What do you do when you're desperate? Most of us have been desperate in some way, at some time in our lives.
Desperate for money, desperate for love, desperate not to lose a job or a business built over years.
Personally, I remember being so desperate to work things out with a certain gentleman that I put on a gown and crashed a gala dinner where he was a guest, then had to hide in the ladies' loo when the security guards came after me. (Unsurprisingly, our romance did not go forward after that incident).
One of the Webster definitions for desperate is "involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat and frustration."
When you're truly desperate, you'll do some pretty extreme things. Cheat, steal, lie.
Or share your most intimate and personal medical information, surrounded by great gobs of self-pitying word salad.
Did Meghan have a miscarriage?
Did Meghan have a miscarriage, as she stated in a recent personal essay in the New York Times?
I hope not, because no one deserves that, not even Meghan.
However, as Meghan herself states, this tragedy happens to roughly one out of five women. (Including me, although mine was quite early, and followed quickly by a successful pregnancy.)
It is not unusual and certainly not generally caused by the emotional "coldness" of one's in-laws.
No one would question
Having a miscarriage is common, but writing about it for the New York Times is not.
However, when you're truly desperate, you're willing to "employ extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat and frustration."
When your (Democratic) presidential candidate has apparently won but no one on his team will take your phone calls; when the money you desperately need is linked to a streaming service that is in the news for insulting your husband's family; when you're stuck in an expensive lawsuit you appear to have no chance at winning, it's understandable to want to grasp at any sympathetic story you can.
The story of a miscarriage is one no media outlet - and probably no husband - would think to question.
Can you think of any other topic that would have gotten Meghan permission to write a long personal essay in the New York Times in November 2020?
Comments
I don't see why people are still so fascinated with Diana.
At the end, she was hanging out with scuzz balls and she paid for it with her life. Not something I aspire to.
She lives on through her children and ex husband and their reactions and actions.
"They didn't have the lot "closed" for them. According to the article their "agent" (?) called and asked for times when the lot was not usually busy.
"Me thinks even the Harkles now know that they are not "special" enough to demand stores close nor can they withstand more negative stories regarding their diva behavior"
And me certainly hopes so! Or they just wanted to be able to say they went there -- there is doubt and downright disbelief of this-- so Meghan's Mirror could more easily merch 9' balsam fir trees.
Sounds more like they didn't want to pay the $$$ fee for hours closed and just lied via PR. Or Omitted and twisted. What's new?!
Thank you Nutties
Happy to bring you some cheer!
Hikari, wow, Ogden Nash, I wish!
Googled his poems, brilliant, thank you.
I’ll have a triple salted caramel latte,
no need to close the shop, have it delivered
to Shady Pines!
Singalong?
The Slush Fecunders
Dumb bells ring, no-ones listening
On the hill, rain is drizzling
She gave us a fright
They come out at night
Hiking in the Harkles Hinterland
*Pixilated
Her trolls follow blindly
Their Mistress, so kindly
Harry’s now following suit
With all that he’s said
He appears Pixie-Led
With his head up her Maximus Glut
*bewildered, confused, drunk!
I did see a video at one point which appeared/purported to have been shot from behind MM when she & Frog were Hiking in the Harkles Hinterland, presumably taken by the gardeners, medical orderlies, `security' or whatever.
In this, nobody jumps out of bushes - the papp appears in a perfectly normal way well ahead of her, just like anyone else out for a walk. She doesn't miss a beat, strides forward , without hesitation, as if ready for her close-up.
I suppose it could have been `re-enactment by a body double' but it looked authentic and tied in with the frontal photo of her grinning broadly at the camera. She tried to get the Mail to take that one down, on the grounds that it was taken without her consent. She did not allege it was fake.
Down here, we like to believe it comes from `pixie led', as of an intoxicated person getting lost on Dartmoor, who blames the mischievous Pixies who live in those parts for leading them astray, rather than admit it was the rough cider (`scrumpie') that was responsible.
@WildBoar
As for her ‘pap’ stroll
In the words of Jim Royle, “ My Arse”
Pixie-Led Harry getting lost in LA.
Blaming the piskie RF for his troubles?
No hat disheveled look with the Queen
Visible belly button in Morocco
Inappropriate dress with bare shoulders in church
Inappropriate dress with bare shoulders during an official event
Sitting cross legged in a very short dress while pregnant
Writing on bananas for sex workers (thank GOODNESS the charity had a presence of mide to make them into cakes instead!)
Gatecrushing the BAFTA and parading herself onstage
Publishing idiotic pics in clown hats against all advice
Breaking the royal protocol rule of never having baby showers
Breaking royal protocol on numerous other public occasions
Idiotic behavior with Arvhie's birth and christening
Insulting the Queen on several occasions
Forcing women in SA to sit on the floor
Inappropriate dress during the SA mosque visit
Banning local people from any contact with them or even their dogs
Threatening the man in Wimbledon
Insulting staff on several occasions
Dressing inappropriately for the Louis christening photo
Using private jets while preaching on environment
Wasting huge amounts of money on wardrobe and grooming during just one year - more than the two European Queens!
Telling obvious lies publicly on the record
Breaking royal media relations rules
Letting down her royal charities
Trying to manipulate the media
Talking about abortion during official trip to NA.
I am sure I missed a lot. After all these disasters during her meagre royal career nothing will surprise me. The woman has no sense of propriety, taste or respect.
A raindrop is a snowflake having a meltdown.
Priceless !
Telling obvious lies publicly on the record
We all know that the BRF cannot respond to her lies without getting into a status lowering tit for tat. This would make the RF look as common and tawdry as Megsy. So Meghan is able to keep telling her lies with impunity, large medium and small. Some are fibs. One day the BRF will unleash on her but in a way that cannot be traced back.
Thank God Megs and her ventriloquist's dummy are 6,000 miles away at Christmas time. And btw so stupidly cruel to deprive Archie of a fun visit to the Christmas tree seller during this oppressive Covid era. Just about all families will bring their children for fun, memories and photos.
Also the clearing of the stand at Wimbledon - although I’ve always maintained the view that it was her minders who wouldn’t let anyone sit near her because they knew how inebriated she was.
And greeting the King of Morocco before H
And - the ladder in her stockings at the BP event, the muddy shoes, visible eyelash glue, pit stains and the dresses coming below the coat - all examples of can’t be arsed, you’re not very important so I didn’t bother, trashiness.
I, too, have suffered Diana Exhaustion. Magazines and newspapers and television stations made lots of money from advertisers and viewership and sales whenever Diana was featured. Her personal tragedies made comfortable livings for a lot of people. I can see why they would want to go out to the cemetery to drag their favorite magical cash cow out yet again to, forgive me, make it rain. (Harry's "raindrops" speech reminded me of "make it rain" and then into what Netflix is trying to do with Diana. That probably was not what was intended.)
This periodic resurrection of her (outwardly) glittery life to her ultimate end is macabre. I know how this ends. I refuse to be drawn into hearing any new sordid details. She was a flawed individual, as are we all. Personally, I think it is time to let her rest.
Singalong?
The Slush Fecunders
Dumb bells ring, no-ones listening
On the hill, rain is drizzling
She gave us a fright
They come out at night
Hiking in the Harkles Hinterland
Thanks, Magatha! I do so love a good singalong in the early morning (and I did sing along)! SwampMan does not enjoy it quite so much, since my singing voice leaves much to be desired.
I doubt press stories will die down though. We've got the 25th anniversary of her death in 2022, the current BBC investigation and Charles Spencer speaking out, the KP statue unveiling purportedly scheduled for summer 2021 (on what would have been her 60th birthday) an effort spearheaded by Will and Harry in 2017, and Harry speaking publicly of her on what seems to be a pretty regular basis. So it's not just "the media" driving the stories.
Thank you, how could I forget her inappropriate makeup? As you say, visible lash glue, lumpy mascara, creased eyeshadows.
Too much bronzer that made her hands so much whiter compared to her face! Unkempt hair.
These are all little things that add to the image, and I did not appreciate a member of the family I am paying for with my taxes to look like this. Not looking properly groomed during official occasions is a sign of disrespect to all those who pay for the royals, especially taking into account astronomical sums she wasted on her clothes and "grooming".
Archie looks like his parents. He has the same head shape of Just H, and Megs crossed eye. But no way in heck was Megs pregnant. Surrogate all the way. The ridiculous name of Archie Harrison was an inside joke with the HAMS. They knew and know that their son cannot have any royal title, or inherit one. Incidentally, the actress Jamie Lee Curtis married an aristocrat with a title, who is an actor. They adopted two children. When her husband passes, his title will go to a relative, not his children.
Regarding the Christmas Tree buy, wasn’t the near identical story appear in DM before the two losers married? The Christmas tree buying, where there were no photos?
'Regarding the Christmas Tree buy, wasn’t the near identical story appear in DM before the two losers married? The Christmas tre
buying, where there were no photos'
Here it is it's identical as you say
CHRISTMAS 2017
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Christmas Tree
Where to find the Christmas tree with a Royal seal of approval, and how to care for it
06 DEC 2017
Before announcing their engagement last month, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had stayed decidedly under-the-radar. But, last year, the couple couldn't resist a festive trip to the Pines and Needles pop-up at Battersea Park to choose a Christmas tree, and we can't help but imagine it twinkling in the corner of their Kensington home, Nottingham Cottage.
ADVERTISEMENT
The couple chose one of the six-foot Nordmann Fir trees, priced at £65, which are available this year from the various Pines and Needles outposts across the capital. And to decorate? Seek inspiration from our Christmas tree gallery, full of the prettiest ideas.
Pines and Needles, whose clientele also includes Sir Elton John, is run by Tate & Lyle grandsons Sam and Josh Lyle, who will no doubt be reaping the rewards of the Royal seal of approval
https://www.houseandgarden.co.uk/article/christmas-ideas-prince-harry-christmas-tree-shopping
Despite no photos the Sunshine Sachs boys and girls were able to splash this across the known universe.
Just catching up - that was a very long list but not exhaustive! May I add the following, in no particular order:
- not just bare shoulders but deliberately lowering the neck of her (pale pink) jacket on the balcony at Trooping the colour
- trying to get into a car before the Queen
- sticking her tongue out when leaving church with the BRF
- parading at an official function with a label dangling from her dress/her handbag wrapped in plastic
- refusing food (dates) offered on official visit to Morocco
- not just inappropriate dress to visit a mosque, as you mentioned, but loose hair partly uncovered instead of being completely covered
- finally, let's not forget Megalo looking pregnant at Eugenie's wedding
Gosh, there have been so many disasters, this is tiring! I'm sure I've missed a few.
One person wrote:
Who can take a sunrise... Sprinkle it with dew... Cover it with choc'late and a miracle or two... The Candy Man... Oh, the Candy Man can...
then someone responds:
Who can take a graveyard... Use it as a set... Visit graves of soldiers from a country they reject.. The Harkle folks can... Oh, the Harkle folks can
You are so right. Sticking tongue out at the media was my WTF moment with her. When Princess Charlotte did the same it was charming, because it came from a very young child. When a 37 year old woman does the same, and during the high profile outing with the royal family as own her public debut, it causes doubts in her mental capabilities.
