Prince Baldy Tied the Knot, On to the Baby Making

Filed in International by on April 29, 2011

I’m all for the harmless fun of a Royal Wedding. If you look at it as a celebrity event – yes it is nauseating. But if you think about that fact that the English invented this system of elaborate pomp and pageantry to protect their society from 50 – 100 years of strife and turmoil every time a King kicked the bucket, it makes a little more sense.

Our historical frame of reference is idiotically short, so we have long forgotten the debt that we owe to Brittish royals (and commoners) who worked out the system over hundreds of years through bloody wars and tough negotiations.

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (49)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Auntie Dem says:

    Totally corny and I loved every minute. I got up at 5:00 to watch all the spectacle. The couple was lovely.

  2. delbert says:

    At the pub yesterday afternoon a friend wondered aloud what the big deal was with the Brit Royals to the Americans that ogle over it, as we watched footage on a flat screen. My answer was this: the Brits founded the East coast of this land from a power standpoint, and hung onto it for about 150 years until we overthrew them. But if not for them, WHAT would we be? Hence the otherwise ridiculous attachment to The Crown.

  3. heragain says:

    I don’t owe Britain shit, and the royals less. I’m Irish, dammit. We’re just an early example of what those people did when they could get a native population to oppress.

    Someone in my twitter timeline tweeted that she was
    “I love showing this to my kids and say see anything is possible”

    It’s freaking 1952.

  4. Geezer says:

    If you were “Irish,” you’d live in Ireland. Hate them all you want. Doesn’t change the fact that, as Americans, we clearly do trace our government to British roots.

  5. socialistic ben says:

    Eastern european with hardly any ancestry in this country prior to 1900.
    Besides, pretty soon most of this nation will be able to trace their roots to south of the Rio Grande 🙂 How does THAT taste you bunch of Tories?

  6. socialistic ben says:

    “Doesn’t change the fact that, as Americans, we clearly do trace our government to British roots.”

    maybe if you are talking about how the lower house of government is a bunch of uncivilized curs who yell at each other.

  7. delbert says:

    “south of the Rio Grande”

    Probably the largest human exodus in history within the Americas we have witnessed.

  8. jason330 says:

    Suck it delbert and then thank your lazy/cheap American captains of industry.

    Better yet. Blame capitalism. You don’t see North Koreans entering the country do you?

  9. socialistic ben says:

    Delbert, this may blow your mind, but the whole reason Texas exists is because poor white americans ILLEGALLY immigrated to then mexico looking for work…. they, in classic white-people fashion decided it was THEIR land, killed the indigenous population and claimed it was God’s will.

  10. Jason330 says:

    Viva Aztlan!

    English has had a nice long run, but I’m looking forward to Spanish as the official language.

  11. Aoine says:

    I am truely amazed at the lack of history education displayed here

    The Brits setteled the east coast northwards from the Carolinas,

    the other eurpoeans here, and here for about 200 years LONGER than the Brits were the SPANISH – duh
    The crown of Spain already had control of South America, Central America and most of what is now the United STates of America.

    We did not get those lands until the Lousiana purchase.

    And please remember that the plantations all had BLACK AFRICAN slaves working their lands. There was a sigificant number of them in the Southern states

    So making this a WASP nation is not just revisionist history but fantasy mixed with racism as well.

    I mean really, where would we be without Eli Whitney, Ponce De Leon, Coronado, the Underground railroad , the Iriquois, Oneida, Seneca, Cherokee, Nipmuc, Naragansset, ?? there were many others here, Black, Native, Hispanic and together, they far out numbered the whites.

    SO, you fucking idiot delbert -they were all already here about 100 years before your lily-white-assed ancestors showed up to try to disposses them and steal their lands.

    how does that taste?

  12. socialistic ben says:

    Shame on you Aoine.
    The fist REAL people here were the Pilgrims at Plymouth rock who escaped an evil socialist muslim gaybortion regime to start a new land where people could freely practice fundamentalist christianity or be freely burned alive.

