HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Duchess of Cambridge preg...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:28 AM

Duchess of Cambridge pregnant

Source: BBC News

The Duchess of Cambridge is expecting a baby, St James's Palace has announced.

Members of the royal family and the duchess's family, the Middletons, are said to be delighted.

A spokesman said the duchess has been admitted to King Edward VII Hospital in central London with very acute morning sickness and is expected to stay for several days.

Catherine and William were married at Westminster Abbey in April 2011.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20586343

183 replies, 22099 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 183 replies Author Time Post
Reply Duchess of Cambridge pregnant (Original post)
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 OP
adigal Dec 2012 #1
Viva_La_Revolution Dec 2012 #5
RussBLib Dec 2012 #7
Viva_La_Revolution Dec 2012 #14
JNelson6563 Dec 2012 #38
Samantha Dec 2012 #107
du_grad Dec 2012 #137
SummerSnow Dec 2012 #154
du_grad Dec 2012 #174
Historic NY Dec 2012 #2
Stuckinthebush Dec 2012 #3
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #81
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #118
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #151
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #165
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #172
Stuckinthebush Dec 2012 #183
Gidney N Cloyd Dec 2012 #150
Sunlei Dec 2012 #153
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #168
littlemissmartypants Dec 2012 #4
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #6
OKNancy Dec 2012 #8
dipsydoodle Dec 2012 #16
Gore1FL Dec 2012 #42
raccoon Dec 2012 #148
sarge43 Dec 2012 #177
msanthrope Dec 2012 #9
JoDog Dec 2012 #10
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #17
Liberalynn Dec 2012 #21
femrap Dec 2012 #29
Diclotican Dec 2012 #71
Freddie Dec 2012 #102
Diclotican Dec 2012 #116
sarge43 Dec 2012 #176
Diclotican Dec 2012 #180
sarge43 Dec 2012 #182
thelordofhell Dec 2012 #76
CTyankee Dec 2012 #112
goclark Dec 2012 #147
Aristus Dec 2012 #11
ray of light Dec 2012 #22
Lochloosa Dec 2012 #23
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #39
TDale313 Dec 2012 #88
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #90
TDale313 Dec 2012 #95
Diclotican Dec 2012 #181
Orrex Dec 2012 #89
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #91
Orrex Dec 2012 #92
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #93
Orrex Dec 2012 #94
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #100
Orrex Dec 2012 #115
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #117
Orrex Dec 2012 #119
sarge43 Dec 2012 #179
alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #12
CaliforniaPeggy Dec 2012 #13
L0oniX Dec 2012 #15
Carnage251 Dec 2012 #18
Mass Dec 2012 #19
heaven05 Dec 2012 #26
classof56 Dec 2012 #34
Flaxbee Dec 2012 #61
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #73
Flaxbee Dec 2012 #111
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #124
treestar Dec 2012 #156
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #173
ChairmanAgnostic Dec 2012 #63
LeftInTX Dec 2012 #101
Barack_America Dec 2012 #160
L0oniX Dec 2012 #171
regnaD kciN Dec 2012 #178
Swede Atlanta Dec 2012 #20
dipsydoodle Dec 2012 #24
Inspired Dec 2012 #25
intaglio Dec 2012 #27
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #30
intaglio Dec 2012 #36
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #41
intaglio Dec 2012 #82
hockeynut57 Dec 2012 #28
lyingsackofmitt Dec 2012 #31
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #33
hockeynut57 Dec 2012 #66
ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #78
Catlover827 Dec 2012 #125
ChisolmTrailDem Dec 2012 #32
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #37
ChisolmTrailDem Dec 2012 #44
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #47
Gore1FL Dec 2012 #46
Freddie Dec 2012 #120
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #128
Freddie Dec 2012 #136
BlueCollar Dec 2012 #45
ChisolmTrailDem Dec 2012 #52
mrsadm Dec 2012 #110
JNelson6563 Dec 2012 #35
truebrit71 Dec 2012 #40
avebury Dec 2012 #43
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #48
dlwickham Dec 2012 #104
theHandpuppet Dec 2012 #143
dlwickham Dec 2012 #159
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #56
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #59
renate Dec 2012 #65
Orrex Dec 2012 #49
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #51
Orrex Dec 2012 #54
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #57
Orrex Dec 2012 #67
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #68
Orrex Dec 2012 #70
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #126
Orrex Dec 2012 #130
Retrograde Dec 2012 #96
dmallind Dec 2012 #162
Prometheus Bound Dec 2012 #170
FedUpWithIt All Dec 2012 #50
JohnnyRingo Dec 2012 #53
TDale313 Dec 2012 #55
JohnnyRingo Dec 2012 #114
TDale313 Dec 2012 #132
noamnety Dec 2012 #149
JohnnyRingo Dec 2012 #157
noamnety Dec 2012 #158
TDale313 Dec 2012 #164
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #58
Brickbat Dec 2012 #60
RebelOne Dec 2012 #121
Xithras Dec 2012 #77
PADemD Dec 2012 #87
laundry_queen Dec 2012 #122
Auntie Bush Dec 2012 #127
Samjm Dec 2012 #129
Ilsa Dec 2012 #134
noamnety Dec 2012 #139
Manifestor_of_Light Dec 2012 #141
littlemissmartypants Dec 2012 #144
AngryOldDem Dec 2012 #145
JohnnyRingo Dec 2012 #161
LanternWaste Dec 2012 #163
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #169
treestar Dec 2012 #155
ChairmanAgnostic Dec 2012 #62
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #64
Orrex Dec 2012 #74
Confusious Dec 2012 #84
ChairmanAgnostic Dec 2012 #86
1ProudAtheist Dec 2012 #69
CaliforniaPeggy Dec 2012 #85
BuddhaGirl Dec 2012 #108
hockeynut57 Dec 2012 #72
Orrex Dec 2012 #75
Evasporque Dec 2012 #79
WeekendWarrior Dec 2012 #80
AngryOldDem Dec 2012 #146
alp227 Dec 2012 #83
andypandy Dec 2012 #97
dipsydoodle Dec 2012 #103
tabasco Dec 2012 #133
LanternWaste Dec 2012 #98
Tx4obama Dec 2012 #99
BigDemVoter Dec 2012 #105
Nye Bevan Dec 2012 #106
We are Devo Dec 2012 #109
libinnyandia Dec 2012 #113
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #123
Retrograde Dec 2012 #131
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #138
Freddie Dec 2012 #135
Manifestor_of_Light Dec 2012 #140
andypandy Dec 2012 #142
Manifestor_of_Light Dec 2012 #167
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #152
Prometheus Bound Dec 2012 #166
CaliforniaPeggy Dec 2012 #175

Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:30 AM

1. She is so darn skinny, a few days of getting sick would be dangerous for her

I hope she and the baby are OK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to adigal (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:50 AM

5. my first thought too

that girl needs to put some meat on her bones. Pregnancy is a huge drain on your body, and she's got no extra built up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Viva_La_Revolution (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:56 AM

7. Not always...

One of my sister's-in-law has a stocky build, and "baby-bearing hips." However, her two pregnancies were very difficult and both premature. The other sister-in-law is skinny as a rail and doctors were a little worried. Yet, her two pregnancies were like a "walk in the park." That is her term, and not mine.

