We must be off our collective rocker to perpetuate (and to keep paying for) this unelected clan of inbred spongers.
 
Anti-monarchy campaigners Republic get it right:
 
========================================================================
Royal baby reminder that British democracy has limits, no-go areas for voters
September 8 2014
 
The announcement of the new royal baby is a clear reminder that in Britain we're not all born equal - that British democracy has it's limits, according to campaign group Republic.

The group's chief executive Graham Smith said today:

"Like thousands of other parents-to-be across the country, Kate and William must be thrilled - but their news just highlights the absurdity of hereditary office and focuses minds on what kind of future we want for Britain."

"People are rightly asking: "Why doesn't every child have the chance to be head of state?  Can we really be equal in a country of royal births and power and privilege for one family?""

"A royal baby is great news for the republican movement as it raises serious questions about the future of the monarchy, ones the royal family would rather avoid."

"Next year, while we get to vote for who leads our government we get told again who will be in line to be head of state - the people will be told in no uncertain terms that our democracy has limits, no-go areas that are off limits to the public."

"These big issues of state and identity clearly matter to people - as we're seeing in Scotland.  The monarchy has to be the next big issue on the constitutional agenda. Another royal birth will only remind people why the monarchy is a bad fit for modern Britain."
========================================================================

Where's Diana when we need her?
 
No, not that Diana. I mean Wonder Woman.

Ahh...  I remember the hyped up headlines fondly!
 

 

 
I'm not a happy bunny.

craigb
Ahh...  I remember the hyped up headlines fondly!
 

 

Can't see that pic either, but I just somehow know it's the Private Eye cover 'Woman Has Baby'

"But but but the tourism money they bring into the country..."

Yeah well if that's the case, why don't they run themselves as a self sufficient tourist attraction instead of shaking down the peons?

 
I wouldn't give a flying feck who is head of state, how many of them there are, how much they cost, or who pays for them, providing they are democratically elected - I'll happily abide by the decision of the majority. I still wouldn't bow to any of them though.
 
It's the twenty-first century and we still have kings and queens and princes and princesses, and we are supposed to bow and scrape to them, allow them to live a life of unabashed luxury, look up to and respect them as our 'betters', and... get this... we even get to feckin' well pay for the 'privilege'.
 
Still, it won't matter anyway in a generation or two when we're all under the cosh of the shari'ah.
 
What ever has this once proud nation come to.

''The Only Way is Wessex''
 
~ Alfred The Great

On the plus side we'll hopefully get rid of the sweaties next week, so that should save more than enough to buy some extra farleys rusks and pampers.

 

paulo
On the plus side we'll hopefully get rid of the sweaties next week, so that should save more than enough to buy some extra farleys rusks and pampers.

If we don't, we could always start a campaign for English independence from them.
 
Nobody has mentioned this possibility.