  13. Dana Garrett says:

    I might owe parts of the structure of my goverment and its jurisprudence to the British, but I don’t owe the royals one shred of respect for their official status; nor am I obligated to give any more regard to the significance of their weddings than I am the weddings of strangers. The existence of a royal class is terribly anachronistic and hardly worth the expense it costs the tax paying commoners.

  14. V says:

    I’m allowed to be a feminist and still appreciate looking at a really pretty dress.
    Bitch wore McQueen. She brought it.

    also, I have an unhealthy attachment to epic hats.

  15. Geezer says:

    “making this a WASP nation is not just revisionist history but fantasy mixed with racism as well.”

    The nation, as opposed to European occupation of the Americas, was founded by WASPs, as were our political traditions and our legal system, which is based on British common law. Just sayin’.

  16. Dana Garrett says:

    I agree, Jason. Since Spanish is the inevitable dominat language of the USA, I say let’s start preparing for the eventuality now. Require students to learn Spanish in school and speak it part of the time during school. Require all signs and official documents to have a Spainish translation. Begin the process of deciding on a definitive translation of the US Constitution now. I’m serious about this. It’s ridiculous for us to carry on as if the significant historical changes that happen to every nation, culture and region won’t happen to us.

  17. socialistic ben says:

    not if we build a big enough wall….. and make our country so unattractive no one wants to come here. that’ll show em!

  18. Dana Garrett says:

    SB, you might be on to something. Perhaps if we continue the assault on the middle class and transfer most of the wealth to the upper classes, no one will want to immigrate here and we can maintain the English language. That would be worth massive impoverishment.

  19. heragain says:

    So, Geezer, our “melting pot” means that we’re all WASP, now.

    Awesome. Where do I stock up on wide-wale corduroys?

  20. Geezer says:

    Note that I was speaking of our forms of government and law, and made clear I was doing so.

  21. skippertee says:

    To counter the influx of Spanish speaking people a movement to annex Russia needs to begin immediately.
    We have no time to lose.

  22. liberalgeek says:

    I heard the NBC commentators this morning say, with awe, that Prince Charles has never put toothpaste on his own toothbrush. They assumed that it was because he had a servant do it for him, but then I saw his teeth…

  23. cassandra m says:

    How would an NBC commentator know that Prince Charles has never put toothpaste on his own toothbrush?

  24. heragain says:

    Geezer “our system of government and laws” was designed to address the failures of the British legal system. Although there is a basis in ‘Common law’, which, as you might expect, owes little to “the royals”, and has roots back to the Magna Carta (a document specifically drawn up to limit the power of… oh, that’s right, British Royalty) it also draws on Enlightenment concepts, and the Puritans would have been EXTREMELY surprised that an English Royal Wedding was an occasion for Americans to celebrate.

  25. cassandra m says:

    So, Geezer, our “melting pot” means that we’re all WASP, now.

    Who’s this *We*? Some of us are in no danger of ever being WASPs, you know.

  26. heragain says:

    Yup, cassandra. Part of my point.

    It seems absurd to even suggest, when we just lived through that “birth certificate” business that the population of the USA is somehow beholden to the House of Windsor.

  27. Geezer says:

    I wasn’t addressing the royal wedding. I was addressing the issue of whether this nation owes something to England. BTW, the “failures” of the British governmental system (they had very little problem with the legal system, except as it applied to treason) were not related to governance of the home country but rather to its colonies, which were granted no representation in Parliament.

    The House of Windsor, for what it’s worth, isn’t even English. It’s German.

  28. donviti says:

    If I knew that I could have a king and queen, get a solid retirement guarantee, good vacation packages and great health care benefits…

    I think I might be ok with the way they govern….

    oh and their education system isn’t too bad

    oh and their food safety programs are pretty fucking good too

    Why don’t we want a monarchy in the United States?

    that’s right, we have it wayyyyyy better than the middle class in England has it…

  29. Jason330 says:

    Liberalgeek –

    *rimshot*

    I’m not worthy.