So body type is no real indicator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RussBLib (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:22 PM

14. true, not always

just more likely than an average weight woman. If you are at a healthy weight then you have reserves that the baby will need. My first two were 9+ and 10 lbs, but my 3rd (1 year later) was just barely 8lbs, because I had not recovered my 'reserves'. Dieting does the same thing, and she was doing a lot running up to the wedding. I hope she quit then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to adigal (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:21 PM

38. I weighed 100 when I got pregnant.

I ate all the time though, once pregnant, so I'd have a big strong baby. Gained 45 pounds and had an 8 pound daughter. Did the same thing 3 years later and had an 8 pound boy. Now my average weight is 110.

Julie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JNelson6563 (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:25 PM

107. I weighed 102 When I became pregnant

and I was 5'l". I knew I was pregnant at 2 weeks because I started getting sick to my stomach. Perhaps once in my life I had been sick to my stomach, but if so, I did not remember it. With each passing week, the problem got worse. I would upchuck so many times in the day, when nothing was left, I heaved green stomach bile. As time went on, my doctor told me I had to get it under control or go in the hospital because the baby was not receiving enough nourishment. But I had no idea how to get it under control, I did everything he suggested, even eating crackers incessantly.

Eventually, they decided I had a disorder similar to that which makes people ill when they fly on airplanes. Not the same thing, in the same family though. They decided I had to take some medicine and so I did. It did not help. But at about 6.5 months, all this quit happening. My daughter was born 17 days early and weighed 5 pounds 8 ounces.

Since the actually birthing process started at 10:30 that morning when my water broke and my daughter was born at 1:02, after I had only one contraction, my doctor said I was built for having babies. I responded, that is a shame, because this is it for me. And I was someone who had wanted six children!


Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to adigal (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:24 PM

137. Hyperemesis gravidarum is the condition of severe vomiting during pregnancy

My aunt had it with four pregnancies. Her first one was in 1947 and she had to have a "legal abortion" (as it was told to me by my mother). Three doctors had to say it was necessary. None of them would do it in their office. It was performed on my grandmother's dining room table. She had what I presumed later to be a saline injection. She was down to 75 lbs. and wasn't even to three months along.

She subsequently had three other children, all girls, and suffered some degree of this with each pregnancy. She couldn't eat much of anything. Her oldest daughter, my cousin, also suffered severely with it. She had one child. She was about 5'7" tall, and at the 9 month point only weighed 110 lbs. She looked like a skeleton with a bump. Her daughter was fine when born, but she never had another child, as the genetic component was presumed to be strong. Interestingly, the only daughter also experienced this with her first pregnancy, so three generations with it certainly implies genetic risk.

Here is a link. According to the article, this official condition only occurs in 0.3-2% of pregnancies. If she stays sick throughout her pregnancy, then this is a definite concern.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperemesis_gravidarum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to du_grad (Reply #137)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:23 AM

154. I suffered with this

I was 128 pounds when I got pregnant with my first child.I suffered from this condition for 6 months during pregnancy. I was miserable. I spent more time in the hospital than at home. Couldn't eat or hold down a glass of water.My Dr told me the baby was in danger and we could lose her.I remember just before the start of this illnesses my Dr asked me why I was losing so much weight.I just thought it was normal morning sickness. But they found out it was more. I lost 85 pounds during the pregnancy. I think at the beginning of my last trimester I started holding down food and fluids. I was getting better and gaining weight. I had some difficulty during delivery but all went well.Had a baby girl just a little under weight at birth. Now she is 19 in college

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SummerSnow (Reply #154)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:35 AM

174. Glad you got through it okay, SummerSnow

My cousin never had any more children. I know her husband wanted another, but she had been through hell and back and didn't want to risk another nine months of it.

I saw in the paper this morning that they are using this term to describe her nausea now. Heck, they're even speculating that she is carrying twins (which remains to be seen).

http://www.ibtimes.com/kate-middleton-hyperemesis-gravidarum-pregnancy-update-duchess-feeling-better-919347

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:33 AM

2. "Brilliant".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:40 AM

3. Who?

I hope whoever this is has a healthy baby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuckinthebush (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:40 PM

81. Who?

Ya beat me to it.

THIS IS NOT LATEST BREAKING NEWS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #81)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:53 PM

118. Really?

The baby will be the heir to the thone in the UK aka king or queen someday. Assuming the monarchy lasts that long. It's probably the most famous baby in the world already. I'd say it's LBN.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #118)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:41 AM

151. Possibly true, but this particular absurdity exists...

because some people invest a modicum of belief in it.

Long as the pregnancy of this particular random lady out of 3.6 billion females on the planet merits such hyperbolic description -- the most famous baby! erm fetus! in the world already! -- and the pregnancies of women who were formerly "subjects" of the criminal British empire do not merit any attention... even though their nations are still suffering from the consequences... it's important to challenge those who would foist breathless descriptions of a human biological function on us as though one pregnancy is more important than the other.

Especially if they're headlining as the pregnancy of some magical character known as the "Duchess of Whatnot" rather than by the person's civilian name.

Even if in the end it's still going to qualify as "news," thanks to the divine-right royalty worship that endures even among professed democrats.

But I'm sure you think that's all too much, so let's boil it down: Screw UK royalty. Celebrations of it are an insult both to our intelligence and to the many victims of a criminal empire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #151)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:42 PM

165. I'm sure

you'd be saying the exact same thing if Michelle Obama was pregnant. Not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laundry_queen (Reply #165)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:51 PM

172. What is the relevance of your question?

Is Michelle Obama in her present position and worshipped as "royalty" solely by virtue of birth or marriage? Does her present status last for life? Does she pass the royal gene on to her children? Is her "noble family" founded in the bloody deaths of millions of people?

Would you like that? Are you sad that there isn't any officially recognized American royalty posing as heads of state?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #172)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:39 PM

183. Dayum

Snap.

Game, set, match.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuckinthebush (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:33 AM

150. +1. Best reply in the whole thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #150)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:03 AM

153. I hope she has a girl who will be Queen, the male bloodline is to inbred and weak.

much like animals humans with these 'leadership' bloodlines rarely bring in new male blood, just females.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #153)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:34 PM

168. Genetics doesn't work that way

The only part of the genome that goes to a male only is the Y chromosome. And that cannot, by definition, be inbred - for all males, it comes only from the all-male ancestry.

If you're worried about inbreeding, it will be just as bad in a girl as a boy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:43 AM

4. Well Done, Sir!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:54 AM

6. They are in my prayers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:57 AM

8. That's great. I'm glad the succession rules were changed.

Either a boy or a girl will be next in line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:30 PM

16. Yes

Last edited Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:13 PM - Edit history (1)

likely to be one or the other.

