Vort Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 #1 Do not embarrass the Crown. #2 Do not cavort with pedophiles. #3 Do not marry divorced American socialites. Midwest LDS, Jamie123, KScience and 3 others 1 5 Quote
Jamie123 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 ...but if you do don't worry: there'll be another royal scandal on the front pages in a week or so, and then your faux pas will be forgotten. (Notice how the Andrew/Epstein thing is "so last year"?) Quote
anatess2 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 6 hours ago, Jamie123 said: ...but if you do don't worry: there'll be another royal scandal on the front pages in a week or so, and then your faux pas will be forgotten. (Notice how the Andrew/Epstein thing is "so last year"?) It is? Not in this side of the pond it ain't. I guess you got Sacoolas and we got Andrew percolating in our consciousness. Quote
Fether Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 28 minutes ago, anatess2 said: (Notice how the Andrew/Epstein thing is "so last year"? We can only handle so many breaking news stories at once. How can we remember pedophile island when Trump is starting WW3, Trump caused Iran to shoot down an airline jet, and Trump is about to be impeached??? Quote
Jamie123 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 33 minutes ago, anatess2 said: It is? Not in this side of the pond it ain't. I guess you got Sacoolas and we got Andrew percolating in our consciousness. Sacoolas is old news too - and in any case there's nothing "royal" about that. The "front page news" for the last week has been about Harry and Meghan. Quote
Jamie123 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, Fether said: We can only handle so many breaking news stories at once. That was rather my point. Here though, the Tabloids have almost forgotten about Trump's middle-eastern Trumping, in favour of Miss Meghan "I-want-it-my-way-so-stick-that-in your-pipe-and-smoke-it-Your-Queenness" Markle. Quote
NeuroTypical Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 MrShorty, askandanswer, Midwest LDS and 3 others 6 Quote
NeuroTypical Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 10 minutes ago, Jamie123 said: Tabloids have almost forgotten about Trump's middle-eastern Trumping, I like it. I mean, I liked this bit of Trumping. Especially breaking the news with a victory tweet. Quote
anatess2 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 15 minutes ago, Jamie123 said: Sacoolas is old news too - and in any case there's nothing "royal" about that. The "front page news" for the last week has been about Harry and Meghan. That's just really it, isn't it? The MSM is driving the news pushing perceptions. The unwashed masses though, don't listen much to them anymore. The interwebs are still percolating on Epstein Didn't Kill Himself and Andrew and Bill were his friends so much so that NBC got more view on their Ricky Gervais Golden Globe monologue youtube video than watched the Golden Globe. Vort 1 Quote
anatess2 Posted January 15, 2020 Report Posted January 15, 2020 19 minutes ago, Fether said: We can only handle so many breaking news stories at once. How can we remember pedophile island when Trump is starting WW3, Trump caused Iran to shoot down an airline jet, and Trump is about to be impeached??? That's so 5 minutes ago. It's about Meghan now refusing to move to California until Trump is ejected from the White House. mrmarklin 1 Quote
Traveler Posted January 17, 2020 Report Posted January 17, 2020 Cheering for Royals is worse that cheering for a really crappy sports team. You will spend most of your life disappointed!!!! The Traveler Quote
mordorbund Posted January 17, 2020 Report Posted January 17, 2020 45 minutes ago, Traveler said: Cheering for Royals is worse that cheering for a really crappy sports team. You will spend most of your life disappointed!!!! The Traveler That's why democracies are better. You get to elect whoever you want to disappoint you. KScience, Traveler and Vort 2 1 Quote
Jamie123 Posted January 17, 2020 Report Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, mordorbund said: That's why democracies are better. You get to elect whoever you want to disappoint you. Sorry to be a pedant, but the UK is a democracy as well as a monarchy. We have elected politicians too, and they are quite as capable of disappointing as the US ones are. mordorbund and Midwest LDS 2 Quote
mordorbund Posted January 17, 2020 Report Posted January 17, 2020 5 minutes ago, Jamie123 said: Sorry to be a pedant, but the UK is a democracy as well as a monarchy. We have elected politicians too, and they are quite as capable of disappointing as the US ones are. Midwest LDS and Vort 2 Quote
Vort Posted January 17, 2020 Author Report Posted January 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, mordorbund said: In this area, we Americans will certainly put up a good fight. But after watching European and especially UK politics for decades, I think this just may be a battle we cannot win. mordorbund 1 Quote
