Not fit to be king

I don't have a lot of time for royalty at the best of times, bit of respect for the Queen, yes, like Prince Philip for what he says when he speaks his mind, yes. Prince harry for at least going into combat sure. The rest I wouldn't miss save only that they are probably a bit cheaper than a presidential system. However one royal I simply cannot abide is our next king Prince Charles, more for his utter hypocrisy in saying one thing and doing another.
Mail.

Prince Charles ‘consorted’ with ministers to push his agenda on climate change, alternative medicine and grammar schools, politicians have admitted.
The revelations show for the first time that Charles is not only listened to at the highest levels of government – his views can sometimes influence policy.
Former Labour environment minister Michael Meacher said he worked behind the scenes with the Prince of Wales in a bid to persuade Tony Blair to ‘change course’ on green matters and to block genetically-modified crops.
Charles prompted Peter Hain, another former Cabinet minister, to promote the provision of complementary medicine on the NHS.
And he tried – but failed – to persuade then Education Secretary David Blunkett of the merits of grammar schools.

Well we all know what an utter scam climate change lobbying is, it's simply been used for a tax grab and those who believe that humankind is responsible for a major change in the planets climate are deluded, charlatans or fraudsters. As for complementary medicine, some of it is efficacious, however a lot of it on the herbal side is useless and in some cases downright bloody dangerous. Genetically modified crops are not as dangerous as some would like us to believe and could be a godsend to countries struggling with drought or pests, but the green lobby has dubbed them frankenfoods and is determined that millions starve because in their view the planet is massively overpopulated.
Frankly Charles should not be meddling in politics, the Queen meets the PM once a week to be filled in about what's going on, whilst I'm sure she has views, she never openly interferes with government policy. Charles however is a meddler and believes he knows best, despite the fact that he often enough doesn't. Still the last thing we need heading the country is an opinionated man who will try and influence policy, particularly the hypocritical Charles who although he promotes a green lifestyle has when staying in Scotland had his food driven up from Cornwall in fume belching Rangerovers rather than use local produce.
The man is clearly unfit to be king, hence long live the Queen!

For once I'm with the BBC on this...

I rarely agree with what the BBC allegedly puts out as news and opinion, they claim to be impartial, although the evidence gathered by such sites as Biased BBC clearly shows that they are anything but. Generally the BBC see themselves as impartial as they get equal complaints from both left and right or what the BBC consider to be 'right' if we're trying to be accurate. The evidence though tells us that left wingers such as the Labour Party get a far easier ride with the BBC and when reporting certain news stories the BBC will always slant them from a left wing viewpoint which is why they never report accurately on stories about muslims, Israel, the EDL or indeed the Tory party.
Still, when it came to the royal christening, the BBC appears to have got it right... admittedly from my jaundiced viewpoint.
Telegraph.

The BBC has been criticised for its coverage of the Royal christening after relegating Prince George’s baptism to an “and finally” segment.
The Corporation’s flagship news shows both made Prince George’s christening the last item on their programmes.
BBC 1’s 6pm and 10pm news programmes devoted two minutes each to the event at the Chapel Royal of St James’s Palace.
A segment about the spread of false widow spiders was given greater prominence on one of the BBC programmes.
“I was appalled,” said Andrew Rosindell, the Tory MP for Romford. “The BBC is the national broadcaster.
“An event such as that should have been given greater prominence. People will be very surprised to see that it was an ‘and finally’ item bearing in mind that it is a slot usually reserved for non-serious items.”

Well to me it was an 'and finally' article and pretty much non-serious either, my interest in the royals begins and ends with how much money they bring into the country via trade and tourism, not their soap opera lives. It was a Wednesday and it was obviously a slow news day hence the inclusion of the christening I presume, otherwise why bother other than to pander to the diminishing royalist watchers.
As you can gather I've little time for most of the royals, I respect the Queen, like the Duke of Edinburgh's talent for speaking what's exactly on his mind and grudgingly respect Harry for at least sticking with the Army, although how much in danger he really was in is anyone's guess.
As for the rest, sorry not much time at all for them, not saying some don't do a good job, but if they do, it's not newsworthy or of interest to me.
So the BBC sticking the story right on the end of the news was fine by me, I don't watch it anyway and at least with my radio at work I can tune out the inanity of the presenters when they go a-gushing about trivia, which is essentially what most news about the royals is...

We can but hope

Prince Charles is the man who would be king and fears he is running out of time, after all he's 64 and his mother is 86 and his grandmother lived until she was 101. Thing is though, no one but Charles and a few of his closest friends believe he'd make a good king...
Telegraph.

In a series of remarkably candid comments, Prince Charles hinted that he feared his legacy as king would be cut short.
During a visit to Dumfries House, the stately home in East Ayrshire which the Prince helped save for the nation, he joked about his reputation for pursuing projects with notorious vigour but made a poignant reference to his mortality.
He said: “Impatient? Me? What a thing to suggest! Yes of course I am.” He added: “I’ll run out of time soon. I shall have snuffed it if I’m not careful.”

Well from a man who thought it perfectly ok to keep a married woman as his mistress. All that stuff over Princess Diana. Who believes that he should be defender of all faiths (including Islam) Talking to plants (I could possibly live with that one) Unable even to put his own toothpaste on his toothbrush. Goes on endlessly about green policies yet has his own veg driven from Cornwall to Balmoral in four fume belching range-rovers which despite running on vegetable oil are hardly 'green'
No, Charles is not exactly my ideal of a good king, I'm not exactly in favour of a monarchy in the first place, though having seen what politicians can do it seems a slightly better option than the likes of someone like Tony Blair ever becoming president. Popularity contests (which in essence is what all elections are) inevitably allow some real charlatans access to the levers of power and prestige.
Still, considering the longevity of the ladies in the House of Gotha Saxe Coburg Windsor we can but hope her majesty continues to reign for a long time yet.
Whilst I doubt now that Charles would have the time to become a disaster for the UK, best not to take any chances...