't really KC's grandkids. 

[Cas Stark]

9 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

 

You know all those royal correspondents and Tabloid types that like to drone on about "Royal Protocol"? In the immortal words of Tony Soprano, "If you can quote the rules, you can fucking obey them." 

The law in Britain that determines who is gets the title "Prince" or "Princess" comes from the King George V's Letter Patent of November 1917.  The text can be read here.

Until King Charles issues a new LP, this is the law. I've read through this a number of times and I can't find any consideration for the wishes of the parents of the Monarch's grandchildren or conditions on whether or not the parents of the Monarch's grandchildren are working royals. In other words, it isn't clear H+M could deny the titles or the styles to their kids even if they wanted to. 

Maybe that's why psychotic H+M haters on twitter are claiming Archie and Lili aren't really KC's grandkids. 

Of course they can not use the tiles, come on.  Princess Anne didn't give her children any titles, that is why Zara Tindell isn't Lady Zara, just Zara.  The Wessex children also don't use their titles but I believe they've been given the choice to decide to use or not use when they're of age.

 So, it is 100% clear that they can not call their American children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet Diana.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

25 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Of course they can not use the tiles, come on.  Princess Anne didn't give her children any titles, that is why Zara Tindell isn't Lady Zara, just Zara.  The Wessex children also don't use their titles but I believe they've been given the choice to decide to use or not use when they're of age.

 So, it is 100% clear that they can not call their American children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet Diana.

Princess Anne's children weren't grandchildren of the monarch through the male line. 

When the Wessexes married, QE2 issued a statement that their children would not be styled "Prince" or "Princess". Neither QE2 or KC have issued any such statement regarding the Sussexes. The 1917 LP stands. 

ETA: they are still HRH's, until they turn 18 when they can give them up. 

Edited March 8, 2023 by Deadlines? What Deadlines?

[Spockydog]

6 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Interesting.

 

Oooooooh, been waiting years for this.

Considering what happened to Rebekah Brooks, Morgan should have been jailed. It was his Daily Mirror who pioneered the practice of phone hacking. I guess he's got some very good blackmail material.

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 hour ago, Spockydog said:

Oooooooh, been waiting years for this.

Considering what happened to Rebekah Brooks, Morgan should have been jailed. It was his Daily Mirror who pioneered the practice of phone hacking. I guess he's got some very good blackmail material.

Regarding the various lawsuits Harry's involved in with the English tabloids, if it comes out that certain so-and-so's perjured themselves at the Levinson inquiry, yeah, they could be in serious trouble.