I am pleased the rules are in the process of being changed. It is regarded as being unlikely that will not occur.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:26 PM

42. I am glad they changed the rules too

It is a little like modernizing the Spanish Armada in the sense that "First Born" and "Royalty" are not exactly modern themselves. In any event it is progress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKNancy (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:20 AM

148. Yeah, like how many centuries has it been since a king went into battle? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raccoon (Reply #148)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:40 AM

177. About two. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:12 PM

9. Lovely, lovely. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:14 PM

10. I'll bet a shilling

On it being a girl. "Elizabeth the Third" has a certain ring to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoDog (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:30 PM

17. Diana would be a much better name

It would honor William's mother...and "Queen Diana" would certainly make the other nasty royals' heads explode. Especially Camilla.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:44 PM

21. This has my support

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:12 PM

29. I like the way you think. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:15 PM

71. lbrtbell

lbrtbell

I don't know - by the time a potential Queen Diana is crowned as queen in England (They still Crown their kings and queens in England - in other nations they tend to use a less expensive ceremony) Camilla, Charles and the most of his generation will be long dead.. And Camillia can not be a Queen any way as he is not a royal.. She can be a princess consort to the King (Charles) but not a queen..

Diclotican

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Diclotican (Reply #71)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:42 PM

102. Camilla can be a Queen (consort)

Like the Queen Mum, the King's wife, as opposed to a Queen born to the throne like Queen Elizabeth. However I believe she agreed to not use the title Queen when she married Charles and will be called the Princess Consort. But I don't think that's set in stone if Charles wants her to be called Queen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie (Reply #102)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:39 PM

116. Freddie

Freddie

She can be a Queen (consort) as you say - but she could be a Queen like Elizabeth who is born to the purple so to say.. We have the same thing here in Norway, where our Queen are not a Queen who could rule in absent of a King (well, either our King and Queen have that much power anyway in a modern democracy, but our king is recognized as our head of state - and in theory where all laws goes to Our Queen is of ordinary origin - and therefore can not legally be recognized as Head of State.. So even if our current King dies - she can not take over the reign and be head of state for the rest of her life... It goes to the crown prince - and then hopefully after many years, it goes to his oldest daughter who then become Queen of Norway (first in more than 600 year by the way, our last ruling queen was Queen Margarethe the 1 of Norway-Denmark and Sweden, he heritages all tree crown's in the late 1370s..

I doubt she will be accepted as a Queen the same way Diana would have been.. The fact that Camilla have been divorced is enough to make her illegible to the full title of Queen... And yes, I think they had a agreement going back to before Charles married her - that she would not be using the title Queen, as it would rub to many in the face.. It is safer to decide it to be a Princess Consort rather than the consequences a popular uprising would be... The Royal families treatment of Diana was not exactly after the book, and many got really pissed of by it - she was popular and loved by most people in England and other places.. Camilla is the ugly witch who managed to get near the trhone by marriage to the Prince of Wales...

If Charles understand his subjects he would not use the title Queen but rather Princess Consort.. It might not be what he wanted it to be - but it is safer than to risk anything... Even though I doubt England will go republic anytime soon - The Kingdom is a institution who goes way back - and the experience with the republic in the 1600s was less than happy for the british. It is a reason they asked Charles the 2 to came back to England as King after Cromwell was buried under 6 foot of dirt.. If he is verry smart, he let his son get the throne rather than take it himself.. Queen Elizabeth is in her 80s, and still going strong, and I doubt he wil be any younger before she dies.... Her mother the Queen Mum got to the age of 100 before she passed away... So I guess the british Queen wil live for a long time yet..

Diclotican

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Diclotican (Reply #71)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 05:39 AM

176. Right now Camillia won't be crowned queen consort because the CoE's stand on divorce.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2005/02/what_is_a_princess_consort.html

Being a commoner by birth has nothing to do with it. The late Queen Mother was legally a commoner, daughter of an earl, as was Diana. There was never any talk about Diana being merely a princess consort.
Nor is there any ban against the duchess of Cambridge being William's queen consort and she doesn't even qualify for the social status of aristo. Her family is middle class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarge43 (Reply #176)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:54 AM

180. sarge43

sarge43

You are right - I suspect the fact that Camilla is divorcee is a worse offense than that she is a commoner... At least as long as the rulings in CoE is as they are... But that will maybe be different in the future as most other things I suspect..

In the meantime - we just have to hope that William and Kate will have a good marriage where they love each other and their children - and also manage to undo some of the damage the royal family have managed to do on their own the last 20 years.... It looks like things kind of are making a comeback in the royal family after the 1980s and 1990s turbulence... Even the Queen looks fare more kind and warm than she was before...

Diclotican

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Diclotican (Reply #180)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 12:06 PM

182. Well, the British monarch is supreme governor of the CoE

and the coronation ceremony is in part religious in nature, so the monarch and family have to at least play the part. Further, since WWI the royal picking list has considerably shorten, just not that many to chose from. The possible hostility about a 'commoner' queen died with QM Elizabeth. She's the standard of conduct for the foreseeable future. Finally, the British seem to have made it clear they have no problem with one of their own as a q. consort.

I share your good hopes. I hope that Kate gets through this pregnancy successfully. Yes, it is nice to see the queen enjoying herself. Finally, put the ghost of grandmother Queen Mary to rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:32 PM

76. How about both

Diana Elizabeth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:42 PM

112. Screw Camilla...really...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:44 AM

147. or Elizabeth Diana

Honoring the queen first.??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:14 PM

11. That'll knock Harry down a bit.

That will keep swastika-boy a little further from the throne...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:50 PM

22. Why are you calling him that? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ray of light (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:58 PM

23. He wore this costume to a party once....

?w=450

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lochloosa (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:21 PM

39. Showcasing (again) the occasional disconnect between British and American humour...

...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:29 PM

88. iirc, there was something of a dust-up

over this in the UK as well as here in the states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TDale313 (Reply #88)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:12 PM

90. Possibly, i don't recall...but taking the piss out of Nazis, as Harry was doing...

...has been part of the British sense of humour since we beat Hitler's ass back in the 1940's...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #90)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:33 PM

95. We've had examples

(Mel Brooks, Charlie Chaplin, Quentin Tarrentino, Hogan's Heroes) of comedians/artists willing to "go there", but you're right... it's often a line that's not crossed here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #90)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:03 AM

181. truebrit71

truebrit71

British humor is something that not everyone got - even though Harry going around in a nazi uniform was kind of tackles.. After all it was not THAT long since the war - just 60 or so years... But then again - the british was playing with dud shells when going home from the pubs after a air raid in the 1940s...

Diclotican

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:11 PM

89. I'm sure that Harry would find my French Paparazzi costume screamingly funny

Smashing good fun, that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #89)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:12 PM

91. Swing and a miss...

...but thanks for playing...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #91)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:15 PM

92. Hey, if you don't find it funny, blame Diana's driver

Thanks for playing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #92)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:19 PM

93. Thanks again for proving that you continue to miss the point entirely...

Thanks for playing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #93)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:31 PM

94. The point is that Harry acted like an asshole

If you can't see the problem with a so-called Royal dressing in Nazi regalia, alleged humour notwithstanding, then I'm not the one who's missing the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #94)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:19 PM

100. The point is that Harry dressed up like a Nazi in a long-standing British tradition...

...of taking the piss out of the Nazis...There's nothing "alleged" about the humour...it's been like that in the UK since old Adolf's crispy corpse was still cooling down...

