The Goat Pen

isn't red hair a bit of a wild card in the gene pool anyways?

With freckles.

Supposedly the queen disliked Diana, amongst other reasons, b/c the Spencer fambly is far more ancient in Great Britain than her Jaw-neh come lately Saxe-Coburg-Gotha line that are really just a bunch of foreigners to start with...

Bklyn,

The queen would absolutely have brought it out. To not do so would be the death of their bloodline as monarchs. And, supposedly, she was the one who demanded that Diana publicly admit the affair. She apparently thought it would make her be hated with the public. It did not.

I'm not a lover of the Royals, but I don't believe Diana was even introduced to the major until after the first child was born. Who knows.

Am I the only one that thinks Chelsea Clinton looks alot like Webster Hubbel?

AlabamAlum wrote:I'm not a lover of the Royals, but I don't believe Diana was even introduced to the major until after the first child was born.

Harry is the bastard, IMO, not William (the first born). I would be more in line believe your line of thought if the bloodline was not secure with William (who is soooo obviously his father's child). But with him being the first born male, the throne was not in jeopardy.

Also, since Harry is the second born, it would make sense that Major could legitimately be his father.

(I'm almost embarassed to be still talking about this...I was really just amazed at how much we like this chick, considering how nuts she was)

Aristocrats can't be nuts, only eccentric.

I don't think the queen would consider one son (especially considering the Royals' scandals and 'required' military service) safe for the preservation of the bloodline. The "heir and a spare" cliché exists for a reason.

Just think, if QEII's uncle Eddie hadn't abdicated, nobody would have even heard of her or any of her offspring. They'd all be distant from any hope at the throne. Just goes to show how fickle the strings of fortune are upon which the monarchy dangles...

I couldn't give less of a shit about any of the lot.

Exactly. As brook said. I'm a but embarrassed talking about them as much as I did.

Oh pshaw. They're as much a topic of general interest and conversation as most of the other generally worthless people we discuss in here on a regular basis. They're the Kardashians with a pedigree. Not that that's saying anything. But we spend our life in here discussing a revolving door of teenage kids who play football and basketball, what's the shame in an occasional mention of a dynastic royal fambly of europe? Now then, if somebody wanted to start a thread about it, I'd advocate that person's immediate assassination, but I don't see that happening (somebody asking to start a thread on the royals, that is, not my calling for someone's immediate assassination, which I feel as a personal duty as well as a delightful sideline). And I have to say I'm a bit shocked at Cletus turning on his own kind like this. You know very well Liz or Chas or Wilie would be welcomed with open arms at The Grove (in the highly unlikely event that they deigned to attend the festivities). Shame on you...

Navy Yard Shooter - arrested 3 times, one for shooting out the tires of a car he thought was spying on him, was not convicted on any of them - clean record for background check.

Went to VA citing voices in head and microwave beams trying to hurt him. Laws prevent VA from telling anyone.

Yet we'll talk about gun legislation for the next two weeks, attempting to outlaw assault rifles even though he used a Remington 870 shotgun - the last gun that will ever be outlawed.

The common denominator isn't guns, its crazy people

The bigger story buried in this is military roles and clearances being outsourced to non-military personnel. Some want our government small enough to drown in a bathtub, but what you oftentimes get is a government that people still want around and key components of the government outsourced to the private sector. This leads you to the DC shooter and Edward Snowdens of the world. Our security clearance permissions and levels are out of control.

so you're saying bureaucracy would have kept those people alive?

No. It doesn't have to be bureaucratic and all government functions are not necessarily bogged down by bureaucracy.

That's true, but something like this could very easily have been done by a legit govertnment employee. Just so happened that this time it was an outsourced guy...

When it keeps happening with outsourced resources, then maybe one should look at the model. That's all I'm saying.

I agree. Just saying that crazy isn't limited to employee status...

Starbucks finds themselves in a policy snafu they didn't ask for.

They recently made the mistake of publicly commenting on gun policy - which basically was them saying they'd honor local gun laws but pro gun zealots decided that starbucks was to become a rallying point so they all start showing up looking like Rambo's and scaring off all the birkenstock crowd that Starbucks needs to sell $7 coffee's.

So the CEO reiterates (after the Navy incident) that while Starbucks honors local gun laws, he'd prefer that gun owners quit acting like complete douchebags showing up with flashy silver plated .45s and walking around the parking lot with AR-15's

Its these "I will not go quietly into the night" fucksticks that are making responsible gun owners lives that much harder in the court of public opinion



I'd want to punch this ass right in the face. I bet he was an avid airsoft / paintball player 5 years ago. No one can convince me that is responsible gun ownership.