Thursday, 25 September 2008

King McRae

Exciting news for all of us who harbour dreams of ruling over our fellow men: it is now not necessary to be protestant or male to be heir to the throne of England. To be fair, those requirements weren't necessarily a struggle for me. Now the only thing standing between me and a life of pointless luxury and constant tabloid coverage, is the fact that I wasn't singled out by God to be born in the right bed, to some(foreign) blue-blood, probably so in-bred that for every child born with the requisite number of limbs there is a baby in the attic with the head of an ant. Jesus-fucking-Christ, are we still putting Royal stories (even constitutional ones) on the front page of serious newspapers? Some days I struggle to find evidence that we live in a grown-up world. Maybe Sarah Palin is right, maybe the planet is only 7000 years old. That would explain alot.

PS. To everyone who says the Royal family don't harm anyone, or that they bring in tourists' money... and give us some sense of heritage and tradition... I say this: they establish the fact (one compounded by private education, hereditary peers... etc) that the bed in which you were born will be the defining characteristic of your life. What the fuck does that mean for those of us born in Chelmsford?

PPS. There goes the OBE.


  1. "Jesus-fucking-Christ" enjoy your life for once instead of complaining about everything.

  2. They all talk about your kenzo advert. Yes it's cool but do you remember Andreas Johnson (or stuff like that) now everyone calls him "nutella"
    ok i shut up...
    By the way, I like your "complaining about everything" you are open minded and curious on such things. But come on Tom some people wants you to be a teletubbies, self obsessed and ignorant.I have a question: when I criticize something does it means that I’m necessarily sad?

  3. Well I've never been a royalist so I'd have to agree with you and cannot understand their worth as far as the UK is concerned. I can't help but think if we didn't have a Royal Family then there would be a lot more in the government's funds to actually go to the people of this country who weren't born in the right bed but have to work bloody hard to earn a crust. Where everyone of us are having to tighten our purse strings big time with this recession I haven't read anywhere where the Royal Family are actually doing the same, they'll still expect the tax payer to fund their lifestyle.
    My worst thing was when my son before he went off to Afghanistan that he was going out there for his Queen and Country.......I mean WTF! what has she got to do with it or how much would she care if my son died......and there was me thinking I was the most important woman in his brainwashing maybe?
    Not everyone will agree what you post Tom but at least you have the balls to put a name to your statement unlike comment number 1 who prefers to be anonomous:-)

  4. "Jesus-fucking-Christ" who, 'being in his very nature God, did not count equality with God as something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant...' turned the whole royalty thing on its head, so it's interesting that you should mention him in this context!

  5. .....*scratches head*...I wasn't born in a bed but in my parents' bathroom, what does that make me?....

    On a more serious note, I live in Canada, and some Canadians don't even know it's a monarchy under some Queen that doesn't even live in canada and come visit every....uh... well, rarely
    What's her implication in all this? I have no clue, I just know her face is on our bank notes...

  6. anonymous number 128 September 2008 at 19:09

    It was just some sort of a quote from one of his own emails.. so it has nothing to do with wanting to be 'anonymous'...

    Anyway,I don't feel like I have to explain myself a little bit more further since it is Toms blog and not yours.
    Have a nice day...x

  7. Wotcher Tom

    One of the great fallacies about the royal family is that they cost a bomb. Taking away all the "bringing in tourist money" crap, the civil list is given to them in lieu of the royal lands. I forget the exact figures but the civil list is in the region of £100m as a cost (including all the upkeep of the property etc) whilst the royal lands generate about £1billion of revenue for the country. Meanwhile they spend the majority of their time (and the civil list money) raising money for charities. Which might sound very Smashey & Nicey till you look at the sort of stuff the Prince's trust gets done.
    So it's pretty easy to call them a bunch of freeloaders, till you realise that their wealth more or less goes back into the country continuously, which is a good deal more you get out of the Abramovitches or Mittels of this world, or even the Duke of Westminster, none of whom have to put up with the Sun poking cameras into every aspect of their lives. About a generation after you get rid of them, you can forget that lovely ongoing stream of money.

    And anyone who says Prince Philip doesn't represent good value for money clearly doesn't have a sense of humour.



Leave your comment, observations,screams of outrage here, and clothing and grooming tips.