Ergo, yes, you are WILDLY missing the point...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #100)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:17 PM

115. No, I get it. And it's every bit as funny as my paparazzi costume

You seem to think that I don't understand the sublime subtlety of British humor, but you're mistaken.

Even if we pretend his costume was a wry zinger at Jerry's expense, that wouldn't outweigh the fact that a high-profile member of the "royal" family was prancing around in a Nazi uniform. You can dress it up however you wish, but it was still inexcusably insensitive, and ill-befitting a duke or whatever bullshit title he holds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #115)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:41 PM

117. Yawn...

"inexcusably insensitive"..."ill-befitting a Duke"..yada yada yada...so that holds true for every single British comedian that has done the very same thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebrit71 (Reply #117)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:58 PM

119. It's true of every comedian who's part of the royal family

Last edited Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:17 PM - Edit history (1)

The royals enjoy a preposterous and anachronistic quasi-worship and are paid handsomely all the while. The least they can do is try not to act like assholes.

How did the queen mum react to Harry's Nazi-flavoured idiocy, by the way? Did she thrill to his comic antics?
If the royals are simply celebrities and are held to no higher standard, then no one can complain when Kate's boobs show up on Page Three. But if they're "Royal," then it's on them to act like it.

Can't have it both ways, old chap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:58 AM

179. Especially insulting as his great grandmother is a Righteous Among the Nations

Princess Alice of Battenberg, Philip's mother, during WWII sheltered Greek Jewish refugees at considerable risk to herself. Have to wonder what Grandpa Phil had to say about that stunt.

Every kid that Will and Kate have will knock Harry down a notch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:14 PM

12. Prince William ain't do it right, if ya ask me...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:20 PM

13. I'm thrilled to hear this news!

Babies are a miracle...

I hope Catherine gets over her morning sickness very soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:28 PM

15. "Breaking News" ...get a life!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:33 PM

18. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:40 PM

19. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:10 PM

26. thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:17 PM

34. Another +1

Seriously...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:59 PM

61. If Chelsea Clinton announced she was pregnant - would that be LBN?

No? Where would it go?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flaxbee (Reply #61)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:17 PM

73. Chelsea= LBN. Britney Spears = Lounge (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #73)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:41 PM

111. I agree with you. Just as I agree that Kate's pregnancy is LBN


Some people just want to snark. THEY might not think the news is important, but it is, to many people.

William and Kate are part of a centuries-old tradition in England, and a large majority of Britains support the monarchy. I have no idea why Americans feel the need to trash a monarchy that they have nothing to do with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flaxbee (Reply #111)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:31 PM

124. I understand it...

Though I'm a fan of the royals. The very concept is odious to some people. However, at the end of the day, this news is about the future head of state of one of America's closest allies, if not its closest ally, so it's definitely big news over here as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flaxbee (Reply #61)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:29 AM

156. Yes.

Bill wants grandchildren. Hillary would be the grandmother, so there are definitely DUers who would put that in LBN.

This does have some history to it, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flaxbee (Reply #61)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:54 PM

173. Unfortunately it would be LBN to those who think gossip sheet material is news.

It's an appropriate GD post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:00 PM

63. thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:31 PM

101. The wedding was beautiful. Of course, if you're not into watching weddings....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:38 PM

160. Future monarch of our #1 ally.

So it's notable for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Barack_America (Reply #160)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:40 PM

171. I see ...so we need to focus on Kate expecting a baby so they will help us with our wars ...pffft!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:00 AM

178. Of course, it's LBN...

...after all, how often do you know of a married couple actually having sex?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:43 PM

20. This is wonderful news.....

 

I wish the couple and the baby the very best.

Perhaps when the crown passes to William there will be more stability and more "populism" around the Crown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:07 PM

24. White House gave congratulations

at press confererence a short while ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:09 PM

25. Congrats to them. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:10 PM

27. It is very nice that a wealthy and highly privileged couple are going to be parents

It is sad that the lady has such bad morning sickness ...

Now can we become a republic?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #30)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:19 PM

36. Lots of people also supported capital punishment

but Parliament still got rid of it, thank goodness!

Your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:22 PM

41. The people chose to elect MPs a majority of whom opposed the death penalty.

How many MPs have declared that they oppose the Monarchy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #41)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:48 PM

82. But it was not a maifesto issue - although

it may have been mentioned in the manifestos.

At that time how many people read or were made aware of manifestos? The answer is passing few even at that time. The little polling that was done in the period made it very clear that the general public did not support the loss of Capital Punishment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:12 PM

28. I, for one

couldn.t care less

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hockeynut57 (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:13 PM

31. + 100,000,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hockeynut57 (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:15 PM

33. I know you have an enormous choice of threads to respond to.

Thank you for choosing mine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:03 PM

66. yours was just the most BS one i could find at the time. it still escape me there

are so many anglophiles in the US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hockeynut57 (Reply #66)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:34 PM

78. Hey now!

I could be considered an "anglophile" but I don't give a shit about the Royal Family. Most of my favorite British bands don't either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #78)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:32 PM

125. I like the way you think!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:14 PM

32. Well, that's just fucking great!

Last edited Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:46 PM - Edit history (1)

9 months of "Royals Await Heir to British Throne" -like headlines. Beginning already today, the apparent American fascination with Britain's royal family affairs will be satiated each and every goddamned day by our brilliant media "news" apparatus.

I thought we fucking declared our independence from England?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:19 PM

37. It's interesting to see how fascinated Americans are by the UK Royal Family.

Even here on DU, which one would not expect to be especially royalist, more than 1000 views, and 15 recs, in less than 2 hours.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:28 PM

44. It's so annoying, what with all the problems we have to solve. I mean,

with everything going on domestically and in Syria, Israel, and for God's sake they won't let Adrew W.K. go party in Bahrain! ... MSNBC RED ALERT! BREAKING NEWS!!! The Princess is Preggers!

I understand there are Royals fans here (and it's okay to be a Royals fan, that's not the issue), but for fuck's sake, we have bigger problems deserving of a MSNBC RED ALERT! BREAKING NEWS!!! chyron and reporting. Doesn't TMZ.com do a good enough job of reporting on the Royals?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #44)


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:29 PM

46. It isn't about Royalty

It's about celebrity--not that there isn't crossover between the two.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:19 PM

120. I wonder if they're more popular here than in the UK

My great-grandparents were Cornish immigrants and I still chat with a cousin in the Old Country who is totally blasÚ about royal stuff and I get an impression that many Brits consider them a great waste of time and $$. (My cousin also thinks Americans are total idiots about health care and guns, and I completely agree with him!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie (Reply #120)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:50 PM

128. Do you ever try discussing the US religious right with British people?

Complete confusion and amazement results, as such a thing does not exist over there. The UK is much, much less religious in general than the US, kind of ironically given that they have an established religion with no separation of church and state. And just as Obama is way more popular there than he is here, I wouldn't be surprised if the Royal Family is more popular over here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #128)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:10 PM

136. Another "Americans are nuts" topic

And one of my British relatives is a retired Methodist minister. Church for them, if they go at all, is a nice social thing to do once a week and has no influence in politics or laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:29 PM

45. As an expat living in the USA

I do "give a shit"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCollar (Reply #45)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:38 PM

52. I was specifically speaking of Americans, not expat Brits. Of course

you would be interested. But we have other media outlets that do a very good job of reporting on the Royal Family.