To be honest watching Markle's behaviour and her shameless "borrowing" of other people's ideas as well as her manic desire to upstage anything and everything, I came to conclusion she is not entirely compos mentis. I went as far as questioning if she is a product of some early abuse that led to pretty severe personality issues.
I also now believe Harry and Markle will not divorce any time soon because they feed off each other's problems and spiral down together in a tight embrace.
Perhaps people here who are employed in or familiar with PR (Nutty?) can set me right as to whether this is still the way it is done? What is all this about a Xmas tree. zzzzz.
I too have given up on the idea of the Harkles divorcing any time soon. I know it sounds a horrible thing to hope that a couple will divorce but in their case it might be for the best. As you so rightly say, 'they feed off each other's problems' and have become interdependent, not in a positive way. Harry is now unrecognisable.
FC is a part of Crown Estate, it means it is owned by the Queen. Renovation costs came out of the Sovereign Grant. For our American Nutties - Crown Estate generates profit each year that goes to the national pocket, and the nation in exchange pays a certain sum each year to the Queen to perform her duties and look after the Crown properties. That's Sovereign Grant. Technically the profit from the Crown's estate is greater than the Sovereign Grant, so in essence the Monarch pays for her own upkeep, but the matter is very complex and I could never quite get to who is having a better deal here.
Anyway, renovation costs came out of the Sovereign Grant, from the Queen's pocket. So, the owner of the cottage paid for its renovations out of her own money. So far so good. She then granted the use of cottage to the Harkles, with or without the rent, because they were supposed to be a part of her royal support set - part of the working royal machine. Presumably renovation bills were forwarded to the Crown to pay.
Then things got tricky. Harkles bolted, public was enraged, press made a fuss about "taxpayer's money wasted". After a while we hear that Harry "repaid" this portion of the SG. You see? He repaid the Queen's money to the Queen, not to the taxpayers. And the Queen paid for renovation of the property that always stayed in her ownership.
So, what did Harry get in exchange for parting with his money to pacify the media and public? This is where I am on a guessing ground. Perhaps instead of paying the rent to the Queen, Eugenie is paying to Harry to reimburse him for his expense.
I would expect the monthly rent of a 5 bed property on the Queen's estate is upwards of 10K, but who knows with the shady royal affairs?
Another option is nobody actually repaid anything to anybody, the Queen simply agreed to reduce her next grant by this amount, thus saving Harry's face and hide. And Eugenie is paying to the Queen as a long-term financial arrangement while Harry gets to claim that the taxpayers had been reimbursed.
I would be interested to hear what other Nuttiers think. I just can't believe that Harry voluntarily parted with upwards of 2.5 million pounds of his own cash.
I have no idea but I'm glad you posted the question. Given that everyone is still pretending it's H&M's house (owned by the Crown Estates but their "permanent" home) I can't imagine why---as some sugars have demanded ought to happen---E&J would "pay Harry back" for the renovations though.
Precisely which parts of the structural reno were necessary to revive the building and make it a single-family home again and which parts were H&M preferences has never been clear either.
Personally I do not believe Harry ever "paid back" a significant sum.
I gave up ages ago, but what I’m slowly losing hope on is an imminent disappearing act of the ghastly divisive Duo. I was hopeful they’d disappear off under the radar by now, unfortunately for us the media won’t pass them over just yet, sadly click-bait pays too well.
I’m well and truly Megxit fatigued.
I think we're all Megxit fatigued! We might see some change after the 'review', if indeed there is one. If there's no change at all after that, then we can give up any hope.
What has actually been done to Frogmore, Its current condition, And whether the Harkles ever actually lived there for any length of time is shrouded in as much secrecy as the conception and existence of Archie. I’m American, so I don’t pretend to know all the ins and outs of the sovereign grant and the requirements for renovating an historical listed building. From what I have been able to glean from Harry Markle, Who has been worrying this question like a bone, They are planning applications that were lodged with the council stretching back to 2014 to bring the building up to code in its existing configuration as five separate dwellings in order that it could be used once more for staff housing. Until the Harkles arrived on scene, And it was to create that this would be their new house, the building was officially known as Frogmore Cottages, plural. I can imagine that the renovation work required to convert five separate flats into the original single-family configuration would have been extensive. Much more than 2,300,000 pounds, bearing in mind that Meg Spent half that figure on wardrobe alone in less than a year. Would such a renovation have even been practical, assuming that the queen was willing to spend that amount of money? The location alone, close to public roads in foot paths in Windsor and directly under the flight path to Heathrow would have seem to rule it out As a suitably secure dwelling for Harry and his family. It is my understanding that the Sovereign Grant would legitimately cover items like: roofing, rewiring, knocking down walls, and replacing the floors. These all have to do with structural integrity and needed to be done regardless of who would be living there. The portion not covered by the sovereign Grant would be the cosmetic things that make a house a home: paint, carpeting, draperies, furnishings, and landscaping items like the garden, barbecue pit, Tennis court etc. If there is 2,300,000 pounds owing, I believe that money was to come out of the Dutchy of Cornwall funds, ie. Charles. Those people are taxpayers too, But that amount could be said to be part of H and Meg’s Compensation package as senior royals. When Edward renovated his place, He paid for all that stuff out of his own wages as it were, which I guess would be the Duchy of Lancaster funds, And the rent he pays back for the property was reduced to reflect this. I can imagine that Meg went apeshit In the Soho house catalog and spending up for items like vegan paint and such. I think she thought she was entitled to Frogmore House, And when disabused of that notion, refused to live in the cottage.
When Harry did his video with Ed Sheeran last year, it was from Ivy cottage, home of Eugenie and Jack. Why was he broadcasting from
There when he ostensibly had a beautifully renovated to his specifications property in Windsor? I have a feeling that he was crashing at NottCott, While Meg was elsewhere. I am not sold on them ever having lived together under the same roof since they got engaged. Eugenie’s move to froggycott seems official, But I’ve read other articles saying that she and Jack are still in Ivy Cott and have not yet made the move. Lord only knows what condition FrogCott is actually in, and maybe it’s not move-in ready. It’s so very odd that all of these extensive renovations do not seem to have been witnessed by anyone in Windsor. It’s beyond weird. I cannot for the life of me imagine that Eugenie has entered into any sort of financial arrangement with her cousin. That is nonsensical. Rent owed on the cottage will go to the sovereign grant via Buckingham palace. Harry is out of this equation. The likeliest scenario is that Charles reimbursed the Duchy for what the pair spent on a house they never lived in, and Harry was permitted to say that he paid in order to save face.
"It is my understanding that the Sovereign Grant would legitimately cover items like: roofing, rewiring, knocking down walls, and replacing the floors. These all have to do with structural integrity and needed to be done regardless of who would be living there.
The portion not covered by the sovereign Grant would be the cosmetic things that make a house a home: paint, carpeting, draperies, furnishings, and landscaping items like the garden, barbecue pit, Tennis court etc."
That makes sense. But my question is where do items like furnace type, soundproofing, interior trim work including window/door trims and built-ins but also stair bannisters/balusters, tile/stone work (e.g., bath, fireplace surrounds), renovation of existing exterior patios, front walkways, and doors (exterior and interior) fall? There likely may some constraints given the historic nature of the home. But those areas also may involve personal choices that could lead to massively "overspending" on idiosyncratic choices too (assuming, of course, that the work was ever done.)
Seems like a lot of the items you mention would fall under discretionary spending, I E Harry’s allowance. It could be argued that things like stair railing’s and bath fixtures might come under the sovereign Grant to a degree; there might have been some budget allocated for these things, but not to an ostentatiously expensive level. If Meg wanted teakwood and marble kitchen countertops,etc, far and away what was allocated for, seems like they would have to cover the difference themselves. Ditto soundproofing and smart house technology, lake sound systems and etc. After all the occupants Frogmore had been living there since the 19th century without Soundproofing tiles, or an in-home music studio, special yoga floor etc. I think when it was laid out to them that they couldn’t have everything they wanted do today historical nature of the building, they buggered off, but they had probably already spent a great deal of money, maybe just ordering furniture. It’s quite obvious that Meg has no intrinsic taste, nor does she appreciate vintage historical things. There’s been a pervasive rumor that for the entirety of their marriage, she was lodged in an apartment in Kensington, while hairy continued his bachelor life at NottCott. During the interlude when they were ostensibly at that property in the Cotswolds, rumor has it that she was staying at SoHo Farmhouse just down the road. So who knows were all these phantom furnishings for empty Frogmore went? It’s not out of the realm of possibility that she was submitting fraudulent bills to Charles for renovation items that never actually wound up in the cottage. She was probably flogging them for cash just like she did with the clothes. The story about removal vans pitching up in the middle of the night Is most likely 100% fraudulent, to make it seem that they had been living there and left things. Let’s hope that Euge and Jack Can turn it into a legitimate family home and get some use out of what has been spent on it. Whatever transpires, I’m sure they are not giving Harry money.
I started thinking about that (how we are which drifted off to if we think it is bad at least we can walk back into our day to day life without them touching our stuff, being seated across from them at a meal or respond to a text but not a call) but ... the BRF and the people who work under/around them cannot.
What if there is a review and it has already happened? like after the Remembrance Day walk and they were told that crossed the line and now you have constraints IFwant money from now on?
So the trip to get the tree might be an attempt to show regret/appeasement for no pictures or a following of the now in place rules to get money.
Or it happened before Remembrance Day - what we was saw was more of a how dare you tell me/us where and what we cannot choose to acknowledge (that someone has spend our money already on) response? (not saying who might feel this is a good fight)
Could the Times piece be some sort of additional lob at the Palace in anger about their constraints knowing the Palace is unlikely to ever publicly respond?
Here's the Wiki definition:
The Crown - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › The_Crown
A corporation sole, the Crown is the legal embodiment of executive, legislative, and judicial governance in the monarchy of each country. ( `each country' ie England ,Wales, Scotland, N.Ireland)
(Not to be confused with a TV series produced by the scurvy knaves of Netflix!)
I shan't even attempt to summarise the Wikipedia entry beyond saying it's not the same as the monarch (who it is its personification), nor the Government. It covers the functions of the state: national government, law-making and the upholding of the law.
It owns land, as Crown Estates - which are NOT the personal property of the Queen. The are in another sense, publicly owned (which doesn't mean the public necessarily has access).
Balmoral and Sandringham are owned by the the Queen in her personal capacity, having been bought in the usual way, just like we freeholders do, respectively by Victoria & Albert and by Edward VII. They are inherited as personal property.
I read somewhere that when Edw.VIII abdicated, he sold Sandringham to brother Bertie, D of York (now George VI). That is, it didn't `go with the job'. I don't know how Balmoral was sorted out. I daresay Wallis would have been glad to give it away!
------------------
I was watching `The Valhalla Murders' on BBC4 last night when it occurred to me that, being set in Iceland, it was mercifully `woke free' - eg most Icelanders use their patronymics instead of inherited family names - thus Thor Jonsson can marry Margret Sveinsdottir (who doesn't change her name) and their children might be Olaf Thorsson and Anna Thorssdottir. Totally binary!
That led me to wonder, given the damage that Netflix is wreaking on the RF, if it's the forces of Woke that could be behind the assault on our Constitution that we've been watching for the last 3 years?
That is, it's not linked to the more traditional forms of extreme politics, just that our hereditary monarchy offends them.