Traveler Posted January 18, 2020 Report Posted January 18, 2020 20 hours ago, mordorbund said: That's why democracies are better. You get to elect whoever you want to disappoint you. One would think that the more someone is compensated - the less they would disappoint or at least they ought to make a profound effort not to disappoint. But it does seem (with very few and rare exception) that the more someone is compensated - the greater they disappoint - and the less they seem to care about how badly they disappoint. I ponder if we would not be much better off if the pay and benefits of politicians was no more than our military. The Traveler Quote
Guest Godless Posted January 19, 2020 Report Posted January 19, 2020 7 hours ago, Traveler said: I ponder if we would not be much better off if the pay and benefits of politicians was no more than our military. A great idea in theory, but I fear that it would only encourage more corruption and corporate money influencing politics. If the taxpayers won't pay politicians, they'll find someone who will. Quote
anatess2 Posted January 20, 2020 Report Posted January 20, 2020 On 1/18/2020 at 12:11 PM, Traveler said: One would think that the more someone is compensated - the less they would disappoint or at least they ought to make a profound effort not to disappoint. But it does seem (with very few and rare exception) that the more someone is compensated - the greater they disappoint - and the less they seem to care about how badly they disappoint. I ponder if we would not be much better off if the pay and benefits of politicians was no more than our military. The Traveler Newsflash: Politicians don't make their money from their salary. Quote
Traveler Posted January 20, 2020 Report Posted January 20, 2020 2 hours ago, anatess2 said: Newsflash: Politicians don't make their money from their salary. Which is why I used the word - compensate. The Traveler Quote
anatess2 Posted January 20, 2020 Report Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, Traveler said: Which is why I used the word - compensate. The Traveler Which does not make a difference. Politicians don't make their money from compensation. You think Bernie Sanders gained 6 mansions through his compensation as a Senator? Quote
Traveler Posted January 20, 2020 Report Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, anatess2 said: Which does not make a difference. Politicians don't make their money from compensation. You think Bernie Sanders gained 6 mansions through his compensation as a Senator? Yes - if he was not a Senator he would not have been so compensated. Do you think this 6 mansions are a compensation for his intellect or non governmental experiences? The Traveler Quote
JohnsonJones Posted January 21, 2020 Report Posted January 21, 2020 This is an area I know very little about. I've heard some stories that Prince Harry and Megan are having some sort of qualm with the rest of the royals and thus are stepping back, but I have no idea what it is over or why. This thread has not really illuminated me on the reasons either. Anyone care to explain what exactly is going on with them? Just_A_Guy 1 Quote
anatess2 Posted January 21, 2020 Report Posted January 21, 2020 On 1/20/2020 at 2:32 PM, Traveler said: Yes - if he was not a Senator he would not have been so compensated. Do you think this 6 mansions are a compensation for his intellect or non governmental experiences? The Traveler So you're saying that Bernie Sanders was PAID all this money that allowed him to buy 6 mansions because he was a Senator? That's what you think? Maybe it's my poor English but compensation and graft, to my knowledge of the English language, are not interchangeable. Quote
Vort Posted January 21, 2020 Author Report Posted January 21, 2020 4 minutes ago, anatess2 said: So you're saying that Bernie Sanders was PAID all this money that allowed him to buy 6 mansions because he was a Senator? That's what you think? Maybe it's my poor English but compensation and graft, to my knowledge of the English language, are not interchangeable. It looks to me like Traveler is using "compensation" to mean more than just "salary". As in, any money Sanders brings in either directly or tangentially because he is a senator and infuence-peddler is "compensation" for being a senator. Traveler 1 Quote
anatess2 Posted January 21, 2020 Report Posted January 21, 2020 1 minute ago, Vort said: It looks to me like Traveler is using "compensation" to mean more than just "salary". As in, any money Sanders brings in either directly or tangentially because he is a senator and infuence-peddler is "compensation" for being a senator. So graft is compensation... that makes absolutely no sense. It's like saying, I stole $100 from my mother's purse = I got compensated $100 for being my mother's daughter. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.