A belated welcome to America and my apologies for offending you. That was not my intent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:27 PM

110. So what? If you don't like, leave it alone

And don't even bother reading threads like this. You may not like royalty, but celebrity babies are always news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:19 PM

35. I hope they have a healthy baby.

Congratulations to the young parents-to-be!

Julie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:22 PM

40. Smashing!

Good luck to all three of them...!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:26 PM

43. If they have a girl, I would be really

surprised if the name Diana wasn't somewhere in the name (they are known for having about 4 names).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to avebury (Reply #43)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:33 PM

48. My money is on Trisha Brenda Tracy Michelle.

Remember, you heard it here first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #48)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:43 PM

104. she's going to live in a palace

not a double wide

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #104)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 04:25 AM

143. Best reply yet!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theHandpuppet (Reply #143)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:32 PM

159. thank you

thank you very much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to avebury (Reply #43)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:54 PM

56. I expect Diana and either Elizabeth or Victoria to be in there somewhere

Supposedly they are partial to the name Alice but that could just be a baseless rumor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blasphemer (Reply #56)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:57 PM

59. Elizabeth Diana Victoria Beckham.

OK, perhaps not the Beckham.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #59)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:01 PM

65. I think there's a good chance you're right about three of those, though!

And I think Alice would be nice to put in there at the end, since it's a royal name with a bit of history as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:33 PM

49. Great. Another welfare recipient breeding on the public's dime

When will we stop subsidizing these parasites?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:35 PM

51. The amount of tourism the Royals attract results in a net profit (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #51)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:49 PM

54. Well that's simply smashing

I wish that I could earn a living by being a rich and anachronistic monument to class stratification.

Nice work, if you can get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #54)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:56 PM

57. I don't know. Never again able to walk down the street unrecognized?

Never able to just go somewhere and hang out with friends without the press harrassing you? Living the rest of your life in a goldfish bowl? I wouldn't want that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #57)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:03 PM

67. She married into it with eyes wide open

If she didn't want that life, then she had plenty of options open to her.

I have no sympathy for any celebrity who laments media exposure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #67)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:05 PM

68. I agree. She knew what she was signing up for.

I'm just saying I don't think I would choose that for myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #68)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:07 PM

70. LOL! I understand now.

Yeah, I wouldn't enjoy the spotlight, no matter how exciting and charismatic I am.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #67)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:33 PM

126. She loves William...you expect her to just walk away?

Would you walk away from your love just because he got famous? Don't think so! Well, I hope not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auntie Bush (Reply #126)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:54 PM

130. "Got famous?" Are you kidding me?

He was famous since before he was born.

She went into it with eyes wide open. Anyone who feels bad for her as a result of her decision is simply foolish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #51)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:33 PM

96. I keep hearing this without any proof being offered

I've been to the UK numerous times; reasons for the visits included work, visiting friends, attending conferences, general touristing, and passing through on the way to France (a noted non-monarchy). The fact that it has a monarch is pretty close to the bottom on my list of why I want to visit a place - and I don't think I'm the only one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Retrograde (Reply #96)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:31 PM

162. Because it has little else

The UK has a terrible climate, is miserably overcrowded, unacceptably expensive, and underserved with fine cuisine to say the least. It has no particularly spectacular scenery when compared to, say, France to use your example. Although some small parts nestled between surrounding industrial parks and council estates might have a combined bucolic/craggy charming vibe going, they are not comparable to the Alps or the Riviera by any stretch. It does have some world-class museums and galleries all sadly in London, and it's a worthwhile stop for connoisseurs of beer or whisky. Beyond that though what brings in the tourists? Lake Windermere is not overrun with masses of Japanese photographers like Buckingham Palace is. You don't hear a huge number of American accents at Buckden Pike or Torpenhow Hill (the most tautonymic placename I know) like you do at Westmister Abbey.

Take away all that pomp and pagaentry and you have an entire nation that is the equivalent of a suburban Cleveland without the Puerto Rican food.

Born there, lived there 20+ yrs by the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #51)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:48 PM

170. I doubt many tourists go to the UK to see the queen.

They go to see Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle, not the Royal Family. And those places would still be popular tourist draws even if the Royal Family disappeared, just as Edinburgh Castle is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:34 PM

50. Congratulations to them both.

Best wishes for good health.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:44 PM

53. I'm afraid I don't understand why she's in a hospital...

I fathered three sons with a petite woman who weighed 110, and she suffered through morning sickness just like every other pregnant woman, but not once did we even consider calling an ambulance or driving to the ER. I don't even know if our insurance would have covered that anyway. She's not "sick", she's a very healthy woman who's pregnant.

I know GB has a great healthcare system, but shouldn't that bed be given to someone who may be getting home treatment? Is the royal loo too nice to barf in once a day?

No one has to tell her she's a princess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:53 PM

55. Seriously?!?

Of all the things to attack the royal family on (of which there are many) you're going to lash out at a young first-time mom-to-be because apparently she and her doctors felt it appropriate for her to stay in hospital? What exactly are you basing the opinion that it's unnecessary on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TDale313 (Reply #55)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:57 PM

114. I administer sympathy in a thin layer over royalty.

Though I hear from those with experience in pregnancy based maladies below, I still strongly suspect her hospital stay is the kind of pampering given to people of means and station.

I didn't read anything in the article that indicates she has a special condition that can't be treated at home like the peons of British society do every day, and I'll never believe hospitals are full of women with morning sickness, "severe" or otherwise. If I see pix of her with IV drips and tubes up her nose, I may reconsider, but I'm not holding my breath.

I normally have great ambivalence for the royal family, but when I find them in the media with a "woe is us" story like this, I suddenly discover an opinion on their better than you status. America's princess, Paris Hilton, would get the same treatment from me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #114)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:03 PM

132. woe is me?

I guess I read this differently. I read an explaination as to why she'd been hospitalizied, which definitely was going to be reported, not a plea for sympathy. Ymmv. Look, I don't really want to get into it, and I realize my first post was kinda harsh. And honestly, I'm no fan of the royals. I just took a little issue with criticizing someone for receiving what they and their doctor deemed appropriate medical care without *any* evidence that it was unneccessay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #114)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:08 AM

149. If it were the prince dude in the hospital for something

would you assume he wasn't really sick?

It's offensive to me to have men assume pregnant women's medical problems aren't real or aren't serious. This is coincidentally a view promoted by republicans as part of their efforts to outlaw abortion, to portray pregnancy related illnesses as made up, or as "inconveniences." That attitude is what led to that woman in Ireland being killed recently.

