Counterintuitive. Archaic. Mindless. And just plain not makin' much sense. I'm talking about the British Crown's Line of Succession, which I was startled to read this week suddenly elevates "Prince" William's newly born little shit George straight above William's younger brother Harry to become the new King if something happens to Old Queen Elizabeth and her notorious offspring Charles.
So let me clear my throat, and let me get this straight: Say the Old Lady jets off to India or somewhere tomorrow for a Big Royal Appearance, with her nefarious son Charles and bald William in tow? And say something happens along the way (Heaven forbid) and the jet goes down (ever seen "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet" from The Twilight Zone?).
You mean to tell me that in that situation, a little 5-day-old punk would suddenly become the King of England? OVER a 28-year-old Harry who would at least be able to make coherent decisions over such important matters as how to spend the Royal budget, where The Family will be appearing in person this year, and what to do with those crappy Region 1 DVDs that the Obamas completely insulted the Royal Family with back in 2009?
Sorry, but I just don't get this whole Limey Succession List thing. Sounds like something straight outta the year 1525. We don't have such issues over here in the States, BTW. When one of ours departs, we just annoint a new Bush, Clinton or Obama as the new Monarch...
That's a tradition here that's been goin' on for 25 plus years now in the Good Ol' U-S-of-A! Although very suddenly now, I take back the derogatory things I said above about the Brits' Royals. At least their royal assholes don't have any real power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_George_of_Cambridge
Posts
