The Queen,the Jubilee and all that.

[Common as Mook]

Because ultimately, he is not head of state and can be passed off as a loveable, eccentric buffoon.

But interestingly, this highlights how unaccountable they really are. Compare the treatment of his appalling "slitty eyed" comment in the press to that of an elected MP like Ken Livingston who perfectly reasonably compared an Evening Standard reporter to an SS guard for "just doing his job".

Ken got rightly lambasted for this though - Ken Livingstone accused of 'rich Jews' remark - Telegraph

 

[Simster]

Ken got rightly lambasted for this though - Ken Livingstone accused of 'rich Jews' remark - Telegraph

Indeed. And he is held accountable for his often-crap remarks because he is elected. Therein lies the difference.

 

[CHAPPERS]

I quite like Charles, if only for the fact that he has always championed British farmers.

 

[GreersElbow]

I don't hold anything against the Queen herself, however, I do believe we should perhaps look to become a republic in the next decade or two. Not a rapid transition, but a gradual change. I'm a republican because I believe it's anti-democratic to have an unelected head of state, the average joe should be allowed to contest for head of state.

I am grateful for the days off we've had though...

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Time to dust off the old slogan from 1977 again: "Stuff the Jubilee! Fight the cuts!" Ah! That takes me back! Doesn't it Johnny Rotten? Oh no, you're on the other side now aren't you?

Actually, to be honest, even though I'm a staunch Republican I will admit that Elizabeth Windsor has been an EXCELLENT Head of State. I may profoundly disagree with the method whereby she got the job in the first place but if she were to abolish the monarchy and put herself up for election as President I'd vote for her. Whatever your views the Jubilee is an historical event.

I was going to post something, but your second paragraph just about sums up my feelings exactly.

It reminds me of the bit in Monty Python's Holy Grail, King having a conversation with peasant (Michael palin):
I'm King of this Country.
Well, I didn't vote for you.
It then goes on to dismiss the taking of the sword Excalibur from the hand that rises from the lake as "some aquatic ceremony with a watery tart", and not a reason for respect. Hilarious but true.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

People will quickly forget about what Charles has said and done as soon as he becomes monarch.

I don't think I will.
If he were to interfere as King in the same way as he seems to have done as Prince of wales, i think we would fairly soon be heading for a constitutional crisis.

 

[beorhthelm]

... the average joe should be allowed to contest for head of state.

Why? no ever seems to make a decent case for this, its assumed to be preferable. and why even make this case when you know full well it would be a political grandee, not an average person who'd get the job.

 

[Titanic]

Why? no ever seems to make a decent case for this, its assumed to be preferable. and why even make this case when you know full well it would be a political grandee, not an average person who'd get the job.

Indeed... President Boris! Woo hoo! Then again, perhaps not.

 

[happypig]

Excellent programme about the Prince's Trust on ITV last night.

I don't think people appreciate just how hard the Royals work.

Yes, that's true graft, being driven around in a limousine, attending banquets and opening the odd factory.
Compare that to the life of utter luxury lived by coal miners, builders and soldiers and it's a wonder she's lasted so long.

 

[Albumen]

Indeed... President Boris! Woo hoo! Then again, perhaps not.

Exactly, don't trust Joe Public to vote well.

 

[Common as Mook]

Exactly, don't trust Joe Public to vote well.

I agree. Look at Brighton and Hove.

 

[Albumen]

I agree. Look at Brighton and Hove.

Touche! To be honest the Green Party Mayor candidate was a f***ing idiot too.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Indeed. And he is held accountable for his often-crap remarks because he is elected. Therein lies the difference.

I don't think it's as much because he's been elected but because of his staunch left wing politics make him a target for the right wing press, it's just part of the ongoing I'm left/you're right so I don't like you battle.
This sits with your comment that head of state is better being non political and I'd totally agree with that, but I think that would be blown out of the water as soon as anyone was allowed to do it because you'd just get all the same power hungry corrupt arsehole politicians who we are voting for in parliament. Just look at the house of lords which is supposed to be above party politics, yet we now have a situation where cameron is giving peerages to ex-tories to even up from when blair did it.

I think it's a lesser evil to have someone who is aware that they will be HOS from birth, therefore totally apolitical.

As for Charles, I don't think he's that controversial - he's just had the balls to say what others were thinking but too scared to say because it goes against mainstream thinking. I'd put him in the same bracket as David Nutt in that respect

 

[Billy the Fish]

Compare that to the life of utter luxury lived by coal miners, builders and soldiers and it's a wonder she's lasted so long.

You could easily say the same thing about your job (and mine for that matter) when compared to any of the above^^^

Just because you don't graft like they do, do you feel guilty that you get paid more than them for doing less?

 

[Storer 68]

They thought that in 1639........................................................ a few years later it had gone

 

[Storer 68]

Exactly, don't trust Joe Public to vote well.

wouldn't have got Falmer without those 44,985 idiots voting for it in a referendum