I'm hoping within that context you can understand why you got the pile on here for jumping from "she's in the hospital due to complications" to "she needs to suck it up like all pregnant women do."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noamnety (Reply #149)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:53 AM

157. "Yes"

Now you can stop trying to paint me as a woman hater. It's become epidemic here to overreact to gender bias, and I'm not going to fall victim to it for this.

And yes, If his highness was admitted for a case of the flu, strep throat, or even a sprained ankle, I'd say he's wasting a hospital bed that could be occupied by someone who actually needs it. Someone worse off who was told their illness isn't serious enough to warrant an extended stay.

I don't say that because I hate men or have less respect for them, but because he should be told at the hospital that he'll be miserable for a few days or so, and that he should suck it up and be treated at his physician's office and sent home to recover. He - and yes, her highness as well - even have a staff of devoted servants there to make their temporary misery more bearable.

I say this about the prince but don't at all expect a group of men here to pile on me for trying to brand all men as "sissies" or hypochondriacs. Please don't take every comment about someone personal - or as a universal attack against half the population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #157)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:16 PM

158. Most people aren't held in a hospital for strept throat or a normal flu

unless there are serious complications from it. And then I presume that's the reason.

I don't know anybody who enjoys being in a hospital. I doubt any princess is thinking "ooooh, that's the life!"

I'm not accusing you of being a woman hater. I'm saying that the presumption that "complications from pregnancy" are by default exaggerated and not serious when the only information you have is that the woman needed to be hospitalized for it is offensive because of the implications, and promoting that viewpoint hurts women.

This is sort of like when I tell a student "that photo is out of focus" and they hear "you suck as a photographer." I'm not labeling you as a person. I'm saying this particular line of thought is destructive and strengthens republican positions that hurt women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #157)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:46 PM

164. As has been pointed out...

This can be very serious. You don't have any idea what her circumstances are. But you seem intent on doubling down because it's more fun believing she's a spoiled brat (which she may well be, but I just don't think this is the evidence of that that you're looking for.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:56 PM

58. Apparently her case is very severe

I'm certain they would have preferred not to make an announcement so soon but her hospitalization made it necessary. I don't think she'd be in the hospital unless she absolutely had to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:57 PM

60. Morning sickness varies widely. For example, you say "just like every other pregnant woman."

I never had morning sickness. Not a burp of it. But in some people it can lead to dehydration very quickly. It didn't happen to your wife, so yay. It may be happening to Catherine, so yay for them for checking on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brickbat (Reply #60)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:20 PM

121. I had two pregnancies and morning sickness with each one.

It was awful. I would not wish it on anyone. If men had to go through it, there would be a lot less children in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:34 PM

77. Morning sickness varies hugely from pregnancy to pregnancy, and person to person.

My wife had three babies.

Kid #1: No morning sickness at all. Not even an upset tummy.

Kid #2: Three years later, violent morning sickness so bad that they put her on an IV to combat dehydration. She ended up spending two days in the hospital while they pumped drugs into her to stabilize her nausea. The condition was called hyper-something gravidarium, and it can be EXTREMELY dangerous if not treated properly.

Kid #3: 6 years later, she had morning sickness again, some of it quite bad, but nothing even remotely approaching what she experienced with #2. She made some changes to her diet, and her doctor prescribed a mild medication to help her out, both of which prevented any serious problems.

I'm glad your wife didn't have any serious problems, but not everyone is so lucky.


ON EDIT: I just googled it. It's actually called "Hyperemesis Gravidarum", and they are already confirming that it's the same condition Kate Middleton is suffering from. It's a nasty, nasty condition that makes typical "morning sickness" look like a Sunday picnic. Imagine puking until your stomach is empty, and then dry heaving for HOURS. EVERY DAY. And the moment you take a drink, having it start all over again.

The reason for the six year gap between my second and third child was the fact that my wife didn't want to go through that again. She really wanted to have another child, but was terrified of having the same thing happen again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #77)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:27 PM

87. Imagine

Imagine puking until your stomach is empty, and then dry heaving for HOURS. EVERY DAY. And the moment you take a drink, having it start all over again.

Just like having the whooping cough. Unfortunately I can imagine this.

Hope she feels better soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:25 PM

122. Boy Howdy are you uninformed!

There is a serious condition that some pregnant women get that is like morning sickness on steroids (read some of the posts, someone explains it, hyperemesis gravidarum, very dangerous - women used to die from it before iv's and anti-nausea drugs). My friend had this and basically was admitted to the hospital every other week or so, and was given meds that finally helped her stay home (but not stop barfing 10 times a day, but at least it wasn't 30 times/day). Having had 4 kids myself, I understand morning sickness, but this is another beast all together. My friend said she barfed right up until labor and as soon as the baby was out, she asked for food, as she hadn't felt that hungry (and not nauseous) in 9 months. She lost 10 lbs during the 9 months and cried when she found out she was pregnant again 17 months later because she was so worried about a repeat performance (luckily that didn't happen). One of my mom's co-workers spent weeks in the hospital with it, waited 7 years to have another and had the same thing happen again.

I'd say your pick of things to attack Kate on was weak. Best to know what you are talking about first if you are going to mock someone for something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:50 PM

127. You only know what the media told you. Maybe she's on the verge of a miscarriage.

She's also very thin and if she has severe vomiting it could endanger her health and the life of her baby...the future king or queen of England. That ranks her quite important and she deserves the best of care they can give her. Personally...I have a horrible feeling she's might lose the baby...as this is a very critical gestation time...under 3 months. She may also be bleeding heavily...a sign of pending miscarriage. Maybe she doesn't want her medical details out in public...but they have to report something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:53 PM

129. It's not "just" morning sickness

Hyperemesis Gravidarum is pure hell. It is NOT "just" morning sickness. I am eternally thankful that my insurance covered an extremely expensive drug, normally used on Chemo patients, that was the ONLY thing that got me down to "normal" morning sickness levels. Ugh. Try puking upwards of 15 times a day and not being able to keep ANYTHING down. Like the worst stomach flu you can ever imagine that lasts for 9 months.

http://health.yahoo.net/comments/15246/list

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:38 PM

134. If she has hyperemesis gravidarum, she should be

hospitalized. I'm not saying that is her diagnosis, but only her doctors know for certain.
It's more common in first pregnancies or if there is a potential complication. She might need IV fluids to keep her adequately hydrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:04 AM

139. I had to be hospitalized for morning sickness.

My platoon sgt sent me in after sick call booted me out several times. The final straw was having an inspection called. Iwas prepared for it, but after a week or two of not eating I was too weak to stand for any length of time. So I did what in my mind made sense. We were all in formation and everyone else was standing upright at attention. I did the best I could to be in the at-attention pose, except I was flat on my back. The guy asked what was going on and I told him to go ahead and inspect me, I was ready, I just didn't have it in me to stand up for it. It's hilarious to me now, but at the time I didn't see why this would be a problem; he could still see me fine.