  30. Dana Garrett says:

    The monarchy has nothing to do with the benefits the English people enjoy. You can credit the old Labor Party and movement for them. You know, those damn socialists.

  31. Geezer says:

    Isn’t that the “Labour” Party? They can’t even spell their own language!

  32. Dana Garrett says:

    Geezer, I thought of that as I typed it, but then I thought what the heck. I’ll just type it ‘merican.

  33. Geezer says:

    Let it never be said you’re not a patriot.

  34. donviti says:

    Ok, well I’ll still take the freaking monarchy if it means I get all those things you bearded freak you

  35. Jason330 says:

    Update: Kate has placed the blood spotted sheet over the balcony rail, so everything is cool. Carry on.

  36. skippertee says:

    Is that why or where that adjective “BLOODY”they use comes from, Jason?

  37. Von Cracker says:

    I just spit water all over myself. Jus Primae Noctis, Jason.

    Hope Charlie’s not jealous.

  38. Aoine says:

    @Geezer – you need a little more education – actually Benjamin Franklin was rather enamored of the native system of rulw and government and borrowed many ideas from them

    so yet again, revisionist history is a terrible thing – too bad – you must be a product of American schools to believe that our entire legal and social constructs are from the British

    thats like the right wing saying we are a christian nation – Actually the founder’s were more deists thatn anything – it was the age of the French Revolution and the moving past the religious constructs

    please do, Geezer, get beyond the high school history books and the slanted view they provide

  39. Dana Garrett says:

    “it was the age of the French Revolution”

    I believe the French Revolution postdates the American Revolution and the latter in part inspired the former, not vice versa.

  40. Von Cracker says:

    Voltaire, Locke, & Rousseau provided much of the philosophy used to build our system than pretty much anybody else.

    So that’s French, English and Swiss, along with the customs and laws from the other European settlements established here before the Brits – Dutch, Swedish & Spanish.

    It’s an amalgamation.

  41. Aoine says:

    Like I said – “the AGE’ of the French revolution

    not the years of – usually things marinate as ideas first

    then action comes later – as in the “age of Enlightment” etc

    I think you know what I meant

  42. Joe Cass says:

    To the depths with the crown and all it represents. Its appalling that any American attends to or give credence to a failed imperialist nation. Up the RA!

  43. MJ says:

    Well JC, I rather enjoyed watching it and I’m a bit of an Anglophile. There is nothing wrong with the constitutional monarchy that the UK has (and I have a vested interest since my partner is a relative of Her Majesty and a direct descendant of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine). I don’t see anything appalling in it at all.

  44. Joe Cass says:

    More power to you, MJ. What some find appalling other may see as amusing. I don’t dictate, I’m just a dick.

  45. Frieda Berryhill says:

    Seemed strange to see Charles come in with Camilla Parker Bowles

    It was a brilliant day of celebration for Prince William and Kate Middleton, but Queen Elizabeth II wasn’t ready to share her joy with daughter-in-law Camilla Parker Bowles.

    Womder what the boys were thinking about that Stepmother

  46. Brian Shields says:

    The queen seemed bored by it all. I predict in 5 years she gives the throne up to the new Duke and Dutchess and lives in happy retirement. The only reason she hasn’t so far is because Prince Charles is somehow unworthy of the throne, probably the whole Camilla thing.

    Anyone else notice Kate’s turkey buttons had popped when she stepped out on the way into the Abbey? Odd reaction, I thought. Excitement, not nervousness… but then as she walked down the isle her hand started shaking as reality struck.

    ..and what is with the freakin hats? One girl had a salted pretzel on her freakin face.

  47. jason330 says:

    I know the one you are talking about. I’ll bet if you google the term “worst hat” it will be the top response.