King Charles at the White House

[TheTanakas]

Maybe a matter of time before it's taken down?

 

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2049208884280062270

 

[Pyreaux]

Well, as long as we don't debate the politics, and just comment on it with little cross talk. I assume he's trolling because protesters say he's a king?

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

Well, as long as we don't debate the politics, and just comment on it with little cross talk. I assume he's trolling because protesters say he's a king?

He doesn’t troll. He floats ideas he likes and claims he was “joking” if he gets too much pushback.

[longview]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

He doesn’t troll. He floats ideas he likes and claims he was “joking” if he gets too much pushback.

That can't be since Tampon Tim and Slick Gavin are more king-like by far than orange man bad. 

[let’s roll]

Elvis is offended that he wasn’t included in the picture.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, longview said:

That can't be since Tampon Tim and Slick Gavin are more king-like by far than orange man bad. 

Cool, I have no idea what this is supposed to mean and am probably marginally happier not knowing.

[Tacenda]

All I know is I was a little impressed, more than I care to admit, on how well King Charles and Queen Camilla were treated in the USA. It was amazing! Kudos to those that made it happen.

In the past I didn't have much regard for King Charles and Camilla because of their affair during Princess Diana's life as his wife and girlfriend. But I guess Charles didn't have a choice? Was he basically forced to marry her, not sure.

On a recent trip to London England and seeing all the sites for the royals, I got a little miffed at the large castles and fine workmanship and in my mind thought a lot of people probably slaved to create them. And I didn't like the early history of the royals a few hundred or so years ago. I had a bad taste for the royals and thought the people were over taxed to provide for them. Well I was sorely mistaken now, our tour guide set some of us straight. She was with us on the bus and had asked if we had questions. Someone mentioned the people being taxed to provide these luxuries for the royals. 

She said we were wrong, and that King Charles/Queen Camilla with Prince William and his wife and especially Queen Elizabeth worked extremely hard and also were frugal in their clothing and would buy the very best and would use it for years and years. And that their calendars were filled for the whole year each year attending ceremonies for all kinds of things and charities. They couldn't just choose what they could do with most of their time.

It gave me a different perspective.

 

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

But I guess Charles didn't have a choice?

He had a very difficult choice as he and others would have lost a lot at that time, but he had a choice.  

And while in the beginning it might have been rocky, perhaps in the end it would have been better for all. He might have had to give up the future throne (but maybe not) and dukedom and likely any major political influence, but would have still been very wealthy.  Think of the Duke of Windsor who married a divorced woman.  Camilla wasn’t married to begin with, so that wouldn’t have been an issue and Charles might have even kept succession rights.  Camilla was (is?) by many because of the affair.  If they had been open and married, she might have had huge problems with the in-laws, but not as much with the public most likely. 

There would have been no Princess Diana with all she accomplished (and no little princes), but she might also be alive.

Hindsight is always better, of course.

A lot of the royals do work very hard and accomplish a lot of good, but they also live a good life with lots of support staff.  Wearing the very best clothing for years is still wearing the very best clothing. Working hard while living in comfort is still living in comfort.  
 

 

Edited May 1 by Calm

[The Nehor]

On 5/1/2026 at 2:39 PM, Tacenda said:

All I know is I was a little impressed, more than I care to admit, on how well King Charles and Queen Camilla were treated in the USA. It was amazing! Kudos to those that made it happen.

In the past I didn't have much regard for King Charles and Camilla because of their affair during Princess Diana's life as his wife and girlfriend. But I guess Charles didn't have a choice? Was he basically forced to marry her, not sure.

On a recent trip to London England and seeing all the sites for the royals, I got a little miffed at the large castles and fine workmanship and in my mind thought a lot of people probably slaved to create them. And I didn't like the early history of the royals a few hundred or so years ago. I had a bad taste for the royals and thought the people were over taxed to provide for them. Well I was sorely mistaken now, our tour guide set some of us straight. She was with us on the bus and had asked if we had questions. Someone mentioned the people being taxed to provide these luxuries for the royals. 

She said we were wrong, and that King Charles/Queen Camilla with Prince William and his wife and especially Queen Elizabeth worked extremely hard and also were frugal in their clothing and would buy the very best and would use it for years and years. And that their calendars were filled for the whole year each year attending ceremonies for all kinds of things and charities. They couldn't just choose what they could do with most of their time.

It gave me a different perspective.

 

Charles was pressured into marrying Diana. He couldn’t marry Camilla (who he was already involved with) because she was married. Even if she divorced that might not have cleared the way for a marriage. It was a sin in the Church of England to marry a divorced person when their ex was still living. This also bit Princess Margaret hard when she wanted to marry a divorced man and was denied and then there was Edward VIII who abdicated so he could marry a woman who had been divorced once and was divorcing a second husband at the time. Edward VIII not keeping the throne was probably for the best. Edward was more than a little pro-Nazi and spoke favorably of Hitler. There were all kinds of shenanigans during the war by the Nazis to ‘acquire’ him and Churchill spent a fair amount of effort getting the idiot back onto British soil where he could be protected. If the Germans acquired him they would probably declare him the legitimate monarch to attempt to stir up his supporters in England to turn against the government.

Saying the Royals are frugal is……yeah, not really a thing. They don’t live as ostentatiously as some of the ultra-rich do but they are very well off. Queen Elizabeth did work really hard. That has not always been true of the monarch or the royal family in general.

There is also a common claim that the Royals bring more in tourist income than they cost but that is based on things like people touring the Tower of London and the like. They could still do that if there were no monarchy.

Charles and Diana had a whirlwind romance and she was of the right stock and fit in pretty well with the family at first but that didn’t last. Diana wasn’t ready to live under that kind of a microscope. Charles was still seeing Camilla and Diana had a lot of lovers.

Edited May 2 by The Nehor

[Calm]

22 hours ago, The Nehor said:

He couldn’t marry Camilla (who he was already involved with) because she was married.

Yeah, but if they had considered the possibility of marriage or at least commitment to each other before he went off to the Navy given their apparent “instant connection”, she might not have gotten married.  Seems like it was more ‘not queen material’ that was the issue from the start. 

added:  I am probably mistaken according to one thing I just read as it claimed Camilla dated Charles first to get back at Bowles because she was “potty” about Bowles and upset about breaking up with him and him being with Princess Anne.  I didn’t realize she was involved with her future husband before she was dating Charles and that possibly their relationship was more one sided than both emotionally involved and Charles was more about being Anne’s brother than his own attractions.  I ignored all the gossip as it happened as much as possible, so know very little about the whole thing and as usual in such cases, thought I knew more than I did.   Sheesh, even more messed up than I thought.   Going back into ignore mode after this post as I always regret looking at more details.

So Camilla apparently wasn’t that interested in Charles until after she was married.  And that means she would have had to divorce like you said and he would likely have lost the throne because the family and the government hasn’t yet been through the disaster that was that royal marriage and its aftermath which made divorce seem pretty minor. 

Edited May 3 by Calm

[TheTanakas]

On 4/28/2026 at 10:25 PM, Pyreaux said:

Well, as long as we don't debate the politics, and just comment on it with little cross talk. I assume he's trolling because protesters say he's a king?

Trump posted an AI video depicting himself as a king dropping sludge on protesters.

[Pyreaux]

1 hour ago, TheTanakas said:

Trump posted an AI video depicting himself as a king dropping sludge on protesters.

Right. They were "no kings" protesting, he's leaning in on it to troll them. A "King" was their portrayal, he is just reacting to it. Like they did "Fat JD", now JD plays into it. Now Fat JD is a Meme Lord. More people know and like Fat JD more than they know and like the real JD.