Never mind that most of us Brits are content with the status quo (or sometimes grumble but see the alternative as worse) and wouldn't give a `thank you' for the chance to be part of the royal life.
Never mind that the British Constitution is none of their damn' business, just as the US Constitution is none of ours.
MM piling on the `racism' accusations could be part of that, as Joaquin Phoenix's mocking of Wm at the BAFTAs could have been.
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1310616983256338433/photo/1
Ha ha, we watched 'The Valhalla Murders' last night ! On another note, I've just read in the DM that 'Hollywood producers have been blasted over a ‘cruel and unfair’ new cartoon show mocking Prince George.
Creators of the forthcoming £5 million series The Prince have been accused of ‘taking cheap shots’ by pillorying the seven-year-old as a demanding spoiled brat.
Critics say the youngster could be adversely affected by his portrayal in the eight-part series, which is due to air on the HBO Max streaming service.
The row follows the outrage sparked by Netflix drama The Crown, which has been accused of exploiting the Royal Family for financial gain and depicting hurtful fiction as fact.'
Mocking a young child who has no control over who he is is a new low and her another attack on the BRF.
Just spotted the bit about Pines & Needles being run by members of the Lyle family - as in Tate & Lyle, the reviled sugar company!!!
Such hypocrisy - Tate galleries have been criticised for retaining the name of their Founder, using money from sugar, won on the back of sugar-plantation slavery... Giving up sugar in tea was one of the acts of an Abolitionist 200 years ago.
Got tell it our abroad! She patronised a firm run by beneficiaries of slavery - so much for her Wokery.
This video talks about Charles disappointment in the birth of his second son being the beginning of the end of the Wales marriage. It also mentions the miscarriage which Diana suffered prior to conceiving Harry. That makes Drip’s Latest remark about not wanting to bring children into the world even more stupid, since the baby his mother lost could have easily been him.
I think these feelings of being the second born son unwanted by his father have permeated Harry’s whole life and he has absorbed that atmosphere, Whether or not it was articulated ever in his hearing. Even if Charles had been effusively delighted at the birth of a second son rather than the daughter that he wanted, Harrys position as the spare part in the royal machine would not have changed. So the little boy who grew up feeling that he was an afterthought, and not good for anything Has become, as an adult, a self fulfilling prophecy. He can’t do anything and he’s not good for anything. He has become an international joke and outed as as the fraud he always felt himself to be. Diana spoiled him in trying to overcompensate, and she only made things much worse.
That's a very astute take on the situation. It's true that even when some feelings are unspoken, children pick up on them. In the early years as well, when people discuss things openly because they think children don't understand.
I had some friends who were a couple. They would openly discuss the fact that they were thinking of aborting their children (they had twins) because they didn't want children. They were good parents, but I saw how the children picked up on this and would tell them to stop doing this.
And of course, spoiling children afterwards to make up for things just leads to disaster.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/263d61a4d4994c70b1db1bd26ab0a138/3c788cbc150131c0-3f/s1280x1920/0eba433f3b99b0f8d6a36102d62805ca057cf3ee.png
I'm really looking forward to following Prince William and Catherine's visit to different communities in the UK and already relishing all the goodwill they will earn for it!
The red gene in the royal family goes back centuries all the way to 1066 and beyond. You only have to look at their ancestral portraits to see the centuries of generations of red heads in the family.
By hapstance they frequently married red heads which maintained that red gene.
In recent times, Queen Mary the Queen's grandmother, was a red head.
People often point to the red headed Spencers as the reason Harry is a red head without stopping to ask where Beatrice's red hair came from. You need two red genes - one from each parent - to get a red haired child.
The only person who has/ had said that Charles was disappointed in having a second son, or that he was a red head, was Diana.
We certainly haven't seen any evidence other than Diana's word to support her narrative! Prince Charles's reaction to his second son's birth is also often cited as the moment when Diana fell out of love with him. Wouldn't it be ironic if it were actually the moment he fell out of love with her? He had known before that moment that she was immature and unstable, but I don't think he imagined she'd lie to him for months on end about having a girl. When he realized that she had done just that, well, it must have been a rough awakening. And leave it to Diana to twist his moment of disillusionment into her own -- blatantly playing down her own actions that contributed to it.
Now I wonder whether she had always told Prince Harry's birth story that way, or if it was calculated revisionist history for the War of the Waleses. I certainly hope for the latter! For if the former were true, just imagine how she must have drilled that skewed account into her son's head before she shared it with the rest of the world! We're not big fans of Harry now, but there was a time he was truly innocent and vulnerable.
As @Yankee Doodle reminds us, it was Diana who made up the story that Charles was disappointed that he had a second son. This is the story she told in her ghostwritten biography by Andrew Morton.
However, in her own words in tapes recorded for her acting / speech coach, she admits she kept the gender of the second baby secret from him during the pregnancy and actively never discouraged him when he mused about new baby possibly being a girl.
She deliberately framed his remarks at Harry's birth as his disappointment, but that was not the truth.
So much of what is in Andrew Morton's book is hagiography and outright lies designed to make Diana look saint sinned against. And absolutely no responsibility for the awful things she admits doing as she frames them as others victimising her. Remind you of anyone?
"I am sure that Charles knew he was having a son beforehand..."
Interesting point about Diana's possible culpability. You are correct the story was told by Diana.
But supposedly Charles didn't know they were having a son. Diana claimed she knew early on Harry was a boy because she could tell from the scan. (Supposedly the couple asked not to be told the sex.) I find that claim pretty questionable myself. One child and suddenly she could read prenatal sonagrams? Even trained sonographers make mistakes when determining sex as parents with baby sons in pink nurseries can attest. Regardless, and even worse, Diana admitted she encouraged Charles to believe she was carrying a girl because she said he wanted a daughter. So she admitted she set him up although she said she did it to "make him happy." (Nobody is that dumb.)
Re: the "and he's a ginger" part. Charles certainly knew Queen Mary was a redhead. And he certainly knew Diana's sister Sarah was a redhead because he had dated her. And he certainly knew his own beard grew in reddish when he was in his 20s. So even if he didn't remember red hair is recessive and comes from both parents, it's hard to believe he was shocked his son could have red hair!
https://www.instagram.com/garyjanetti/
Gary Janetti previously worked on Family guy so the tone of his latest creation shouldn't surprise anyone.
The animation was announced last year with teaser trailers and the occasional advert in general media popping up every quarter since then.
The DM carried some of these trailers and press kits, but it's only now that they've decided to take a horrified tone tied in with the pushback PR trying to discredit The Crown.
Upto now, DM had no problem carrying the cartoon's ads and press. Prior to that DM also wrote articles highlighting the very funny IG page.
Looking at the drawings, entire family is included including Meghan. The voice cast is very highly regarded British actors.
Based on the trailers, unless you know or recognise the inspiration of the drawings, the show looks like a made over family guy complete with a sassy, snarky pre-schooler.
The only thing that gives me pause is the title of the show, The Prince, but then again i'm not sure people will see the connection to Machiavelli. And i hope it's hapstance on Gary's part and not a revelation about the character of the boy George in his show.
Interesting we only now see how much damage Diana did to her own children. Harry is a product of Diana's genes and influence.
But her biggest, most dangerous and catastrophic effect is cheapening of the monarchy. She flushed so many highly private details about herself and other royals into media that nothing is off limits now. She opened the floodgate by grossly violating her own privacy and privacy of others.
Look at the trash the Crown is now. Look how even the child George is becoming the subject of nasty cartoons. Diana made this all possible and money is still being made off her "bare all" stories.
I never particularly liked her but now can see how horrible her effect on the monarchy really is.
Harry who is currently firmly associated with Netflix should be ashamed of himself. Netflix showed his mother as a vomiting insane neurotic and his father as a monster. But it was Diana who first provided all this dirt through her book, press manipulation and Panorama interview.
Kudos that he saw the lesson of his mother and chose the opposite in every way. It will serve him well in the long term.
Harry saw the lesson of his mother and wanted more including her celebrity. The current chaos in his life is entirely self- inflicted. I can't even blame Meghan here. It would be on a par with bringing a scorpion indoors and being surprised that it stung you.
I like your parallel about bringing a scorpion home. Although scorpion never tries to pretend to be anything other than a scorpion.
Harry can be summed up by just two examples: claiming Trump had blood on his hands because Trump tried to renew USA coal industry while himself leaving a footprint 26 times greater than an average Brit due to all his private flights
and
Demanding privacy while engaging with Netflix and select journalists to spill his PR
I'm sure it would be as effective as anything else they've done.
"Harry's Anti-Termite and Anti-Cattle Act"
Let's not forget methane produced by cattle. Harry must include cows into his campaign. Heck, why stop there? Harry should push for the Anti-Meteorism Act with obligatory fines for all sufferers. That'll teach them how to produce greenhouse gases.
....the Queen mourns the death of her dorgi, Vulcan, according to Harper’s Bazaar. Only Candy is left now.
@ Swamp Woman
"Harry's Anti-Termite and Anti-Cattle Act"
Let's not forget methane produced by cattle. Harry must include cows into his campaign. Heck, why stop there? Harry should push for the Anti-Meteorism Act with obligatory fines for all sufferers. That'll teach them how to produce greenhouse gases.
Don't forget the Yellowstone supervolcano! It is a prodigious producer of greenhouse gases all by itself. They should go the caldera and lecture it.
And 2020 continues to be awful:
....the Queen mourns the death of her dorgi, Vulcan, according to Harper’s Bazaar. Only Candy is left now.
December 6, 2020 at 10:24 PM
Oh, no, how horrible. I find that I cannot imagine the Queen without her beloved dogs.
Didn't Meghan's PR once release a story about the Queen's corgi's really taking to Meghan on the first meeting? I'm sure she'll dig up that old story, to reference in her new press release about being so "saddened" by the news, as a true "dog lover" would be.
Just in time to grab some attention from the Cambridge Royal Train Tour -- though of course she'll have to up the ante much, much more than that. And if this post is still at the top of Nutty's blog when she does, we'll come full circle on the current theme of desperation!
Yes, you are correct there was a past story re how the Queen's dogs loved the most sensitive dog lover in the world! Apparently she gave a hamster dog toy to the Queen and the Queen thought it the most funniest, fantastic present ever.
And, yes there is also the time Madam rode in the train with the Queen, unprecedented the headline stated at the time. Most of the pictures show Madam giggling like a school girl with the Queen. In the one photo, her hair is a mess (not the Queen's).
Yes, we will get to hear about all these stories again. Plus, new ones, Archie decorates a tree, Madam bakes vegan organic mince pies for Christmas and gives away more Archie hand me downs to the poor for Christmas.
Harry is the one who told the story about M and TQ's dogs.
Yes, Janetti’s obsession with mocking a little royal child from another land is somehow both creatively tired and creepy. Trying to figure out the audience for this.
How did you make your money this year, Gary? “Well, I made fun of a little school child, because of his family and heritage.”
It also underlines the nonexistent nature of America-dwelling Archie, whose show biz-infatuated parents can’t even produce their tot for some cartoon cash. Kid isn’t even represented thus far in the cast or art. Janetti notably became sympathetic to the poor Harkles around August 2019, as noted by the Evening Stabdard in October 2019. He previously mentioned Archie in his memes.
