@Trag: drink a couple of beers (better lager, I think). And, all politicians are too expensive, and I'd like to have the feeling of living in 21 century. It isn't the same for you British, you would miss the royals too much.
UK
Sort:
@Mersaphe: how do you do this? Do you smell the female pics along the threads?
Sep 4, 2014
0
#24
Pulpofeira wrote:
@Trag: drink a couple of beers (better lager, I think). And, all politicians are too expensive, and I'd like to have the feeling of living in 21 century. It isn't the same for you British, you would miss the royals too much.
I wish I could, one sip of alcohol and I have to get drunk to black out, happens at least once a month, terrible problem I've been fighting for years.
The Queen has been there forever, things might change if that idiot Charles outlives her, who knows?
I don't think Charles will be king. The kid will jump over him. People loves Kate!
Sep 4, 2014
0
#27
The Queen gets woken up by them every morning at Balmoral, is this a sign of inbreeding?
An interesting QI question: the current monarch Queen Elizabeth the second is the first Elizabeth to be queen of Scotland. If there were another King James, what number would he be?
adamplenty wrote:
Some people also seem to get confused between England, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom. They are not the same.
Most people who don't live here seem to get confused about the differences between the individual countries, the United Kingdom and Great Britain.
James II of England was James VII of Scotland...
Sep 4, 2014
0
#31
Would be James III of the UK (assuming we were still one country) and England, James VIII of Scotland, although you make a good point, I've never heard the current Queen refered to as Elizabeth I of Scotland but I guess that's exactly what she is.
Apparently, he would just be called James the VIII. When Queen Elizabeth was called "the second", there was uproar in Scotland and people vandalised post boxes and stuff in protest, so to keep the Scots happy, they decided that monarchs from then on would get the highest number available. Hmmm...do I win the prize for "most interesting fact of the day"?
Sep 4, 2014
0
#33
No, that doesn't ring any bells with me either.
(By the way Kay I am sorry for my outrageous drunken rudeness)
Yes, Trag, you mispelled some words. Unforgivable.
Sep 4, 2014
0
#36
Pulpofeira wrote:
Yes, Trag, you mispelled some words. Unforgivable.
Thanks Kay, the truth is probably you've never been in my booze hell, and I hope you never will!
Pulp tells me I can't spell? War, die Frenchie (
)
What?? Explain about that, please. Sounds like a pun between Krautzs and Froggies!
Trag55 wrote:
Pulpofeira wrote:
Yes, Trag, you mispelled some words. Unforgivable.
Thanks Kay, the truth is probably you've never been in my booze hell, and I hope you never will!
Pulp tells me I can't spell? War, die Frenchie ()
Don't worry Tragg, I thought it was an interesting change of pace. Cheers.
Trag55 wrote:
Whilst it's of little interest I would like to correct the posts of Welsh Stephen and others. The United Kingdom does not consist of 3 Kingdoms, but of the Kingdoms of England and Scotland, the Principality of Wales and the Province of Northern Ireland.
There you have the facts of the nation: United Kingdom. May change on 18th Sept. Good night.
Just seems like a good moment to remember the UK.
Oh God headache....apologies to Kay. Republican movement is small and marginal, the cost of the Royals compared to the President that would replace it isn't likely to be significant.
Would any of us prefer President Blair, or Brown, or Ian Duncan Smith?
(P.S.: Still voting no in the referendum in which I have no say)