He had two people cart me off to ER, my lower number in my blood pressure was 53. I had lost a little over 20 pounds in about 2 weeks at that point, my face had gone numb, I was passing out more and more frequently - including once when I was halfway across an intersection. I was in the army hospital for a few weeks on an IV til they could get me functioning.

Anyway. Long story short - women's health problems are health problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noamnety (Reply #139)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:59 AM

141. I had severe morning sickness as well. Barfed for four solid months.

One day in the spring I was outside a lot, because it was the day of my father-in-law's funeral. That evening I got an upset tummy. I was about 2 months pregnant. The exposure to mold and pollen caused allergic inflammation which led to a sinus infection.

I threw up twice a day for four solid months. I told my obstetrician about it. He said "It's just morning sickness." I said, "No it is not. It's a sinus infection. I'm throwing up because it's sinus drainage."

Well, at 24 weeks, I had only gained 6 pounds from my pre-pregnancy weight. That finally got his attention. I was hospitalized and told the doctor again that it was a sinus infection. He got me antibiotic IVs and I stopped vomiting within a few hours. I was right. The ultrasound showed the baby had growth retardation.

The week after that, because I could eat and keep food down, I gained five pounds, and had to stop working because it hurt too much to sit up, due to the pressure of the baby on my ribs at 25 weeks. I am a small person with small bones and pregnancy was a huge strain on my body.

fortunately, the doctor was an excellent surgeon. I had a planned mandatory C-section and a healthy huge 8 pounder, and the scar looked like a natural wrinkle. When I delivered I weighed 187 lbs. and could barely walk. My knees were starting to give out on me.

I think a lot of people don't understand that pregnancy and delivery (esp. when it's major abdominal surgery) can be a massive strain on a woman's body. Especially small women.

Baby is a healthy adult now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:14 AM

144. Hyperemesis gravidarum is the condition of severe vomiting during pregnancy and can be fatal...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:33 AM

145. Of course you don't understand why.

YOU didn't have to put up with it. And you don't necessarily "barf" once and get on with your day. It can rival any bad day-after hangover you can imagine.

And this is just run-of-the-mill morning sickness.

What Kate has could, in some cases, be dangerous to both her and the baby.

I think the operative phrase in your post is, "I fathered three sons..." Want to share any assumptions about labor and delivery as long as you're here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AngryOldDem (Reply #145)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:02 PM

161. I'll remember that next time I have a bad hangover.

Perhaps a trip to the ER for treatment will be in order. I could assume they'd admit me for a few days until I feel better, or at least to treat me for my apparent alcoholism, but I'd assume wrongly. I'd properly be told that hospitals are for those who's life is in peril from a serious illness or injury and to suck it up, go home, and suffer it out. Commoners have suffered through morning sickness like this for a millennium.

The same would happen if I showed up with the flu, strep throat, or even food poisoning, and I don't even have a staff of devoted servants waiting to ease my suffering. My family doctor doesn't come to my palace manse for home treatment. I've never read an obit resulting from "acute morning sickness", and until a licensed physician tells me otherwise, I don't believe that can be termed a life threatening complication of pregnancy. I'm strongly convinced her status as a national treasure is the most likely reason she and the heir in her womb is in a hospital room right now.

I believe this despite the pile on from defensive women here who have also suffered acute morning sickness. It appears many are merely searching for a deeper motive, often citing what they feel are key phrases and misogynous code words for my lack of concern that just isn't there.

I was in a car accident some years ago and badly sprained my ankle. I went to the ER only after I went into a state of shock and spent about four hours there before they put an air cast on it, and rightly told me to go home and see my family doctor the next day.

I didn't feel like they were attacking me with gender bias by branding me a hypochondriac "sissy". I required my situation to be stabilized, not a week of pampering in a private room, and after a few months on crutches and Vicodins, I miraculously recovered. Still hurts when it rains, but I'm not asking for a lengthy line of well wishers to offer up their compassion and sympathy. I'm not exactly a prince you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #161)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:41 PM

163. I imagine conflating a "pile on from defensive women" with different opinions

I imagine conflating a "pile on from defensive women" with different opinions is both convenient and self-validating...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #161)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:44 PM

169. Medical dictionaries:

Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary:
hyperemesis gravidarum

Persistent, continuous, severe, pregnancy-related nausea and vomiting, often accompanied by dry retching. The condition can cause systemic effects such as dehydration, weight loss, fluid-electrolyte and acid-base imbalance leading to metabolic acidosis, and rarely, death. About 2 out of 1000 pregnant women require hospitalization for medical management of the disorder. SEE: morning sickness; Nursing Diagnoses Appendix.
SYMPTOMS

This condition of unknown etiology may start as a simple vomiting of early pregnancy, but if it persists, dehydration, protein, chloride, sodium and potassium depletion, dehydration, and contraction alkalosis occur.
TREATMENT

Early management includes bedrest; small, frequent, high-carbohydrate feedings; moderate fluid restriction; and mild sedation. In severe cases, the patient is hospitalized for complete bedrest and rehydration. Vitamin and electrolyte-enhanced parenteral fluids are administered. An antiemetic safe for use in early pregnancy may be used to control vomiting. Feeding via total parenteral nutrition is rarely necessary.

When the patient improves, food taken by mouth should consist of a light solid diet given in frequent small feedings, with fruit juice or milk between feedings and a mid-night snack to help stabilize blood glucose levels. Vitamin B may be prescribed intramuscularly or intranasally to begin correction of vitamin deficiencies. Sitting upright during and for 30 to 45 min after meals helps to reduce gastric reflux. Termination of the pregnancy is indicated only when the woman fails to respond to medical measures and is approaching serious physiological jeopardy.

Mosby's Emergency Dictionary
hyperemesis gravidarum /-em┤əsis/
an abnormal condition of pregnancy marked by long-term vomiting, weight loss, and fluid and electrolyte imbalance. If the condition is severe, liver and kidney failure may result

Black's Medical Dictionary
Hyperemesis Gravidarum

A rare condition (less than 0.2 per cent) of pregnancy, in which there is severe vomiting. If untreated it can result in severe dehydration, ketoacidosis (an excess of KETONE acids) and liver damage. More common in multiple pregnancy, it may recur in subsequent pregnancies.

And so on. Since the hospitalisation has resulted in the pregnancy becoming public earlier than they wished, it's unlikely they've done this because she's a 'national treasure'. It would have been better for them if she hadn't gone into hospital at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:28 AM

155. I thought that too

Though it could be a legitimately bad condition which ordinary Britons would be hospitalized for, too.

OTOH, not surprising they would take extra car, as this fetus is third in line to the throne - historic!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:00 PM

62. I cannot stand this pseudo-deification of royalty, particularly

since they profited so much on slavery, including involuntary servitude in this country. It is only a relatively recent idea that we are the closest of allies. Before we fought a number of battles, wars, and more, seeking independence from the very crown that people now seem to cherish.

What a strange thing to do when this is DEMOCRATIC underground.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChairmanAgnostic (Reply #62)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:01 PM

64. Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves and raped his female slaves.