You have just opened the whole new field for Harry should his Travalyst campaign fail.
Anti-volcano campaign will take him far. Meanwhile he can campaign against technology that turns coal into a high-efficiency fuel. How dare they improve the dreadful fossil fuels.
Then it will be doubly credible when she resurrects it!
@Crumpet
Oh, I hadn't known about the hamster toy! Perhaps we'll learn that the Queen was cradling it during the Zoom call when she personally broke the news to Harry and his Mrs.
I feel so sad for the Queen. And, she just lost her friend Lady Campbell a few weeks ago as well.
Question. Does anyone (outside of these Tumblr blogs) watch or care about any of the Harkles zooms? I don't think I've heard or read anyone (outside of outed media sources such as Marie Claire, Good Housekeeping, etc) even mention them.
Are Grip and Drip really as unimportant, and frankly invisible, as I'm thinking?
Harry and Duchess Meghan Markle embark on secret 4-day trip around Montecito
Eager to extend seasonal joy and kindness to their Monterrey County neighbors after a long difficult year, Duchess Meghan and her husband recently undertook a secret “journey of peace” throughout their new American hometown.
The famous duo were “eager not to intimidate people, most of whom are simple Californians without their sort of stellar fame and who didn’t have dead Diana as their mother,” notes a Sussex source. Dressed casually, and wearing protective masks and hats, they spent four days On the secret journey, going on foot or by car Into the the side roads, gardens, and even a coffee shop and post office, in the green and sunny private community.
“Oi, ‘is lordship was so normal, such a good lad he is, walked in on me and the missus ‘avin’ our bangers’n’mash and puddin’ on the back terrace, didn’t he just,” said neighbor Hector Washington, a multi-millionaire school teacher and lifetime Montecito resident. “Nice to ‘ave a tall bloke like that nearby! He got down a few late oranges from the tree here for us!”
“Ooh, she dashed right in and ordered up a double mochaccino and some chips from me, didn’t she just!” said 18-year-old barista Tiffany Beemsly, a typical bubbly Montecito teen. “She said ‘er dad Mister Foster loves chips, and it was too bad we couldn’t fry her up an avocado! She was so kind, kindness itself you know, just seein’ ‘er and ‘avin’ ‘er ask me if I was okay with no tip as she had forgot her quid, why, she makes me want to become an astronaut, she does! She asked changed me whole life!”
The Sussex source says that the pair were “humbled by how much love they found” during their arduous four day tour. “They took this extensive trip around Montecito out of simple honest concern for their new countrymen during this troubled year, and were amazed at the bravery they found. At more than one mansion, they were offered cocktails, even dinner to go,”
Although the details were known only to their top-level high security team, the source confirms that the pair returned to their own home each night to prep their notes for the next day. “They wanted to sleep rough, as Meghan's husband used to with the late Princess Diana, but security was against it as they are in constant danger with Meghan being the spouse of an heir.”
The pair ended their journey on Friday in a state of “enormous humbleness, laden with presents” from all the Montecito shops, as well as “multiple fry soil samples” acquired by Meghan’s husband. They hope to channel their new knowledge about how simple Californians live into their work as documentary producers for Netflix. “ They had to reschedule a lot of work for this four day trip, but are so glad they did it. It brought them together and made their marriage “stronger than ever” as they enter the Christmas season. And so many people asked them to run for mayor, they have a lot to consider, the source added.
The source noted they were “happy to hear that Prince William and his wife are going to leave their golden pile of wealth try the same thing, although with the fuel-wasting extravagance”of the Royal train. In response, a Palace spokesman asked that the duo sod straight off.
and the fact that well known british actors are complicit should be enough for the BRF / Cambridges to remember that and stop cozing up to the entertainmant industry / BAFTA. didn’t the actors at the last BAFTA awards go a bit far snarking at Wills? If I were him, I’d take a nice long break from BAFTA and concentrate my patronage time to other worthy causes. he’s got plenty to pick from.
‘the prince ‘ on top of ‘the crown’ shows how disrespectful hollywood currently is to the BRF.
normally isnt it more of a mutual admiration society, with each patting the other on the back, HM hands out knighthoods to ‘actors’/ entertainment people and they respect the institiution. now the entertainment world is throwing stones, thats not good for the long term health of the firm.
Thank you for H&M' 'secret 4-day trip around Montecito'! Very funny! But I think this is not ambitious enough, they could extend their “journey of peace” to SoCal, at least, if not beyond. The peasants will be gratified to receive a blessing from St Meghan. The trip will be a success, naturally, and will eclipse William & Kate's.
'Diana was a known liar, a trait she passed on to Harry. Diana was setting up herself and her children to be victims for life, and it was terrible to put down the father of your children. Royal or not, it was bad form
Agree with you
You have an excellent memory.
Can you recall (or any Nutty posters )how Diana manipulated this story in her favour?
It was supposedly lies that PC was uncaring about his s9n in hospital as PC was encouraged to go to his scheduled Royal duty by Diana who stsyed with William at the hospital but it is believed that Diana tiped off the press to discredit PC ...
Prince William Leaves Hospital After Injury
June 6, 1991
LONDON (AP) _ The 8-year-old son of Prince Charles left the hospital on Wednesday, two days after his forehead was fractured by a golf club swung by a schoolmate, Buckingham Palace said.
Prince William, who is second in line to the throne, will suffer no permanent damage from the injury, said a palace spokewoman, speaking on condition of anonymity.
London’s tabloid newspapers lambasted Prince Charles for not spending more time at his son’s bedside.
″42 Mins (minutes): That’s all Charles can spare for Wills,″ headlined The Sun, Britain’s largest-selling newspaper
https://apnews.com/article/b01bbc8200c4d8756ff70b7b9b8f9f5e
I mentioned the HBO show 'the Prince' in an earlier post (11.34 am) and am just as appalled as you are.
There is a petition to cancel Gary Janetti's new show http://chng.it/7RszCYh8Wj
I agree the secret journey should be more ambitious, but I had to factor in their laziness and cheapness.
That said, it could be that the Sussex camp will be forced to reveal the broader richness of their true extensive journey around California when more dazzled common LA and San Francisco folk speak out about their kindness on their grand Rover tour into West Hollywood and beyond. I heard they even gave a seal mouth to mouth resuscitation in the bay.
Can you image if there was a cartoon about an invisible baby Archie? The Duo would be livid and victim Zoom screaming all over the place.
Changing gears, just found this article from the Sun. I can’t tell if the entire thing was meant to be a satire, or if grip and drip really propose to do this… But check out the picture of the “snowflake medal”...ROFL!
Whoops, it would help to include the link.
Loved the Montecito tour and Maneki the thought of the Duo travelling the Amtrak (upper level of course, not the lower level near the restrooms). Clear out the car!
The Duo Gongs!
So re The Sun article that @Hikari posted, does this mean in addition to the honors (no u, as we are in the US now), that King Meghan and Queen Hairy will be hosting garden parties as well? Madam can swish her way all though the crowds, waving away the little people as the bow DEEPLY to the rightful heirs of the United Kingdom. What would they serve at their festive affairs?
I guess next, they will have a Trooping of the Color (perhaps on Madam's birthday) and will also create space on their calendars for receiving ambassadors and royalty from other countries.
Only if Grip is loaned a tiara by an LA jewelry company
The "Raindrop Award" will compete with the Raspberrries!
Prince William now awards The Earthshot Prize worth 50 million pounds.
What do Just Harry and Madam have to offer? Will this be done over Zoom. Will Harry dress up in his uniform, get out the sword and knight all those who kneel before him and his dutiful Queen?
What will the letters be? BLM (biggest liar like Meghan)? RUoK? MBE (money buys everything)?
I just love the brass neck of these useless offensive nitwits.
Please, nominate me for a top award from a lower-rung escort in a trim-it-yourself wig, and a pouting whiner. I t will mean so much. But I insist on having my photo taken with the medal AND their adorable genius baby Archie.
If I never heard of/from either of mm them ever again, it would be too soon.
--------
I think creating anything mocking Prince George is cruel. He looks like he's a sensitive little guy. That just breaks my heart.
Do you think The Duo are writing the USPS (United States Postal Service), as we speak. To submit their design for a new stamp?
A white profile of Madam (wearing a wig topped with a tiara), golden background with the letters M R (Meghan Rex) on either side of her head. That would be for the standard 1st class postage or perhaps she wants an extra special class, Superior class postage.
They could also issue Christmas stamps. Meghan holding a baby (scrambling to get away) with a star in the sky over her head while wearing a tiara.
The Duo Honors is on par with those titles one can purchase for a small fee. One is better off just buying a lady or lord title ($44.99 and up depending on what level aristocracy one desires) from the Principality of Sealand (an abandoned tower built off the coast of England in international waters).
Oh, I must look that up. I would like to create my own title. When I was doing fair management things, some teenaged 4H and FFA members came to me and asked me if I was the barn manager. I told them no, I am the barn Goddess, and I am the supreme ruler of all I survey. My word is law, and there is no appeal. (Which was true, since I was also on the Board.) They had a T-shirt printed with my name and title (Goddess of the _____ Barn). I think I would like to have a new title: Goddess of the Orion Spur of the Milky Way, Beneficent Ruler and Protector of the Righteous, Merciless Executioner of the Evil, and Composter of Bad Souls, Manure, and Karma. If they charge by the letter, I may have to settle for Goddess First Class.
Lady SwampWoman, The best part though, Mr. SwampMan would have to bow and scrap to you. No more picking up his socks! You could also issue annual awards (who did the dishes the fastest, who was the nicest to you, who purchased the best present for you) all while wearing a tiara, sash, ugly green dress with hat and stripper heels.
@SwampWoman,
Lady SwampWoman, The best part though, Mr. SwampMan would have to bow and scrap to you. No more picking up his socks! You could also issue annual awards (who did the dishes the fastest, who was the nicest to you, who purchased the best present for you) all while wearing a tiara, sash, ugly green dress with hat and stripper heels.
Heh. I don't pick up SwampMan's socks because I HAVE to, it's because otherwise I would be scraping my head on the ceiling from walking on a huge deep carpet of stinky socks because God knows that when they hit the floor, they no longer exist for him and, as far as he is concerned, they disappear into an alternate universe and magically reappear clean and matched. Well. Maybe I do have to for my own mental well-being, but it is entirely self-inflicted. There are probably psychiatrists that I could pay a wheelbarrow of money to so that I won't care if I'm walking on a pile of stinky socks. It does seem to me to be more cost and time efficient just to pick them up and drop them in the laundry basket since the only one that it bothers is me.
He really has much more to put up with from me. I seem to attract stray dogs, cats, horses, injured wildlife, poultry, etc. I don't go get them, they just find their way here.
I rather like the sound of "Lady Musty Syphone"
Lady SwampWoman,
Are you okay?
The Stinky Socks That We Share.
I also have this problem (with the one who sits in the chair most of the day). Perhaps, our eminence The Duchess of Montecito, can help us. As she so wrote in her stratospheric essay in the NYT, not only does she pick up crayons, she looks for missing socks. Perhaps if we wrote to her in the appropriate fancy script or visited her on the appointed day that peasants do such things, she would grace us with the wisdom of the young royale.
Lady Musty Syphone,
Every stunt these two pull off makes the UK monarchy look like it is stuck at the top of a castle keep, surrounded by the evil Duo and their sugar knights who have managed to not only cross the moat, but shoot flaming arrows at the heart of the royal family.
The cheap, tarty second court is treasonous--the mockery it makes of the family and all aristocratic institutions is poisonous.
I wonder why it's so important to them to have those titles stripped. What's their end game?
The cheap, tarty second court is treasonous--the mockery it makes of the family and all aristocratic institutions is poisonous.
Well, I suppose that I could make my way to the ramparts to boil some oil to Help repel the invaders (or to deep fry a turkey). I find, however, to my chagrin, that I'm actually supposed to drop the boiling oil from the machicolations. What a terrible breach of etiquette that would have been.
Lady SwampWoman,
Wow! I had to go look up that word, machicolations. Did you know that some attackers, especially those holding siege to a fort or castle would also throw feces and rancid animal parts into the castle, in addition to flaming arrows? The intent was to spread disease and hasten the collapse of the defenders.
Agreed the Queen and especially Charles are looking weak in all of this. I think the duo needs the drama of a possible title strip to sell their documentary because they are boring on their own.
I take heart in thinking that if they go through with the "awards" well, it really doesn't mean much. Who are they representing? Just themselves. Can you picture Oprah giving out "Opies"? No, well they'd be better received (and would probably include a cash component) than anything from Grip and Drip (no cash, just glass or brass).
And is there really any prestige in getting an award from someone who hasn't done anything of substance?
Kind of feels like a Miss Congeniality.
If HM doesn’t strip Braindrop and Braindrip of their titles, I think it’s fine the way the grifters are acting. It certainly does keep the media from focusing on P Andrew’s sex-trafficking with Maxwell and Epstein. THAT is way more damaging than anything the pseudo-Hollywood royals could ever do. This emphasis on them keeps it all off Andrew, that’s their real value!
My gracious, that reminds me that I read today that the CEO of Central Jet Charter was arrested for trafficking a 12 and 14-year-old girl for sex across state lines. Epstein may be gone, but the demand is there and being filled.
There were a LOT more important people than Andrew that had dealings with Epstein (who didn't kill himself). Andrew and Fergie had a lot of financial problems. I think that if there were any intentional crimes committed, they were likely to be financial in nature.
While my knowledge of castle offense and defense is via old Hollywood movies (and we all know how historically accurate THOSE aren't!), I do believe that some of the invaders inserted heads and dead bodies that died of plague or smallpox via catapult across the fortress walls. DANG it! I'm now going to have to go to bed and spend part of tomorrow researching medieval biological warfare.
Maybe the ' award winners ' would get a somehow preserved signed banana, that they could proudly display on the mantle in the sitting room.
How about some cookies with woke slogans in icing across them? Maybe some famous banana nut bread?
The Harkles are not invited to ANY awards show and ceremony this year (or ever) and so their reaction is to have their own awards show?
Of course it is!
Awards shows are loss leaders, so I hope Meghan understands she won’t be making any money on it. What, is the Time 100 Zoomerang not enough for their ego or pocketbook?
Lol. I’m getting Harry and Meghan idea and media fatigue. It’s like, omg would you just shut. Up. Already?
Anyone else?
I like the Golden Banana award idea. Inscription is extra.
And SwampWoman I've got to agree re Andrew and Fergie. My guess is he may have suspected but did not know for sure if the girls were underage but in no way did he procure (thereby trafficking) them. Fergie is an easy target for financial shenanigans as she is always in debt.
Shall we try to come up with an appropriate name?
I like the "Archies"
or the "Golden Bananas",
or the "Golden Drip" (wait, that sounds like what she did in the bushes of Africa).
All of which wold be accompanied by a glass of green juice and some avocado toast.
Love your banana prize idea.
I suspect however, the major award winners are sure to believe they will be getting a suitcase full of cash if they select the right deal.
I can picture it now, in Madam's head she is designing her grand entrance from the back of the auditorium, as she sashays down the aisle with all of the adoring faces, looking at HER, bathed in the light, wowed by her designer dress and tiara, accompanied by the usher prince.
I don't know what it's like in the US, but over here all hell breaks loose if somebody makes a slip of the tongue and uses the wrong pronoun. Like all true narcissists, some people are always on the look out for an opportunity to take offence.
(When I had short hair and was in mountain kit, I was not infrequently assumed, from a distance, to be male. Now, my husband has an even better head of hair than I [thanks to hiding away from the hairdresser, I have a straggly pageboy bob] and we are sometimes addressed as `Ladies'. We think it's hilarious and always seek to reassure the person that it's OK and try to ease their embarrassment.)
I read this link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9024607/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-launch-awards-rivaling-Queens-gongs.html
It included these three paragraphs:
The awards scheme will be run by Duke and Duchess's Archewell foundation - which they first tried to trademark back in March.
However, lawyers decided the application was unclear and lacked a signature - and they couple were given six months to send another application through.
A second set of forms was filed last week and they are now under review.
Which means it's technically a non-story, which in turn explains why the bulk of the article is about the Queen's honors rather than anything Mr. and Mrs. Windsor came up with themselves.
Can you please help keep any worrisome, unpleasant and off-topic discussion of the pandemic out of this blog on Meghan, Harry and the Royals? I don't understand why this poster continues to bring the topic up when she could post about covid-19 elsewhere.
............
SwampWoman said...
How are people reacting to the idea of getting the COVID-19 vaccine? I wouldn't be able to get it until mid summer at the earliest. I am reading with interest people slugging it out, so to speak, on online forums about whether or not to get the vaccine. A lot of people are worried about unintended side effects due to the rushed nature of the vaccine and that nobody really knows how long the immunity will last, both from the vaccine and acquired from catching the disease.
December 7, 2020 at 7:34 AM
And maybe the Harkles understand this and are actually counting on their second application being turned down just like their first. Then they could say they had a great dream and could have launched the next Nobels, but the mean, horrible trademark people blocked their path. (Always someone else's fault, eh, Mr. and Mrs. Windsor?)
The coverage of the "story" in the DM amounts to absolutely nothing. I can't see why the article was even run. We learn nothing about the Harkles' vision and plans (charitably assuming they have any at all) and everything about why their application was rejected. It doesn't inspire much confidence in them. They sent in a form without a signature? How careless can an entire (supposed) team be?
On the other hand, we do get an information dump on the Queen's honors!
I can only conclude that the Harkles had already given up on the "Archie Awards" but needed to keep their names in the news, especially with the successful launch of the Cambridges' Royal Train Tour. And reasoning that bad publicity is better than no publicity, they settled on this. At least there's some reflected glory from the Queen's honors to remind all the readers that they are still royal!
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are set to launch their own set of awards to reward individuals, charities and companies, reports claim.
The new awards are set to rival the Queen's honours list and will celebrate those the couple feel champion their favourite causes.
'rival the Queen's honours list'! As if! Can anybody be that deluded? I think they can hand out chocolate medals, eBay and Amazon sell them in packs of 10, for instance.
So who will be the recipient of one of these GRIFTA awards? (can't take the claim for that title, either I saw it in the DM comments or on Lipstick Alley)
Greta (not that fake one who showed up Harry so spectacularly)
Do you think there will be any true humanitarian's in their list or just those of the Hollywood variety?
Possibly a real philanthropist who donates BIG money rather than a tenner a month to the Mayhew
Obviously the Sussex Squad will be scrambling for an award as it seems they won't donate to charity unless they get a public thank you from the charity as they think they are so benevolent and deserving and who better to pat them on the back than their two chosen Messiahs
Will Harry give MM an award for being the Kindest Kind Person Ever Ever along with the Biggest Victim of All-time Ever Ever or the Biggest Most Trolled Person Ever?
Will he be wearing his military medals whilst anointing the recipients with their Golden Banana Award complete with MM's calligraphy? 'Are You OK?' 'You Are Loved'...
Well we knew they were planning something to take the light from the Cambridges Royal Train Tour but I didn't realise it would be quite as laughable
@SwampWoman - I'm looking forward to getting the vaccine, I'm in my early 50's so will have to wait awhile but I live with my 85 year old dad who normally refuses the yearly flu jab but he will go for this vaccine when it's offered to him. I've not got any qualms about the speed in which it was produced and whilst not much has changed in our lives on a day to day basis. I work from home so only go out to a supermarket and very occasionally to a pub or restaurant. We live in South London and our lockdown ended last week so shops are open again as well as pubs & restaurants but we're not planning on visiting any really but that is probably more to do with the cold weather, not having a car but not wanting to travel on public transport. Its about an hours walk in each direction to go to the pub my dad likes, and we normally have no problem doing the walk, dad has his fitbit and likes to get his steps in but it's just too cold and grim to want to do it. We normally go to visit my sister in Italy for Xmas but they are on lockdown so that's off for this year.
https://www.ukuleleorchestra.com/index.php/upcoming-events/
Maybe the ' award winners ' would get a somehow preserved signed banana, that they could proudly display on the mantle in the sitting room.
The winners get their signed banana and are then told by Megs --- "Thank you, now piss off, you have served your purpose. Don't linger, the room is getting quite stuffy and Archie needs some fresh air."
Maybe the Harkles could buy from here
They hsve award trophies for every type
Welcome to Trophy Store
Welcome to the Trophy Store website
Bespoke Trophies
Our industry leading website enables you to choose, personalise and purchase awards of your choice from the comfort of your computer screen. Upon receipt of an order our staff will customise your order to your requirements. As part of this process our engravers offer the very best in traditional engraving on metal plaques and medals. Finally all products are individually quality checked prior to packing and dispatch. We endeavour to process and dispatch your personalised
https://www.trophystore.co.uk/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoZLo1tq77QIVWOvtCh0tZwMCEAAYASAAEgIbXvD_BwE
TODAY, 10:07
HARRY 'ENCOURAGED' MEGHAN TO WRITE ABOUT HER MISCARRIAGE
Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl claims that Harry said Meghan’s honest account would help other families going through the same thing.
Speaking to True Royalty TV’s The Royal Beat, she said, “Harry said (to Meghan) ‘I think you should write about this miscarriage because if we can help another family going through this then it is a reason to do it’."
“That is why they did it. You look at Harry and some of the things that he has said you would never expect from a senior royal.
“When have we ever read a royal write like that? I thought it was incredibly brave
If I was offered a vaccine I would run to it losing my slippers. Heck I would pay my own money for it if it means I can move around again.
The only thing I would wait for the Oxford one that reportedly has fewer side effects and is easier to transport and administer.
Harry has lost the last remnants of decency. He can't demand absolute privacy first and then demand public compassion via pouring his family's intimate affairs to the media.
One is either private or attention hungry. Cant be both.
If the Harkles just issue a Harry and Meghan award this will be a laughing stock.
I don't think this is serious, probably just a rumour for a laugh.
There's one possibility on the site Sylvia suggested - for drama:
https://www.trophystore.co.uk/medals-and-ribbons/drama-medals
The masks seem very appropriate - that for Comedy might be laughing but it's doing it with a sneer.
As an antidote, if you can get BBCNews24 live, you can see a short film of the Cambridges departing from Euston Station for Edinburgh- a pop group is playing and there's a clip of Catherine's back view as she sways to the music. Not v. dignified - but so human! I love it!
Completely upstages the Harkles.
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Funko-Pop-Royal-Royal-W2-Duke-Duchess-Sussex-2-Pack/164863293
I wonder if they plan on throwing their award's out the Amtrak window's as they pass by? This way they can claim they had more stops and more awards than any other royal.
@Crumpet, the “usher prince” is now part of my Nutty vocabulary jointing grasping bunt.
Has anyone else here seen the Will Farrell comedy movie, Blades of Glory? At the end, the duo that wins the gold medal for pairs ice dancing raises their left arms and shoot off into the night sky through the arena roof in a burst of sparkles. I imagine their ceremony will be much the same, only the Harkles will fly off to solve the world’s Christmas tree and wig-shipping issues.
I wish we could award year-end Nutty gongs for their most stupid heinous acts of 2020.
Worst Zoom, Worst Lecture, Worst Clothing Choice, Bad Hair Day, Most Egregious Archie Lie, Biggest Insult to the Crown, etc.
I tend to agree with your thought their anger about the Constitutional Monarchy was the impetus for the duo’s bad behavior pattern.
M was stupid enough to think she could become queen via sandbagging William or even Charles, which failed. She then thought she and H would win the invisible King by popularity contest by feigning laughter, casting doe eyes, purchasing bots and PR stunts, and buying a baby. She did not realize the course of the monarchy is not directed by Instagram follower counts. Furious about this, and with the fake baby information on the docket, they fled.
Narcissists cannot ever be wrong, so the mud flinging and crazy behavior commenced from Canada and California.
The lunacy ramps ever upward as the constitutional monarchy remains fixed in place, the Cambridges move smoothly on increasingly beloved and proving themselves worthy of future titles. M, who gets what she wants, must be livid and increasingly erratic. Her usher prince must be pouting more furiously than ever, as he cannot give his substitute mummy what she desires, and she rages day and night, not a queen consort, aging out of Hollywood, ignored by celebrities. Cash runs low unless the backers exist.
William must realize his brother and his wife are truly mad as snakes by this point.
More Harkle desperate measures will probably unroll by Christmas, each as hopeless and silly or baldly offensive as the next. She will not understand why her rage tantrums are not working on an ancient monarchy construct, because she is unintelligent, and mentally unwell.
A more historically nuanced view would be that Lady Di's age at engagement was for the time perfectly normal (nineteen - I was engaged to a seventeen year old still at school - I now shudder) as was her age at marriage (the average age of marriage for a woman at the beginning of the seventies was 20.8 years and I suppose children came soon after).
In short because we no longer do it like that that somehow Lady Di had no idea what she was doing and was perforce coerced. I suppose you will not want to learn of the pressures on young men back in the day to marry the first woman who would even consider smiling at them as they watched the stock of marriageable women diminish such that by the time the remaining single women were thirty they were either the weird or batted for the opposition.
One should endeavour to avoid judging the past by the present - a very common habit in this wokest of years..
@ Swamp Woman and everybody
If I was offered a vaccine I would run to it losing my slippers. Heck I would pay my own money for it if it means I can move around again.
The only thing I would wait for the Oxford one that reportedly has fewer side effects and is easier to transport and administer.
It was an idle curiosity question on my part; I won't be offered the choice to accept or decline a vaccine before late summer. SwampMan may have the choice by late spring. I wonder if they will be vaccinating all people, or just people that have not tested positive for the virus? I haven't heard that discussion here.
We are going to test again tomorrow before we go to his parents' home (four hours away) to do some minor repairs, hopefully over the weekend if the results are back in time. It would be nice to be able to visit senior family members without getting tested first. I don't know when (or if) his parents will be vaccinated; the folks in long-term care* will be next in line after the medical people, I *think*, but every state will set their own priorities.
*Long-term care can be senior citizens, adults with medical conditions in which they cannot care for themselves such as traumatic brain injury or paralysis, adults with developmental disorders unable to care for themselves, people with severe mental illness, and perhaps the incarcerated population.
I think that people at that time were having their first child at 23 or 24, so Diana was still quite young for the time.
Thanks for asking. : ) Vaccine. I will get it as soon as it is available. My state is supposed to start vacs for health care residents and nursing home residents this week. That will take until the end of Jan. Our doctor friends say we’ll be licked up until about May. Pfitzer (sp?) has tested over 30,000 people. That is a good sample, but not enough time to see ongoing problems, if any. We’re being told the vaccine is goid for 6 months or so. We’ll see.
@Opus
I was 28 when I got married—old for the time. My grandmother worried so much that I was single. (I though I was keeping her alive by being single.) She unfortunately died a few weeks before I met my husband. I think I was the oldest mom, but one, in her class at school. I shudder to think who I might have stupidly married at age 19-20.
My daughter’s class, not my grandmother's.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9026767/PIERS-MORGAN-Duke-Duchess-Sussex-Wokie-award-goes-Meghan-Harry.html
"God how the senior royals must rue the day Harry the Dim swaggered into Soho House where Markle had craftily and cunningly positioned herself like a piece of cheese in an elaborate trap."
Harry is suing Associated Newspapers for libel. Filed on November 27. Newsweek and the Observer have the first bits of the story.
The sixth Harkle lawsuit in a year, as one notes.
Raising a baby, running a foundation, running awards schemes, producing masses of top quality content for Netflix and WaterBear, gardening, charity pop ups, running a mansion, cosmetic surgery, helping the youth, and pursuing six lawsuits!
Such impressive energy. It is like watching two older ladies working six slot machines in Las Vegas! Something’s gotta pay!
Hikari describes Lady Di as 'so young'. This would of course be the modern view, young to be engaged, young to be married, young to have a child . . .A more historically nuanced view would be that Lady Di's age at engagement was for the time perfectly normal (nineteen - I was engaged to a seventeen year old still at school - I now shudder) as was her age at marriage (the average age of marriage for a woman at the beginning of the seventies was 20.8 years and I suppose children came soon after).
In short because we no longer do it like that that somehow Lady Di had no idea what she was doing and was perforce coerced. I suppose you will not want to learn of the pressures on young men back in the day to marry the first woman who would even consider smiling at them as they watched the stock of marriageable women diminish such that by the time the remaining single women were thirty they were either the weird or batted for the opposition.
One should endeavour to avoid judging the past by the present - a very common habit in this wokest of years..
To add context to my comment, Diana was my senior by only some four years and a few months. I was 15 years old and it was the summer before my sophomore year of high school when my mother and I arose at 4AM, Ohio time to watch her nuptials.
You are correct in saying that historically speaking, people used to get engaged and married and produce children at very young ages compared to the current trend. The ages for these milestones have been trending upwards as more women pursue university educations and careers. But we can't lay this trend to 'women's lib' alone, as I feel that perhaps you are doing . . record numbers of young men as well are pursuing education beyond high school, because a lot of the jobs in the trades and manufacturing and others that didn't require anything beyond a high school diploma or not even that have largely evaporated. The generation(s) that are in the marriageable age category--the Millennials and the post-Millennials--are facing the grimmest economic picture since the Great Depression. I have read numerous studies that put the number of young people from 18-34 years of age living with parents rather than with partners or on their own at the highest number since 1940 . .over 32%. That's nearly 1 in 3. And this figure is several years old. I suppose with the current economic meltdown still further, it's even higher. (https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/05/24/479327382/for-first-time-in-130-years-more-young-adults-live-with-parents-than-partners). Young people starting out in life have always faced economic challenges--I graduated college in the late 1980s, and it wasn't any picnic then, either--but it's particularly bad now. Even worse than the early '70s when you were in this age group.
A university education was out of the question for Diana, as was a career in the ballet, or any sort of career, really. Of course, she was an Earl's daughter, so a good, early marriage was expected of her as her only path forward in life. I think Diana grew up in her family hearing that she was the 'dumb but pretty one' and I believe it was said many times in her hearing, "Thank God Diana's beautiful; she'll marry well." So it becomes a chicken-and-egg question: Was Diana's lack of academic or other achievement due to an intrinsic lack of ability or did she learn early that she could coast along doing next to nothing because with her face and her father's position, she'd be guaranteed a good marriage and could just faff about shopping and whatever else Sloane Rangers do until then?
That flat she shared with the three other girls was purchased by Earl Spencer for her, and so she didn't even need to earn money for rent. That brief, happy period only lasted for a year and a half or so before Charles entered her life and swept her away from all that. The little jobs she had til then . . .a few days at the nursery school; a few afternoons as an au pair . . were simply to fill Diana's time before her Prince came along, whoever he was . .and he turned out to be an actual Prince, go figure. Di's childhood nickname had been 'Duch', so she'd always expected to marry high, it seems. Like Cinderella, she nabbed the highest prize in the land. Great luck . . .coupled with advantageous placement in life, having grown up with the Royal children as near neighbors in Norfolk and firmly in that circle . .plus the dedicated scheming of an equally advantageously placed grandmother in Lady Fermoy, who just happened to be lady-in-waiting and bestie of Queen Mum. I can imagine those two heads together, plotting, from the time Diana was small. Not for Diana and Charles together per se--but it was firmly decided years before the fact that a Spencer girl *would* marry into the House of Windsor. Sarah had her shot and blew it, so then the baton passed to Diana as the only hope left for the family.
I can't imagine any greater pressure being brought to bear on *any* young man in the kingdom to wed than was greater than was applied to Charles. He was 32 years old and the efforts to find him a bride had been ongoing for a decade. He wasn't in love with Diana, anybody could see that from the engagement interview, even those who wanted to believe it. I can't castigate Charles too harshly for bowing to the pressure; who could stand up to the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the expectation of an entire nation? Philip is a very . . persuasive character. I feel that there was perhaps quite a bit more to his 'encouragement' of his son to 'either propose to her or let her go'. Maybe 'Either propose to her or else . . ." variety.
Charles did seem 'old' for a groom at the time, for someone in his position, but that was mostly on account of the age gap with his nearly-teenage bride being so great. Harry was a whole year older than his father when *he* got married, and yet sugars insist on still calling him 'a young father'. Neither than young, nor a father if you ask me, but moving on . .
We should have all seen it was doomed from the off. We all know it was doomed 'now' of course, but we didn't then. People like to deride Charles's intellect, but he is a thinking man. A Cambridge graduate, does all right at speechmaking in a number of foreign languages, widely travelled and personal friends with minds such as Laurens van der Post. In all senses, an homme du monde. What, beyond breeding purposes did he have in common with his bride, nearly a generation younger and with the equivalent, if we are being charitable, of a 10th grade education? Barely that, as Diana failed to pass a single O-level. Summering in Norfolk . . and, that's about it.
If they became simply `Prince and Princess Henry of Wales' she could well grab the definite article to be THE P & P of W' - and she'd call herself `The Princess of Wales' on the assumption that her American supporters wouldn't understand the difference.
We can put nothing past her; to me, she's `The Princess of Pee', out of the tale of the `Princess and the Pee'
The Fairytale Wedding of the Century assumed monolithic proportions that swallowed up the two principals at the heart of it as soon as they had gotten engaged. Charles was resigned to his fate . . Heirs for England was his principal duty and he would fulfill it. But he also retained the privilege of princes to play away on the side, which he did. Diana's expectations of her Princess wedding seem a bit bourgeois now, if she really believed that she and Charles were Twue Wuve based on . . 10? awkward social encounters prior to engagement? Considering how debauched the aristocracy is and the proof of it in her own broken home growing up, Diana seemed like a real naif going into it . .but I am willing to cut a 19-year-old some slack here, even if that seems like old enough to know better to previous generations. We've learned since that Diana had grave reservations about going through with it, and wanted to call it off several times. There was the infamous 'Too late now Duch--your face is on the tea towels' conversation with her sisters, and the wedding day itself . . which, depending on which account you read was either 'the happiest day of Diana's life--I was so in love with my husband!' or conversely, the worst day of her life because Charles had invited his mistress to the wedding and the bride had to walk right past her. It would seem that it couldn't be 'Both' of these at once, but in the mind of a mentally unstable 20-year-old under incredible stress, it could be.
Ultimately, the marriage was not a complete failure. It brought forth William, and I don't think anyone, least of all Catherine or his children, would say the world would be a better place had he not been born. I used to include his brother in there as a fruit of the Wales marriage, but he's certainly turned into a strange and bitter fruit, hasn't he? I will stop short of saying that it would have been better had Harry not been born . . .but I will say without apology, and maybe . .Can I get an Amen? . . that we'd certainly all be better off, particularly Harry and the Child Who May Not Exist Known as Archie if Thomas Markle and Doria Raglund had never met and procreated.
I do think Meghan thinks she should be queen, absolutely. She wants to flaunt it for a power high, and to have access to jewels & castles. Maybe Soho House thought they could turn all the grand BRF properties into high dollar hotels? They seem that crass.
Having been slapped away from the tiara case, she angrily flew west to try to start a rival court. She still doesn’t appreciate that Harry is the royal. She probably does want a princess title, not understanding the stylings, She is probably shocked to be shut out of Hollywood and with Harry seeing she is a nobody there, she is scrambling in extra rage.
She will jump up and down on this branch until it snaps off
PS — Celt Views has quite a good video on YT about normal Harry and what M allegedly did in college to get a serious sorority shunning.
I think you're on to something. My guess now is that these awards are "for sale". The more you donate, the bigger the "award". This is one way to generate income when no one will hire you to act or give a speech.
@AnT at 3:57 "I wish we could award year-end Nutty gongs for their most stupid heinous acts of 2020. "
It's 2020. We can do anything virtually. Please give it a start with your choice and/or award for Sparkle Farkle behavior in 2020.
@SwampWoman. I too will happily get in line for a vaccine. Perhaps some research or a frank talk with a trusted medical physician (or two, one from each side of the debate) will help you decide. Having several friends and/or their relatives pass from Covid--its not the way I would like to die (I want Mr. Musty and children--the Mustlettes-- holding my hand as I go).
My nomination for the Golden Banana this year: Fergie--for actually tweeting something worth plagerising
My nomination for the Queen's Honors this year: Portia (Ellen's spouse), Priyanka, Jane Goodall, Liza Minelli for all having the courage to say they didn't see Archie or are not good friends of Grip and Drip
My nomination for the worst Grip and Drip moment of 2020--the cemetery pap walk. Hands down the most tone deaf, vulgar publicity stunt, I have ever witnessed in my life.
Others?
At the time I went to university, (the New Morality had been thought of but nobody had got around to the Permissive Society) reliable contraception didn't exist, beyond saying `No'. One had to demonstrate conclusively to the Family Planning Association that one was indeed engaged to be married, assuming that one could discover their business hours and when they were able to answer the phone...
Burning with desire was a great stimulus to early marriage.
A more historically nuanced view would be that Lady Di's age at engagement was for the time perfectly normal (nineteen - I was engaged to a seventeen year old still at school - I now shudder) as was her age at marriage (the average age of marriage for a woman at the beginning of the seventies was 20.8 years and I suppose children came soon after).
Indeed, many of my graduating class graduated and promptly jumped into their starter marriages (because I don't think any of them are still married to the original model). Our first was born when I was 20, so I don't make excuses for her "young age" for her bad judgment. I note that she was making increasingly bad decisions when she died. Whether she had an injury to her forehead as a baby/child that damaged her frontal lobes/prefrontal cortex or whether it was an inherited dysfunction, her executive function was quite faulty.
There are programs that claim to be able to rehabilitate those with executive function disorders due to damage of some sort; I'm not sure how efficacious they are. Rather than hand out spurious awards to just show those pesky Royal Family Members and the Hollywood Glitterati that they are just as important, perhaps H&M should enroll in one of those programs. But, since EFD (Executive Function Disorders) involve things such as planning, insight, and learning from mistakes, they probably will not.
The article alleges Harry had failed to maintain contact with the Royal Marines after formally stepping away from his role in March.
I had not been thinking of 'women's lib'. I might have added that the 20.8 years average marriage age of the early 1970s was younger by about four years than the average marriage age of fifty years earlier. These are British averages.
With hindsight one always has 20/20 vision and that the Royal marriage was sure to fail now seems obvious yet at the time I was at least relieved that the Prince of Wales was not marrying any of the mid-European Princesses whose names were being bandied about as potential brides. Lady Di may have been a sloanie rather than like Camilla of the hunting shooting and fishing inclination but she was English with all that that implies whereas some Lithuanian Princess would have miserably failed the Brexit test - with endless cultural misunderstandings, diplomatic rows and statements from such as Frau Merkel or Macron to niggle the government non-stop much as presently Markle is a thorn in everyone's side. It was not apparent to me either that Lady Di was anything more than of average looks - surely the hair colouring - or was it highlights came from a bottle. I did not watch the wedding on tv though I seem to recall that the government gave us the day off work.
As I said I look back on my own engagement with disbelief - I was the one being given the ultimatum... and foolishly... but you have to understand the various pressures I was under..... surely it wouldn't be too bad... I wasn't that keen on the girl... and yet... I still (in all truth) even now sometimes wake at night in a cold sweat.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, these two are going to bankrupt themselves on the legal system.
Agreed they are bankrupting themselves on the legal system but I have to wonder if something in the Megix compact requires the Palace or Charles to foot any and all legal bills (probably any and all bills for a year?).
But the above poster is correct. Business partners/investors will thin k twice before joining forces with a legitious person(s).
If you are trying to be financially independent, why on the earth are you doing everything possible to chase investors/contributors/partners away?
You can't make this stuff up.
At the time of Diana’s death, I was working with a woman who was nearly her age, a year older I believe. She told me her sisters, mother, aunt and friends joined the wedding throngs in the road that day. She thought it was silly and stayed at home. She said that at that time, she viewed Diana as a naive lamb, sacrificing her life like a girl thrown into a volcano. She could not imaging marrying at her age, at that time, before having adventures, or finishing school. She said she felt contempt for whoever had made the marriage happen. She then said, she eventually realized it was Diana who‘d made it happen, and with new eyes felt that both Charles and Diana had been thrown into volcano together that day.
Strangely, he is claiming they wiretapped him and are intercepting his voicemails. Paranoia. Needs lithium and mental health experts, not a team of lawyers.
I am struggling to think of an entity, website, or business around the duo who they have NOT threatened legal actions, demands, or flat out sued.
Maybe this is how they plan to earn a living; Exploit others. Right now they are exploiting Charles’ funding. It’s interesting that they feel exploited by the papers (or deep pockets) and fail to see the irony of wanting to be influencers and written about and antagonizing the press, yet want to be taken seriously as a professional couple providing myriad business services.
I will vote aye for all your nominations. Excellent.
My nomination for the Archistotle Prize in Logic goes to: Netflix co-CEO Reed Hastings, for thinking H&M are unemployed unskilled ex members of the crown, and The Crown makes Netflix money, so H&M will make Netflix money.
LOLOLOL. "Archistotle Prize". Can I nominate you for Latte of the Day?
Another boredom chaser, naming each prize!
I challenge all nutties to come up with other gems on the level of Archistotle
I nominate Drip for the "ArchiEinstein" prize for intellect for his performance in the Chunga Changa telephone call.
I bet Harry and Meghan Markle would like to stab Piers Morgan with a sprig of Holly. Like him or not, he absolutely rails on the Sussexes. Piers's articles are well read in the UK, America and abroad. It does seems like when he goes after one of their stupid ideas, the idea seems to tank. Hopefully these idiotic awards will have the same fate. Their Own Awards...hahaha the absolute hubris.
Yeah and as far as the Christmas Treelot Story? The SECOND I read the chill lad thing, I knew it was probably a statement given out by Scobie. Also, Meghan always likes to be told she is 'kind' Recurrant theme there. One thing about Meghan is that once you eye spy her ways, her repeated use of certain words, actions and patterns, you can figure her out easily. Well, we can at least!
Since I am a believer in the existence of Archie, I find it sad that they didn't bring him to the Tree Lot. They can't expect to raise a healthy child when he has zero friends, zero family and his life is spent with nannies in the confines of the Montecito grounds. Personally I believe that Meghan would sell or release pics of Arch in a minute but I think she knows that would infuriate Harry. She tried to put her toe in the water when she was up in Canada and she had those paps take pictures of her. You know....the ones where she is smiling at the camera, she is not the least surprised, and her security detail did not rush up to stop the paps. I believe, as I sit in this chair in this office, that Harry was PISSED about it. I don't think Harry wants access to Archie at all because you know,the flashbulbs give him PTSD. Meghan has agreed to this because well, it suits her in a way. Since the public never see him, the public wonders about him and so it creates fervor around him, which again, that suits Meghan. Also by deferring to Harry in that matter, she can get other things from him.
On a positive note, I think the Will and Kate train tour is so cute. I echo a poster about about the difference and tone W&K use that is so much more patable that H and Meg.
I was on the ITV site but it seemed to be Shippy who was doing much of the tweeting. Is he a double agent or has he seen which side his bread's buttered on?
Love your award nominations.
ArcheLit (Lit up, angry, high etc.)
The category I found most interesting in their list was literature. We have heard ad nauseum how they are so social justice, mental health, enviro warriors, but literature well, I guess, if you call FF and press releases as part of the literary cannon.
Does author Madam think she is right up their with Pulitzer Prize winners? I would certainly nominate her for the Mythopoeic Award (adult fantasy novel), apologies to C S Lewis.
I am sure Scoobie is ordering his glad rags for the ceremony and helping to decide with Soho House will be the awards venue.
PS Thank you @Spanner for the UK Ukulele Orchestra info!
Harry thinks by suing the media he is going to shut them up. Ha.
His neglect of the Royal Marines went to the periphery of the public mind because so much is going on; the idiot has just brought it back to the front news through his case.
Instead of working quietly to re-gain what is possible of his reputation and change the narrative, he is inviting more scrutiny to his behaviour.
I am looking forward to more articles citing facts of his dismal erratic actions.
The Duo must be using one of the most famous of worldwide law firms: Dewey, Cheatem & Howe, for this case (of Three Stooges fame).
Actually, I think this would be a great motto to add to the Sussex Coat of Arms.
@AnT @Puds. Thank you.
@AnT
Archistotle Prize, argh, perfect!
May I add the Archimeme’s Prize
for recycled water, Eurineka
The Golden D’rain
I would personally award Markle with the Most Lies Within the Shortest Time award. In no particular order:
"I did not cooperate with the book in any way, shape or form"
"My father doesn't own a cell phone"
"I wasn't aware my friends spoke to the People mag"
"I do not talk to the press"
"We will live in Canada"
"Nobody asked me if I was OK"
"I had no support from the Palace"
"I want my privacy!"
"My wedding brought billions into the UK coffers"
"That guy at Wimbledon was filming me"
"Paparazzi were following me everywhere"
"I didn't know anything about the royals"
"I didn't know who Harry was"
"I love the ring Harry gave me"
"We started dating in May..June...eh.."
"Hit the ground running"
"I paid for my own education"
"I speak French fluently and Spanish well"
"I spoke at UN"
"The Queen would celebrate my birthday"
"Kate would bake me a cake"
"Mile long legs"
"Care about the environment"
"I do not have a project with Vogue"
"Actress and Supermodel"
And the biggest whopper of all:
"I want to be a hardworking royal"
I think this the Liar Award of the Platinum level. Add a Plagiarism Award to this and we can call it a day.
Brilliant! That is all I can say!
Turn positivity into negative in the shortest time? Well, the HAMS
Copy everything from words to ideas? Only the HAMS
Biggest Liars? Well, folks, it looks like the HAMS again!
Spending the most on the ugliest clothes in the world? Dare she be named? Megs
And etc.
After all the breathless thanks, and copying yet another person, HRH Princess Beatrice, the HAMS were accidentally, really, no fun, hit by a lawsuit that loosened Just He’s brown contact lenses, and cut off the horse’s tail (stolen, but of course, by Just H, at the Windsor stables, when Archie was born at 1 year of age and walking!) Megs wears every day, to flick off the flies from herself. It was a fictional sword, of course.
"Singlehandedly modernising the Monarchy"
"I do not read what is written about me"
"More popular than the Queen"
"Whip smart"
"They never gave me a chance"
"We don't have tabloids in the USA"
Goodness, after I picked up my immediate memory about the most noticeable lies associated with Markle I am surprised anybody wants to deal with her at all. That's an absolute flood of porkies.
Thank you. I only hope more and more people everywhere can see what we can see.
Markle is a pathological lair and a hypocrite.
"Regarding tabloid reports that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are planning to launch an Archewell honours list to compete with the Queen, the Sussexes have put out a statement branding the story as FALSE:"
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a34892493/prince-harry-meghan-markle-dispute-awards-show-claims/
"So now they dispute the awards story? What the hell is going on with those two??"
I'm not convinced they are denying the story. They seem to be denying they intend to compete with the Queen. (As if they could)
According to the media the Archewell's intent to issue awards was stated in the court documents seen by the Sun. And knowing the Sun they checked what they saw with their own lawyers before running the story.
Scobie is simply no match for the Sun. He can bleat whatever he wants. He is pretty much discredited as the Markle's mouthpiece already.
I think this is a well calculated counter-attack by the media after the Markle's miscarriage article. Media is not going to let her get off the hook.
Always, always gotta keep the money wagon rolling if possible!
Yes, Diana lived on the Sandringham estate until they moved to Althorp House when her father inherited the Earldom. Diana wasn’t brought up with any of the royal family, her family knew and had close connections to the royals like a lot of aristocratic families do. Nor did she brag, she was simply a Spencer and came from one of the oldest English aristocratic families we have. Her family are more English and blue blooded than the Royal Family could ever be, because they have so much German ancestry.
I’ve personally never read anything about her expectation to be married to Andrew nor him giving her tips. Only her sister Sarah dated Charles, the others didn’t. Not sure where you have sourced your info from, but a lot seems factually incorrect.
@Christine wrote:
"So now they dispute the awards story? What the hell is going on with those two??"
I'm not convinced they are denying the story. They seem to be denying they intend to compete with the Queen. (As if they could)""
I'll add that these two often leak trial balloons via third parties to see public reactions. Same approach to their PR though in that instance they are deadly serious.
When it backfires due to negative public reaction then they usually deny the story directly, but couched in language that implies the media made up the story.
As for these awards; Pinky and The brain comes to mind.
Christine, yes that is an excellent theory. I, too, knew Meghan did the pap walk to test Harry (in a foreign country no doubt). Then the lawsuit when she realized she had an ‘angle’ to backstab them with to save herself (Narc behavior 101), ala a lawsuit regarding photos of Archie, it became a ‘I’m on your side Harry, ooooof course!’
Harry does have a level on control with her and I find it interesting. She preaches her dumb woke feminism but at the end of the day Harry is in charge. Even if he’s sinking the ship all the way to the bottom, blow, whiskey and and porn in tow. (I think Harry steps out on insufferable
Meghan in some way because I don’t think he finds her all that attractive from a mate and historical Harry-dating perspective.)
Ask Kim Kardashian. I swear she could give them pointers. Kim was and is widely despised. However, she has managed to build a million dollar empire. She sells tons of clothes and makeup and whatever else. She dances with the media and she uses whatever and whomever to her advantage for ex her children and the popularity of her brother in law Scott Disick and the possibility of a reunion between he and her sister Kourtney. But I am WAY digressing!
Wellll. The awards will be treated much like anything else they do. They will be ridiculed and comments for online articles will be full of negativity. They just keep hoping and throwing anything at the wall, but nothing sticks.
A woman I worked with briefly had connections to the outer circles of the British Aristocracy. When Charles and Diana's engagement was announced she was quite surprised. According to her, Diana was being groomed to marry Andrew. That was the word she used. Groomed.
According to the media the Archewell's intent to issue awards was stated in the court documents seen by the Sun. And knowing the Sun they checked what they saw with their own lawyers before running the story.
That's interesting! (in bold)
I posted Scooby Doo's tweet,(plus the article) because I came to read the blog and saw you all discussing the 'awards'... so thought you might like to see the Harkles denial.
Always worth a laugh. :)
I respectfully disagree with you.
According to the media the Archewell's intent to issue awards was stated in the court documents seen by the Sun. And knowing the Sun they checked what they saw with their own lawyers before running the story.
Christine said:
So they intend to have their bogus awards but they are just saying they won't compete with the Queen.
Always, always gotta keep the money wagon rolling if possible!
It was late at night (was it Saturday? All my days are running together) when I stumbled upon the Sun article. When I saw the picture of the 'snowflake medal' I thought somebody was having us on. Thought it was one of those fake/satirical articles such as we find in the Onion or the Borowitz Report. Or, it'd be an excellent blind for Blind Gossips annual April Fool's special. It's just so . . .out there. Even for the Sussexes. We go from 'commiserating with Meghan' over a devastating miscarriage to days later, ping-ponging to a 'happy happy families (sans Archie) trip to a Christmas tree lot (a tent in a parking lot somewhere near Montecito) . .at which we are treated to loads of head-scratching details . . Harry was mistaken for a tree lot employee? Oh, hahaha . .this couple is just so relatable!!!. I get mistaken for store employees quite frequently, but I worked retail for some 10+ years, and still have to wear a staff badge on a stretchy wristband, so I can see how people might make the error. But for Harry to go from Prince of the United Kingdom, and #6 to a throne to . .'scruffy but chill lad/tree lot employee working for minimum wage' . . .I mean, Ouch. Talk about comedown. We are supposed to laugh (with him, not at him) and think he's a great down-to-earth person on account of this? Was this (likely bogus) detail included to burnish the tale of the visit, that likely never happened? Surely people so very famous as Meg and Harry could arrange for a resplendent tree to be delivered by some minions to Chateau Mudslide? Because I'm confused about the transport of this tree they allegedly purchased . . did they strap it to the roof of the Escalade with bungee cords, or what?
This proposed 'honors list' smells to me like yet more PR spin to take a jab at the Royal family who has kicked them out. All these desperate little ploys to make it appear like they are creating the thing which they were *expressly* denied--Sussex Court West. They couldn't be arsed to fulfill their charitable and public duties as well-paid and cossetted senior royals . . but they are staging Remembrance Sunday 'events' and passing out 'honors' as boons from on high from 'Royal patrons'.
Receiving an award for 'Wokeness' from the King and Queen of Montecito Snowflakes is as appealing as the prospect of smelling like Johnny Depp, retained as the face of the Dior fragrance for men, 'Sauvage'. Who wants to smell like Johnny Depp? Dude looks like he hasn't had a full bath since 1993. Likewise, what prestige is there in getting a Wokie Golden Banana award from Dim and Dumber? I can't believe it's real. Just another of their bizarre stylings they do when high. Sending in the application form without signatures? Isn't this becoming a trend? They never manage to sign important paperwork. And why would any media outlet possibly know this detail unless it was fed to them directly?
They are both insane and spiraling rapidly down a drain.
Harry does have a level on control with her and I find it interesting. She preaches her dumb woke feminism but at the end of the day Harry is in charge. Even if he’s sinking the ship all the way to the bottom, blow, whiskey and and porn in tow. (I think Harry steps out on insufferable
Meghan in some way because I don’t think he finds her all that attractive from a mate and historical Harry-dating perspective.)
@jessica: Because he is in a marriage to a woman who likely has a profound case of narcissistic personality disorder, the devaluation stage of Harry probably began shortly after the wedding and surely three months later when she or her surrogate became pregnant.
He puts up with it because she has him totally physically and psychologically isolated from everything and everyone he has ever known. It ‘s not as if they moved down the street, or to another part of the UK, or even over the channel to western Europe. No, Meghan took him thousands of miles and several time zones away to California to complete what I and many believe is Meghan’s plan to snatch and grab a royal title and lock down a prince via a child and isolation to advance her selfish agenda.
I agree with you that Harry might be seeking outside contact, but you can bet Meghan is keeping tabs on him better than a WWII POW camp. During the summer as they were camping out at Tyler Perry’s house, Harry is said to have struck up a friendship with Adele, who by the way had just dropped 100 lbs. A blind either on CDAN or Blind Gossip that said Meghan had told Adele to stay away from Harry.
Meghan might only view Harry as an appendage and sperm donor, but even if she loathes him, as a narcissist, she would do everything in her considerable power to keep him from dumping her. Narcs prefer to do the dumping because they can’t accept rejection of any type, especially in any sort of public realm. It enrages them.
She will likely dump him and weave in some sort of victim narrative such as he abused her emotionally or never really supported the move to the US, leaving her to do everything while he sat by.
However.... It would be delicious if some day Harry drops the same bomb on Meghan that she dropped on Trevor by sending his ring back to her after whisking Archie back to the UK before she returns home from a Botox treatment.
The nuclear fallout from Meghan would blow across the US, the Atlantic, and all the way to London.
That "Archewell" award led me to a parallel with an ancient European title of Archduke, roughly meaning a "great" or "grand" duke. The person with this title was lower than an Emperor but greater than a simple duke. In other words, the son or male grandson of an Emperor.
What does it have to do with the Sussexes you ask? This - the use the Greek word ἄρχω (arkho) which means to lead, govern, rule. So, our dearest Duke and Duchess used the word meaning rule or govern to name their son as well as in the fund allegedly created to celebrate their little ducal son, and now want to award people for their "achievements" using this fund and this award. The ArchWell award - do you see? ArchDuke, ArchWell
What a piece of an absolute shameless grandiose mentality!
Why to stop at awards I wonder? Why not style themselves the King and Kween in exile, their little son Archduke, create the whole rival monarchy and demand Sovereign Grant from the folk of California.