Search results

You called my comment 'stupid' then made some snidey comment about my not putting anyone on ignore for 5 minutes. I hadn't said anything strident or controversial. So what part of your reaction was not needlessly peevish? And now you are pasting in part of another post in reply to my reply. This...

No. I would like a trial followed by an execution. Seriously, if the Royals ceased to do the job they do now (which is largely about keeping sentimal working class Sun raders and lower middle class Mail readers feeling patriotic, while attracting foreign tourists to London and Windsor), and...

I have always thought you an intersting poster and I have never had any reason to put you on ignore. You comments on this thread are needlessly peevish. I really don't think what I posted was remotely stupid. Ditto GT49er, a poster with whom I share numerous disagreements as well as agreements...

Quote Originally Posted by GT49er View Post No. Just no to your whole post. "Of course. That'll be because that doesn't suit your poorly considered argument, that somehow it's ok for you to pick and choose when democracy applies." Looks like 'red' Simster has got the wrong end of several...

Because I'm not. I was responding to the stupid comment that appeared to suggest that an elected Trump as president is preferable to a non-elected minor Royal who plays no role in legislation. I am neutral on the royals. They probably earn the nation more than thy cost us, and even though Big...

This.

I am no royalist but I think I'm with Thunder Bolt on this. I'd rather have a non-elected minor herditary royal who earns a small living and does a few good turns, than elected cockwasel like Trump with full presidential powers.