Should we demolish the Jefferson Memorial?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #64)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:17 PM

74. Question about that

How many slaves is he thought to have raped?

I'm not refuting the claim, but I'm sadly ignorant of the subject. I was chiefly aware of Sally Hemmings, and that their relationship was, in a word, complicated. I would value further information on the matter.

Sure, I can google it, but if someone has information to share, then I'd appreciate their insight.



Incidentally, although we shouldn't necessarily tear down the Jefferson Memorial, we absolutely shouldn't worship him as some sort of superhuman "royal" or "noble." He was a man, taken for all and all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChairmanAgnostic (Reply #62)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:00 PM

84. If you look at it through the right lens

As someone said above, it's about celebrity more then anything else.

And the US is celebrity central. People humiliate themselves every day on TV to become celebrities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Confusious (Reply #84)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:14 PM

86. too true, but, hell. If Adolph's girl friend were alive, she'd probably have her own

War Criminal's Talent Show every Thursday night on Fox.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:05 PM

69. I Feel Sorry For Kate

 

her being forced to be nothing but a brood mare for the continued production of Roayl twerps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1ProudAtheist (Reply #69)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:12 PM

85. Why on earth do you feel sorry for Kate?

She loves William, and he her.....They wanted to have a family. She most certainly is not a brood mare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1ProudAtheist (Reply #69)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:34 PM

108. nobody "forced" her into anything

and she knew very well that having a family was necessary, but that aside, they always said - even before the wedding - that they wanted a family.

Congratulations to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:15 PM

72. and i have a reaally

big, red and extremely sore pimple on my ass. it's as news worthy as these two remnants of an imperial society repro ducing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hockeynut57 (Reply #72)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:29 PM

75. Congratulations on your ass pimple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:35 PM

79. we need exlusive pictures of the vomit...where is "News of the World" when you want them....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:39 PM

80. Who? And why do I care?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WeekendWarrior (Reply #80)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 05:36 AM

146. I dunno...

...it's been kind of a welcome distraction from all the other bad shit going down in the world, but that's just me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:53 PM

83. Come to america...say no to monarchy!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #83)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:40 PM

97. Absolutely!

Down with Dynastic rule - people have come to this great nation from all over the world fleeing tyrany and oppression and seeking the right to democratic, meritocratic government. the idea that you might have 'ruling clans' where generations of rich families inhabit the highest offices of the land is just shocking - it would be preposterous to think that one President might be followed by his Son a mere 8 years after he left office, or that that Presidents brother might be a serious candate for yet another Presidency (while being the Govenor of their home state): its the kind of thing you'd see in some banana republic.

or that a former Presidents wife would become a senior figure in another presidents administration (i think she's a pretty good SesState, but you get my point...)

or that 4 generations of a family with a not unblemished personal and political record would hold a succession of Senate, Administration and even Presidential offices in a pattern that could almost be decibed as feudal...


oh, hang on...

stone, meet glass house

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #83)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:42 PM

103. Last poll 2011

showed that 61% of the American public approved of the Queen and similarly 57% Prince William. With regard the Royal family being good for the UK public in general the figure was 71% for and 15% against.

That leaves you as part of a Republican minority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #103)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:04 PM

133. Hahahahahaha.

Fuck the queen and anyone else who calls themselves royalty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:44 PM

98. Congratulations to her and her family.

Congratulations to her and her family.

And as an added bonus, this birth seems to have frustrated a particular demographic... and that makes me giggle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:58 PM

99. Congrats to Prince William and Kate :) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:50 PM

105. Uh Oh. . .

Now I know what we're going to be hearing about 24-7 non-stop for the next 9 months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigDemVoter (Reply #105)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:03 PM

106. I'll try to keep DU posted with updates in LBN (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:37 PM

109. Follow @RoyalFetus on twitter

Quite funny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:47 PM

113. If only the Queen's uncle had married someone else then it would not be big news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libinnyandia (Reply #113)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:26 PM

123. Wasn't he unable to bear children?

I've read that Elizabeth would have been queen eventually anyway due to this fact. Though I suppose one change in history could have had some sort of ripple effect and Charles could have ended up with someone else entirely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blasphemer (Reply #123)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:58 PM

131. Probably not, being a male and all

It's the females who do the bearing. Whether he was able to sire any is up in the air - he didn't have any known children, and his wife didn't have any by her first two husbands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Retrograde (Reply #131)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:46 PM

138. Yes... wrong word choice there

However, it could suggest a more interesting explanation for his alleged infertility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blasphemer (Reply #123)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:03 PM

135. I read that he had mumps as a teenager

Which often causes male infertility and one reason he deliberately chose an "unsuitable" partner is that he did not want to be subject to public scrutiny if he was unable to father a child.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie (Reply #135)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:37 AM

140. Ah, but there is a different opinion on the fertility of Wallis and Edward


Read this, and examine the pictures:

http://we3.org/


Stranger than fiction??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Manifestor_of_Light (Reply #140)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:09 AM

142. stranger than medication?

a true virgin birth story - a 'revelation' from God, or perhaps more likely, cheap wine - and the mother, who at the time was one of the most photographed women in the world, yet somehow no one ever noticed that she was pregnant.

any chance that the story also involves an alien abduction (why do aliens prefer drunk/slightly simple hicks who live in trailer parks?), and possibly a 'forbidden love story' involving an appropriate hollywood star?

please, do go on...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to andypandy (Reply #142)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:08 PM

167. she looks more like Queen Elizabeth than the Queen's sister, Margaret.

This was before they got famous as a couple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:43 AM

152. ...hey, don't look at me!

I got an alibi...I'm sure of it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 02:51 PM

166. In the ancient city of London, on a certain autumn day...

In the ancient city of London, on a certain autumn day in the second quarter of the sixteenth century, a boy was born to a poor family of the name of Canty, who did not want him. On the same day another English child was born to a rich family of the name of Tudor, who did want him. All England wanted him too. England had so longed for him, and hoped for him, and prayed God for him, that, now that he was really come, the people went nearly mad for joy. Mere acquaintances hugged and kissed each other and cried. Everybody took a holiday, and high and low, rich and poor, feasted and danced and sang, and got very mellow; and they kept this up for days and nights together. By day, London was a sight to see, with gay banners waving from every balcony and housetop, and splendid pageants marching along. By night, it was again a sight to see, with its great bonfires at every corner, and its troops of revellers making merry around them. There was no talk in all England but of the new baby, Edward Tudor, Prince of Wales, who lay lapped in silks and satins, unconscious of all this fuss, and not knowing that great lords and ladies were tending him and watching over him--and not caring, either. But there was no talk about the other baby, Tom Canty, lapped in his poor rags, except among the family of paupers whom he had just come to trouble with his presence.

http://www.americanliterature.com/author/mark-twain/book/the-prince-and-the-pauper/chapter-i-the-birth-of-the-prince-and-the-pauper

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prometheus Bound (Reply #166)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:46 AM

175. I have always loved that story!

Of course, I was a teenager when I read it, but I was completely charmed...

Thank you for the delightful reminder!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread