…and this is a 
I can tell. It's coming. A royal heir has gotten engaged to some young woman, and there will be one of those royal weddings, and the sentimental argle-bargle in the British media will soar to new heights of fatuousness. I'll miss most of it, fortunately, but I pity everyone in the United Kingdom who's going to have to suffer with the royal romanticism for a while.
At least this time the Telegraph has set the bar for stupidity abysmally low, and I have no idea how anyone else willl sink lower (the fun will be in the trying, I'm sure). Someone has found a jelly bean that looks like Kate Middleton.
I don't know what this means. Even the candy-making machines in jelly bean factories are infatuated with tabloid press stories about the imminent wedding, and are pressing their obsessions into sugar and gelatin? Kate's visage is so potent that speckles and spots are spontaneously rejiggering themselves to conform? Or, perhaps, credulous idiots are rife in both the public and tabloid editorial rooms?
I suggest that The Telegraph document this novel property of random dots and send a reporter/photographer to the nearest sewage treatment plant and gaze adoringly into the feculent froth until more detailed images of connubial Windsorness bubble to the surface.
Comments
Posted by: Ben Goren
|
April 15, 2011 9:58 AM
Looks an awful lot more like Michael Jackson to me....
Cheers,
b&
Posted by: Zeno
|
April 15, 2011 9:58 AM
Are they sure it's not the Virgin Mary? I hate to think that Kate is muscling in on the Blessed Mother's schtick.
Posted by: Dhorvath, OM
|
April 15, 2011 10:00 AM
I am so disappointed, it is clearly Ozzy Osbourne. What is up with other people's image processors?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
April 15, 2011 10:01 AM
Walton can you answer this?
Posted by: sizzzzlerz
|
April 15, 2011 10:02 AM
Can't be the VM, Zeno. She deigns to appear only on the potato chip-or-better class of junk foods.
Posted by: tonysidaway
|
April 15, 2011 10:04 AM
Insufferable? Hardly.
An ICM poll commissioned by campaign group Republic found in March that 79% of British people were either "largely indifferent" or "couldn't care less" about the wedding.
I don't even know or care which member of the Royal family is getting hitched.
Posted by: Dhorvath, OM
|
April 15, 2011 10:05 AM
sizzzzlerz,
Since when is a potato chip better than a jelly bean? Heretic.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
April 15, 2011 10:07 AM
What wedding?
Posted by: Nancy New
|
April 15, 2011 10:08 AM
Because the last couple of royal marraiges turned out SO well...
Posted by: Brother Ogvorbis, Apropos of Nada
|
April 15, 2011 10:12 AM
Looks like the Farrah Fawcett of my youth.
And why shouldn't we be excited? This young lady is about to marry someone with a bear as an ancestor!
On that day, I'll be watching "Over the Hedge" or some other nonsense with far more redeeming social value. Or changing the sheets.
Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnDxSgr4ZeT3n9D0m62pAGzoYLiPjejscY
|
April 15, 2011 10:13 AM
Oh dear.
Any non-Brit-based people got a spare room to put me up for about three weeks? I'm really sick of hearing about that bloody wedding now! I was bored of it within a minute of it being announced last year.
The tabloid media have, as usual, gone utterly ridiculous. My colleage in work even told me that The Sun "news"paper had images of the hotel suite that Kate will be staying in on the eve of the wedding, including pictures and information of the bleedin' toilet she'll be crapping on!
Utter madness! Can't wait for May to arrive!
Posted by: Quodlibet
|
April 15, 2011 10:13 AM
Well, she showed up on my toasted bagel several days, ago, with Baby Jesus in her arms. I covered them both with extra cream cheese. (Daughter said, "You took a picture first, right? Right?! No? What?! Oh, Mom...")
Posted by: Eli von Dims
|
April 15, 2011 10:15 AM
well, yeah, but did you see the house that looks like Hilter?
Posted by: Adam
|
April 15, 2011 10:17 AM
When you say Brits it's not all brits maybe 35% really care most are just pleased to have an extra day off work with pay to go out and have fun. the British media just like any shit to fill their crappy papers
Posted by: KG
|
April 15, 2011 10:20 AM
You forgot to tell us which picture shows the jelly bean and which Our Future Queen!
Posted by: mtbunyan
|
April 15, 2011 10:21 AM
As a Brit, my attitude to this impending display of a rich family's extravagance is best summed up with the phrase: 'couldn't give a flying toss'.
Also Ben Goren @ #1, you're right, it does! New evidence for the divinity of Michael Jackson!
Posted by: Epinephrine
|
April 15, 2011 10:21 AM
Seems like someone at the Telegraph needs to print up a little chart, like this one, and post it one various surfaces. Maybe people will eventually catch on.
Posted by: Spiro Keat
|
April 15, 2011 10:23 AM
You utter bastard PZ; I am doing my utmost to avoid hearing or seeing anything about this dross, and you drag it into one of my favourite refuges
Posted by: SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu
|
April 15, 2011 10:25 AM
Well, don't come to USA land looking for respite. If anything the hype is worse over here. The America media is not going to let this alone.
Posted by: Is it fishing season yet?
|
April 15, 2011 10:26 AM
Most of the Brits I know can't be bothered(except for the day off, what's the fuss; at least the relatives of my wife have that opinion.
It's the Yank media I can't figure out. Why are they so interested in it? The repugnant party and the lunatic birthers and teabag mob are going to have to get really crazy now to get back onto the front pages of the quality publications like the WSJ and NYT.
Posted by: Lauren Ipsum
|
April 15, 2011 10:27 AM
1) Thank you, PZ, for adding "feculent" to my vocabulary.
2) Anything to do with "froth" or "frothy" must be linked to good ol' Ricky Santorum. Let's keep His Frothiness at the top of the Google search rankings, shall we?
Posted by: MadcapHal
|
April 15, 2011 10:28 AM
Calm down, PZ. It's not as if anyone is claiming the divine hand has reached down and made the jelly bean look like that as some sort of holy blessing for the marriage. They're just saying that it looks like her, which it does. Like the Hitler house and the rock guitarist tree. We don't care about the wedding, but we like consecutive four-day weekends. We'll try not to be too insufferable while we sit around the house drinking tea and watching anything but the wedding. I'll probably go for re-runs of American sitcoms.
Posted by: Tom
|
April 15, 2011 10:29 AM
A lot of us would like a republic over here in blighty but the monarchists point to the US system and everyone looses interest...
Posted by: slugsie
|
April 15, 2011 10:29 AM
As a Brit, I have to say 'How very dare you!'
We are not going to be insufferable for a while, we're *always* insufferable. ;)
P.S. I pay little attention to the media so this whole wedding thing is completely passing me by. The only bit that is affecting me is that I get some extra days holiday. Thanks Bill and Kate for the day off that I shall spend getting out and about when everyone else will be inside glued to the idiot box watching you get hitched.
Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian
|
April 15, 2011 10:30 AM
Two minor corrections to what PZ said -
No. The Brits are going to be suffering for quite a while.
We're already suffering.Every time you turn on the TV you hear "Everyone loves a wedding" followed by interminable treacly gush about the "eagerly anticipated big day", how the BBC will will be deploying 6 zillion reporters and cameras to give us "unprecedented coverage", reports on how some lucky commoner has an received invitation to the actual wedding, what a wonderful institution the monarchy is, how the "whole world" will be watching, and constant nudging of us all to organise street parties.
So many people are trying to escape all this that it's now almost impossible to get a flight out of the country around the time of the wedding.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RBDC -
Give the poor lad a break!
I suspect that even he is more than a little fed up with the coverage of the whole damn thing driving out the coverage of real news.
Posted by: Erik The Viking
|
April 15, 2011 10:34 AM
One of my local pubs is having a "No Royal Wedding" day. It will not be on the telly and anyone mentioning the stupid bloody event will be kicked out. I shall be getting sloshed on cider in a bastion of sanity.
Posted by: dpattersonmonroe
|
April 15, 2011 10:36 AM
Well, the same pattern-finding ability that leads to this sort of nonsense also leads to mathematics, so I guess there's some good in everything :-)
Posted by: John Lee
|
April 15, 2011 10:37 AM
I remember when Big Ears got married to his gum-chewing airhead wife. It was a public holiday, so I went in search of a pub where they didn't have the damned thing on TV, and finally found one full of anti-monarchists getting sloshed, and loudly cursing the whole royal family. I urge my fellow countrymen to follow their example.
Down with the Windsors! Come back, Cromwell! Send the parasites packing!
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
April 15, 2011 10:40 AM
Last week on our local news: "Find out how local tailors are catching royal wedding fever."
Of course, it's better than this week's: "Spring storm dumps 30 cm of snow on city already sick of winter."
A couple of colleagues of mine were up in Tuktoyaktuk for a week not too long ago on a research project and I hear they didn't get any royal wedding news the whole time, so there's that.
Posted by: John Lee
|
April 15, 2011 10:42 AM
I remember when Big Ears got married to his gum-chewing airhead wife. It was a public holiday, so I spent half the morning trying to find a pub that didn't have the damned thing on TV. I finally found one, full of sloshed anti-monarchists cursing the whole parasitical Windsor clan, and had a great laugh. I urge my fellow countrymen to follow their example.
Come back Cromwell, all is forgiven!
Posted by: ArigatakiMono
|
April 15, 2011 10:43 AM
Each one of you is getting this completely wrong. They obviously found a Kate Middleton that looks like a Jelly Bean. Yeesh, you... people!
Posted by: peicurmudgeon
|
April 15, 2011 10:43 AM
It's not only in the UK people are getting overwhelmed. Here in the Frozen North we are bombarded as well. Up here it's all royal wedding and politicians kissing babies. That and the odd mention of the crisis in Japan.
My only comment is that the royal family may eventually breed some good looks into their lineage. The previous generations have not been particularly photogenic.
Posted by: Timberwoof
|
April 15, 2011 10:46 AM
Oh, the Americans are just as obsessed with this whole King thing as their cousins the Angles. Americans love their pomp and pageantry. There are rules in Federal Law about which way the flag goes when you hang it on a street. The colors of bunting have to be just so. The US Flag goes on the left or on the right depending on whether it's on the stage or in front of it. Americans threw away their King and had to substitute something for him.
Many Americans so pine for the good old days of kings and bishops and peasants (that's the rest of us) that they're even trying to reestablish all that in law.
Let the English have their Kings. They're mostly harmless and might even serve to spank the occasional misbehaving Prime Minister. Who can spank a naughty George or Barack?
Posted by: Ing: PhD Trollologist
|
April 15, 2011 10:46 AM
I think it looks like Apollonia Jayne from Overdrawn At the Memory Bank.
Is there an Chocolate Egg wrapper out there that looks like Raul Julia?
Posted by: sizzzzlerz
|
April 15, 2011 10:49 AM
We Yanks are fortunate in that we aren't being bombarded by hourly reports of the royals and their ever more annoying self-absorbed goings on.
Oh, wait. We do have Bristol Palin and Charlie Sheen.
Never mind...
Posted by: wisnij
|
April 15, 2011 10:51 AM
Here's a shot of her from a different angle, it might make the resemblance a little clearer: http://twitpic.com/4ktl4x
Posted by: LarianLeQuella
|
April 15, 2011 10:51 AM
Aren't Brits always insufferable? ;)
Posted by: Chris Hughes
|
April 15, 2011 10:53 AM
Princess Margaret was quite the babe in her day... I've been pleasantly surprised at how little fuss there has been - I expected a tsunami of gushing...
Miss Middleton looks OK to me - that's a lousy picture above. Let 'em get on with it, I say, and good luck.
Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian
|
April 15, 2011 10:57 AM
And, to all those who think that by going to a republican pub they will be able to escape, let me tell you - THERE IS NO ESCAPE!
I've told this story once before on Pharyngula but it (just about) bears retelling.
Big Ears and Di's wedding - A Thursday. Why not a Friday so we get a long weekend?
Where I was working all the republicans (about half the workforce) arranged to work on the Thursday and take Friday off in lieu. No mention of the event was allowed.
All went swimmingly and we all got a lot of work done with no distractions such as ringing phones, problems with users etc.
Then I went to wait at the station (a little south of London) for a train home. Holiday service, so I had to wait a while. Nobody else there, no staff, no other travellers. After a while a spot a funny looking two carriage train coming very slowly down the other line from London.
As it very slowly crawls past me I notice the rear carriage has a little platform at the back and there are the "happy couple" in full fancy dress.
And they see me.
So they turn and give me big smiles and a long wave (Big Ears doing in the royal fashion - actually waving at himself and showing me the back of his hand).
My hand started to automatically raise itself to wave back. I stopped it, Dr Strangelove stylee, and deliberately looked the other way.
We had people at work who'd camped out in London the night before to get a place on the route with a good view who never really saw them, and I got a personal wave from the two of them from about twenty feet away. Sheesh.
Posted by: iknklast
|
April 15, 2011 10:57 AM
Looks more like George Washington.
Posted by: Amphiox, OM
|
April 15, 2011 11:12 AM
Of course, if this "finding" had occurred another time or place, chances are good they'd be calling it the spitting image of the Virgin Mary.
Or, alternately, as per #40, George Washington.
Posted by: Pikaia
|
April 15, 2011 11:14 AM
@RTL
Big Ears didn't marry Di, he married Noddy.
Posted by: another
|
April 15, 2011 11:16 AM
More like Patti Hearst.
Posted by: theshortearedowl
|
April 15, 2011 11:16 AM
That jelly bean is clearly depicting David Bowie circa 1970.
Posted by: feralboy12, der Ken-Puppe Sie außerhalb in 1983 verlassen
|
April 15, 2011 11:17 AM
Or somebody thinks we do.
My American parents always refered to Charles & Diana as "Upchuck & Di."
Posted by: latsot
|
April 15, 2011 11:18 AM
Councils in Britain galvanized themselves to cope with all the street parties we'd obviously want to stage to celebrate the royal wedding. Streets would have to be closed to traffic due to us celebrating in them. Special teams were set up to cope with the streetparty requests.
However, hardly anyone has bothered. Hardly anyone is having a street party and those who are couldn't be arsed to tell the council about it
And yet the media will only focus on people parading about in union flag colours, shitting union jacks while riding red white and blue bulldogs.
Posted by: Moggie
|
April 15, 2011 11:24 AM
I wonder how much Walton will pay for that jelly bean?
Posted by: Erulóra (formerly KOPD)
|
April 15, 2011 11:25 AM
From the article:
It's a conspiracy!!!!!Posted by: Buxley
|
April 15, 2011 11:27 AM
So... Kate Middleton is Jesus?
*puzzled*
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/hairychris444#96384
|
April 15, 2011 11:29 AM
As a Brit of the "tending towards republicanism" bent, all I have to say is screw all that crap. I avoid the news rags at the best of times but the Torygraph (broadsheet, supposedly) has pulled a corker out here.
We do get a public holiday out of all this so it's not all negative. I will either be in bed or in the pub.
Posted by: Kevin, in Leicestershire
|
April 15, 2011 11:40 AM
Wedding? Nah, shan't bother....... extra Bank Holiday, ..... thanks very much, where's the nearest decent pub which doesn't have this drivel on the tv?
The only other worry is that it's going to be MUCH MUCH worse when the Olympics and all those putative PE teachers take over next year.........
Posted by: SteveV, Death's Pissant Haberdasher
|
April 15, 2011 11:41 AM
RTL
Then don't turn on the TV!
I'm looking forward to it. Due to the coincidence of wedding, Easter and the traditional lefty holiday to celebrate my birthday, I get to have 11 days off work for the (additional) cost of only 3 days loss of pay!
Result!
Posted by: Tumsup
|
April 15, 2011 11:44 AM
You might need one of these.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/02/17/u-k-graphic-designer-creates-royal-wedding-souvenir-barf-bags/
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/hairychris444#96384
|
April 15, 2011 11:45 AM
@Kevin #51
Oh crap, don't even go into the Olympic stuff. I live really close to all of that and am dreading 2012. I have friends abroad. I might hit them up.
Oh yeah, if I do get round to hitting the pub the one I have in mind doesn't have any screens. ;-)
Posted by: Freemage
|
April 15, 2011 11:48 AM
I used to be amused and a bit snooty about how the Brits would lavish attention to the Royals.
Then America discovered Reality TV. At this point, I'd be willing to trade Big Ears and Jellybean Girl and her hubby for Snooki, the entire lot of "Real Housewives" and a Fox News "personality" to be named later.
Posted by: EboTebo
|
April 15, 2011 11:55 AM
I could care less! I'd rather throw cards in a hat than watch these two blighters get hitched! The whole maniacal monarchial bullshit is more than I can stand with the old whore queen and her danish-greek boy friend doin' their "LaTeDa", bringing up the rear with Charlie and his Incredible Sails and his ugly-ass-dog-bitch-wife sniffing at his bunghole. What a royally fetid bunch of masturbating dog fuckers!
Posted by: mxh
|
April 15, 2011 11:58 AM
I'm trying to decide which would sell more on ebay, Kate Middleton or the Virgin Mary. I'd guess that for now it would be Middleton, but for the long term I'd go with mary.
Posted by: viridian1
|
April 15, 2011 12:04 PM
If I was in possession of a piece of toast with the virgin mary's face on it this story would really put a weed up my ass. Is god saying that Kate Middleton and the blessed mother are on equal standing now just because she's marrying into the royal family? I just don't get it. Oh that cosmic magic man is just so WHACKY!
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
April 15, 2011 12:09 PM
It's Jesus anyway. What, he can't shave?
I recognize him from his face on the taco.
Glen Davidson
Posted by: Poolio
|
April 15, 2011 12:13 PM
I'm gonna have to go with Howard Stern.
Posted by: hugesimon
|
April 15, 2011 12:13 PM
It is starting to become a little nauseating over here at the moment. I cant believe im saying this, but I actually feel sorry for my boss having to give us a day off just because some arseholes are getting married.
Im also a little pissed at the fact that our tax money is going towards funding an incredibly expensive wedding between two incredibly rich people at a time when we are supposed to be cutting back.
Finally, whilst I have nothing personal against either of them, his old man is a big defender of homeopathy and apparantly pressed the government to keep it funded by the NHS, which is a bit of a bitch when you think about it.
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 15, 2011 12:14 PM
Guys! That jelly bean is not Kate Whatever-her-face! It is quite clearly me.
Glasses? Check.
Collared shirt? Check. (Apparently it's me at work.)
Tattoo above left breast? Check!
So, there you go. Proof-positive that my face has shown up on a piece of candy.
Posted by: cd
|
April 15, 2011 12:17 PM
Hey, I think she's cute. And she's not a self-pitying dip like her predecessor.
Posted by: Garnetstar
|
April 15, 2011 12:20 PM
The guy who found it is asking 500 pounds on ebay.
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/at-least-it-didnt-look-like-jesus/
Posted by: InfraredEyes
|
April 15, 2011 12:30 PM
Not yet, anyway. I was never a fan of Diana, but after a few years inside the Windsor family, I'd probably be pretty sorry for myself too.
Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
April 15, 2011 12:32 PM
You mean you don't all do that? Well I guess I'll be scratching The UK off my travel bucket list.
Posted by: Q.E.D
|
April 15, 2011 12:32 PM
On BBC radio 4 at this very moment, they are talking about US media coverage of the Wedding. Apparently 6 hour-long documentaries. Kate Middleton Franklin Mint Doll, Royal Wedding Coverage Team ABC news with Barbrara Walters etc etc ad nauseum
Almost every single person I know is leaving Britain on holiday during the "big event"
Me I'm going on Rugby Tour to Croatia then to France to recover.
Posted by: greame
|
April 15, 2011 12:34 PM
A coworker that I go out to smoke with came running up to me the other day and wanted to show me a picture on his phone.
Him: Check this out!
Shows me the picture...it's an empty parking space.
Me: Wow... Did you get your car in there?
Him: Nah, don't you see it?
Me (looks closer): umm.. no.
Him: Look at the floor!
Me: Oh. (there's an oil stain)
Him: Dude! Don't you see the Indian Guy?
Me (looks closer, squinting): Oh... I...guess so.
Him: Look, here's the headdress feathers, here's his eyes, his nose, yadda yadda.
I know it shouldn't surprise me how easily people see pattern where there is none, but it still does.
Posted by: RationalMind
|
April 15, 2011 12:37 PM
Oh dear! Not the blasted royal wedding again!
Why can't old lizzie's grandson get married quietly?
Not all of us Brits have any interest.
Yes she is attractive, but he is loaded!
Posted by: Phil65
|
April 15, 2011 12:38 PM
You know, it is possible to ignore this shit (except when even my favorite blogs insist on mentioning it). I didn't know the name "Kate Middleton" until a couple of days ago. And without looking, I'm not even sure of the Prince's name (Harry or Henry, I think). And I don't live in a cave, I just ignore fatuous nonsense whenever possible. It works surprisingly well.
Posted by: Travis
|
April 15, 2011 12:41 PM
Ugh. I am so tired of this. If I lived in Britain I would cry and maybe lock myself in some old bunker until this is all over. Considering a number of polls I have shown that for the most part the British do not really care about this event I am a bit surprised at the coverage. If 79% do not care I do not see where the consumer demand is and why they keep at it, making most people feel sick and tired of it. I suppose that 20%-30% that actually cares might represent the tabloid readers. I am not sure why the BBC gets into it so much though.
Posted by: Auraboy
|
April 15, 2011 1:13 PM
Oh no. It's infiltrated. There is no escape. Even though the overwhelming majority of us Brits would happily send them to a registry office and keep every penny of our hard earned tax and spend it on something selfish and bubbly like...ooo...I don't know - NOT closing the Hospital down the road or maybe letting a few of the students go to university without monumentally crushing debt.
The BBC is primarily made up of more left-leaning types and I've never met a monarchist in the newsrooms - but somehow the BBC board interprets it's government charter to mean they have to bow and scrape at the foot of the Royals. I vaguely remember the Diana Death Marathon of Grovelling, where the BBC seemed to use the collective 'we' to describe how all of us were wailing and gnashing our teeth and cutting ourselves at the unthinkable horror that some divorced aristocrat had died in a car-crash. I don't wish a death on anyone, despite my dislike for the Royal establishment, but I think I managed to cope thanks. And now I'm supposed to organise a street party to celebrate the wedding I couldn't care less about? Ugh.
Give me the bloody jellybean. At least those little magical concoctions of juice and E-number flavourings are tasty.
Posted by: opposablethumbstoo
|
April 15, 2011 1:27 PM
Day to get work done in peace, day off school all round - and zoic#2 has got a gig playing at something calling itself a "republican party". That'll do.
Other than that it's not too hard to avoid the crap, as long as you don't watch live TV or read a newspaper for the next few weeks ... bloody waste of taxes, sod 'em!
Posted by: tonyatkinson70
|
April 15, 2011 1:28 PM
As far as i can see its the americans who are obsessed with it....Us Brits are ambivalent
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/SCoovu9t2Y1PMl5zVPbudqOFNZFG#32688
|
April 15, 2011 1:30 PM
Brits are going to be insufferable? Aren't most of the die-hard fans of the British monarchy actually Americans?
Posted by: Ragutis
|
April 15, 2011 2:01 PM
There's that famous British talent for understatement.
Posted by: Twopints
|
April 15, 2011 2:14 PM
I'm here in Britain and I'm truly sick and tired of hearing about the royal wedding.
On the bright side I have a paid day off work and if the weather is nice, I'm going on a nice long walk and will do a bit of geocaching, safe in the knowledge that Will and Kate will be first against the wall when the revolution comes.
Posted by: 33lp
|
April 15, 2011 2:15 PM
Anybody gonna eat that jellybean? I'll eat that jellybean, if no one else wants it.
Posted by: david.morning
|
April 15, 2011 2:25 PM
Suffering, the Brits are going to be suffering for a while. Easy mistake to make, but it changes the meaning by quite a bit. Unless you think we actually like this ridiculous farce of a ceremony between two people we've never met, probably never will meet, and yet pay the living expenses of and which the media just won't shut the hell up about?
Posted by: Harry Varty
|
April 15, 2011 2:40 PM
I'm helping to pay for this wedding and they haven't even had the decency to send me an invitation.
Posted by: Anubis Bloodsin the third
|
April 15, 2011 2:47 PM
#15
Oh! for effing crying out loud... this nonsense is really going fucking puerile by the minute.
It is just a glitzy version of a brain dead soap opera ...of which Blighty has a surfeit.
I have made provisions for the popcorn and beer!
I am considering making a book on the odds that divorce, affair or death occurs before future sprogs are busted for cheating, drinking to excess or drug abuse with a side line of inappropriate fancy dress.
Hit the red tops headlines before 2025!
Call me cynical...many have...but there is only so much utter dross to be confronted with in any one year before mental faculties impair beyond reboot capability!
@26
You lucky! lucky! bastard!....;-)
Posted by: Multicellular
|
April 15, 2011 2:48 PM
Looks more like Kate has the Grudge.
Speaking of insufferable, there is a particular obnoxious commercial showing here in the states hocking a cheap replica of the "Royal engagement ring" for only $19.95 (originally $39.95 but reduced for this special event - uh huh). It comes with a "certificate of authenticity" - one assumes it informs the consumer they just paid too much for piece-of-shit costume jewelry made in China. Add to that a voiceover from an American actor doing a horrendous British accent and you get the full flavor of this turd of a money grabber. The really sad part is I think I saw someone wearing one the other day.
Posted by: SaintStephen
|
April 15, 2011 2:50 PM
It's a young George Washington, complete with long flowing dark locks.
Look at a dollar bill. Q.E.D.
Posted by: Jennifer T
|
April 15, 2011 2:53 PM
American idiom detected! I do hope there aren't any more Americans on this here "World Wide Web", or I shall have to ask Mr. Berners-Lee to put the whole thing in quarantine.
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 15, 2011 2:53 PM
Yahoomess:
Aren't most of the die-hard fans of the British monarchy actually Americans?
Clearly you've never met Walton.
Posted by: No One
|
April 15, 2011 3:04 PM
Yeah it looks like her...
... but does it taste like her?
Posted by: Markita Lynda: Healthcare is a damn right
|
April 15, 2011 3:05 PM
Jim Morrison? Ozzy Osborne?
Posted by: Markita Lynda: Healthcare is a damn right
|
April 15, 2011 3:20 PM
The happy couple wanted to leave the church in a modest limousine but the Queen is insisting on a carriage.
Don't slag Camilla; she's the one Charles should have married in the first place, except for that stupid royal-family insistence that he must have a virgin, no matter how little he actually had in common with her. And slagging her looks is just sexist lookism. They both look their age.
Posted by: etruscanshades
|
April 15, 2011 3:20 PM
Photoshop is the great saviour when you can't be arsed to go out and report on real news.
Posted by: Duncan
|
April 15, 2011 3:23 PM
For those who dislike the British media's sickeningly sycophantic coverage of the royal wedding, here's something more irreverant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RpKEAEAPSE&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: etruscanshades
|
April 15, 2011 3:36 PM
Phil65 said
You know, it is possible to ignore this shit (except when even my favorite blogs insist on mentioning it). I didn't know the name "Kate Middleton" until a couple of days ago. And without looking, I'm not even sure of the Prince's name (Harry or Henry, I think). And I don't live in a cave, I just ignore fatuous nonsense whenever possible. It works surprisingly well.
Absolutely right!
Don't read the tabloids if you don't like this stuff (fewer and fewer people do now). The red tops are going downmarket too, and they are losing circulation. They don't seem to have worked it out yet. If there was a decent newspaper reporting hard news then I might start buying one again. Even the BBC is becoming increasingly downmarket. Why watch it?
I get all my news from Private Eye. Once a fortnight is just fine and I get all I need to know.
Posted by: Jim
|
April 15, 2011 3:38 PM
I believe that the *story* is that someone's trying to eBay the jellybean for £500. Although admittedly, I haven't read the Telegraph's article, nor can I be bothered to...
Posted by: The Pick Man
|
April 15, 2011 3:49 PM
Not all of the Brits are going to be insufferable. There's lots of royal wedding trash on sale here but. fortunately, somebody has come up with a royal wedding sick bag. I think I'll buy one.
Posted by: Joe Fogey
|
April 15, 2011 3:55 PM
As another totally uninterested Brit I was thinking it might be a good day to go somewhere quiet in the countryside for a bit of birdwatching - on the other hand it looks as if every other totally uninterested Brit will be there too.
Posted by: PoxyHowzes
|
April 15, 2011 4:21 PM
By now, but for an intervening war or two (1812, anyone?) the Brit royals below the sovereign are every much America's and even the United States' as they are Brit. They are "celebrities," and if only they weren't Brits, if only they had the enterprising spirit of the United States, they could parlay that celebrity into a moneymaking proposition instead of a drain on the exchequer.
The first "duties" of Bill and Kate this summer (presumably by then some kind of Duke and Duchess) will be a tour of America (the part of it above Maine, the Dakotas, Montana, and the like, and below Detroit.)
Canada has been for all intents and purposes a separate nation since 1870, though I believe that the Governor General can still close up the parliamentary shop on her/his own, just as happened in Australia several years ago.
What should have occurred as a result of the unpleasantness after the 1763 war in America was exactly what has happened in the world since. Dozens of nations recognize the British Sovereign as *their* sovereign, but don't recognize the British legislature as *their* legislature.
Thank whatever god(s) are responsible, it didn't happen, and we United Statians were and are all obliged to "hang together."
Posted by: Mr.Kosta
|
April 15, 2011 4:23 PM
Well, the exact thing happened when the heir to my country's throne got married a few years ago. The media were broadcasting stuff about the just married couple almost 24/7. I almost toyed with the idea of becoming a hermit for a while.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
April 15, 2011 5:04 PM
An unemployed woman is marrying a soldier from a welfare family. How is this interesting?
Posted by: Mr.Kosta
|
April 15, 2011 5:09 PM
@ 'Tis Himself
Maybe people's lives are way too boring.
Posted by: timgueguen
|
April 15, 2011 5:22 PM
The wedding is not surprisingly getting media coverage here in Canada it probably shouldn't. Global's supperhour news broadcast has been featuring regular coverage about such important issues as what military uniform William might wear.
The American tabloids have regular articles about the Royals, and they're amusing in their cluelessness. For example a headline from a few weeks back claimed that the Queen would appoint William King right after the wedding. In the era of Google and Wikipedia it's easy to learn how the succession to the throne works, but tabloid writers likely don't give a damn about accuracy and know their typical readers won't have a clue anyways.
Posted by: David Marjanović
|
April 15, 2011 5:29 PM
The wedding has completely stayed out of the Austrian TV and radio news.
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
I can't stop laughing over comments 46 and 47...
On the other hand, EboTebo, couldn't you cut the misogyny out?
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
The USA is pretty much alone among democracies in lacking a separation of head of state and head of government and in not having the government (administration) depend on the parliament (Congress).
You don't look that gloomy.
What? There's a breast in there? Where?
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
April 15, 2011 5:45 PM
You just wait. I'm sure any minute now the UK counterpart of Andrew Breitbart will be posting heavily edited undercover video captured by the UK counterparts of Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe.
Conservatives just hate welfare families, right?
Posted by: Numad
|
April 15, 2011 5:49 PM
Eric Idle dressed as Kate Middleton.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
April 15, 2011 5:59 PM
Apparently we had a royal baptism yesterday.
And somewhere along the way we got rid of male primogeniture. I'd completely forgotten we had a referendum on that of all things - but not yet any revision to the constitution.
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 15, 2011 6:01 PM
David M:
Awe, thanks!
One of the "splotches" below the "collar". Kind of in the chesty area. You know. *cough*
Posted by: harold
|
April 15, 2011 6:49 PM
About 10 years ago I was taking a (Castilian) Spanish class in my spare time (in the US).
We were assigned a "gossip magazine" published in Mexico (but widely circulated throughout Latin America) to read some colloquial Spanish.
It had a "royal families" section. One page for the Spanish royal family, one page for all the (European only) others combined (Dutch, Danish, Swedish, whatever), and then many, many lavishly illustrated full color pages on the British royal family.
Actually, Kate will be one of the three members I'll be able to recognize, once she officially joins the family. I can also recognize Prince Charles (the original one if there are others now) and Queen Elizabeth.
Posted by: Timaahy
|
April 15, 2011 7:13 PM
One of the first questions my Madagascan brother-in-law asked me was "What's a 'wedding'? Can you eat it?".
I can finally answer yes!
Posted by: Xenithrys
|
April 15, 2011 7:17 PM
It does look like her, but who's the bloke with his tongue in her right ear?
Posted by: Timaahy
|
April 15, 2011 7:17 PM
And I gotta say... the jelly bean looks more like her than the official coin.
Posted by: F
|
April 15, 2011 7:19 PM
Divine Right of Kings by association, what?
Posted by: Bawdybill
|
April 15, 2011 7:45 PM
OMG! Its a JELLY BEAN!
Posted by: ericthehalfabee
|
April 15, 2011 8:04 PM
No, most of us don't care.
And in any case, it's clearly Alice Cooper.
Posted by: ericthehalfabee
|
April 15, 2011 8:27 PM
Oh yes, and don't you mean more insufferable? ;-)
Posted by: Aaron Baker
|
April 15, 2011 9:58 PM
It looks a little bit like her--but the eyebrows are too bushy. Maybe it's Brooke Shields, or one of the Hemingway girls.
Posted by: fuckin' kristinc
|
April 15, 2011 10:19 PM
New rule!
If you're able to spend your "last night as a commoner" in a 5-room suite at an exclusive 5-star hotel for about $10k per night, you were never a "commoner" in the first place.
Posted by: Asclepias
|
April 15, 2011 10:48 PM
Amen, Kristin! What's with all this commoner stuff? She was clearly part of the elite before she and William got engaged!
Posted by: Rincewind'smuse
|
April 16, 2011 1:53 AM
No,it looks like Darth Sinister. The one on the right,I mean.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
April 16, 2011 2:15 AM
Talk about Opium of the people.
And Australian TV is gearing up for it too, I'm embarrassed to a non-trivial degree, I have to say.
Posted by: EboTebo
|
April 16, 2011 2:38 AM
@ David Marjanovic- Who said anything about women?
Posted by: fuckin' kristinc
|
April 16, 2011 2:46 AM
Asclepias: I want to puke every time I hear crap about her new fairy-tale life. Her parents are millionaires. She has never had to lift a well-manicured finger for anything she has. She's always lived a fucking fairy-tale life.
Posted by: An Iowa Girl
|
April 16, 2011 2:48 AM
Is that a peach JellyBelly? Yum!
Posted by: KG
|
April 16, 2011 2:52 AM
There is absolutely nothing interesting about Kate Middleton. That, of course, makes her the perfect recruit to the Firm.
Posted by: KG
|
April 16, 2011 5:34 AM
She is a "commoner" in the British sense - technically everyone is unless they are a lord, I think. (I'm not sure about the immediate families of lords, Walton will know, but in any case no-one in Middleton's family is a lord.)
In fact, I discover, her parents are not part of the elite. Wikipedia says:
Definitely middle class, and apparently with some quite recent working class ancestors. But they sent Kate to mix with the elite at an expensive private school, Marlborough, and then at St. Andrews (the reputation of which is that undergrads of both sexes are there primarily to find an attractive spouse of high social status) - an investment that has paid off in spectacular fashion.
Gah! Now PZ has got me looking up facts about Kate Middleton :-O
Posted by: KG
|
April 16, 2011 5:39 AM
To clarify a point in #122, the elite includes, but is much wider than, the "nobility" - lords and their families.
Posted by: lasthussar
|
April 16, 2011 7:54 AM
Do you know what? I don't actually mind. I'm probably the closest thing there is to a left wing monachist!
Occassionally some rabid American who doesn't understand British politics will shout about how I'm not really free because of theoretical powers of the Queen, without understanding how it actually works.
What we have is a colourful figurehead with no power. I actually like all the pomp and circumstance that goes with it all - trooping the colour, state opening of parliament.
What the republicans don't understand is NOTHING would change if we got rid of the whole lot. I've sometimes argued that we should go back to a proper absolute monachy. Someone raised from birth to rule, with whatever (legal) stuff he wants. At the moment places like the UK and the US rely on career politicians who started as lawyers and have proved easily bribable and open to corporate pressure - the infamous example of that republican handing out cheques signed by the tobacco lobby to house members just before a big vote on...tobacco! Now US companies are people too, the $billions they can throw at their preferred candidate dwarfs normal people contributions.
Then you look at the average voter. Remember there is no intelligence test to vote - they let Fox viewers pick who is in charge of your school system. Classic letter to "The Sun" (Murdoch toilet paper - often attacks the BBC and praises Sky, also owned by the dirty digger)
"When Star Trek is on BBC it is only 45 minutes long. On Sky it is a whole hour. What are the BBC cutting out?"
Thus proving 1) thick people write to the Sun and 2) the editorial team think their readers are too thick to understand what is wrong with this letter.
These people are allowed to vote...
Go and read the comments on the BBC website - long rants about all the socialists in the Beeb frequently ending with how the BBC won't print this letter (despite the fact there are hundreds of comments on the blogs that end this way). Richard Black's enviromental column is particularly annoying for the comments: people who sneer at the idea that humans are damaging the environment, won't accept the west's massive consumption and waste is a big problem AND ARE PANDERED TOO BY POLITICIANS desperate for power.
Posted by: KG
|
April 16, 2011 9:02 AM
No, you're just another idiot. Take a look at the historical record of absolute monarchies. For that matter, look at those that still exist.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
April 16, 2011 9:37 AM
It used to be that the nobility married into the nouveau riche for the sake of settling (gambling) debts, but the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas can hardly be considered broke.Posted by: Andy Ball
|
April 16, 2011 10:39 AM
As a Brit, I have always admired the French who had the good sense to decapitate all of their useless royals and aristocrates. I've always felt we should have done the same thing.
Unfortunately our one and only attempt at functioning as a republic was spoiled by the fact that we were ruled by a religious crank!
Posted by: Peter Ashby
|
April 16, 2011 10:55 AM
Fortunately we live within an easy drive of the beautiful Angus Glens in the Scottish Highlands and if the weather is anywhere bearable (we have wind and waterproof outerwear) then on the fateful day we intend to hie ourselves yon, preferably beyond the reach of even the cellphone network.
If we could afford it we would instead be spending a long weekend with Mongolian yak herders in a yurt out on the steppes, no satphones allowed.
Posted by: StevoR
|
April 16, 2011 12:17 PM
That's Marilyn Manson not Kate Middleton! ;-)
Posted by: StevoR
|
April 16, 2011 12:22 PM
@ Andy Ball : Well you did behead Charles I.
I'm sure the royal wedding will dominate the media coverage even here in Oz but if things go well and as planned I'll be watching the penultimate Space Shuttle launch via NASA-TV on that day instead.
Posted by: StevoR
|
April 16, 2011 12:29 PM
@ lasthussar | April 16, 2011 7:54 AM
You know to really frustrate the idiot you should reply and tell them what they're cutting out - all the wild sex scenes! ;-)
Posted by: Wot I Write
|
April 16, 2011 12:29 PM
I am British and I wish for nothing more than the day that the monarchy is abolished. Please don't be fooled into thinking that Brits, as a whole, are excited by the forthcoming nuptials. Most of us couldn't care less about this expensive soap opera.
Posted by: GravityIsJustATheory
|
April 16, 2011 12:53 PM
Posted by: KG Author Profile Page | April 16, 2011 5:34 AM
For example, the Prime Minister and all the other MPs in the House of Commons are commoners (hence the name).
Posted by: Rich Woods
|
April 16, 2011 2:40 PM
When she leaves for Westminster Abbey, I hope her chauffeur drives carefully in the underpasses.
Posted by: chigau (◦_◦)
|
April 16, 2011 3:16 PM
The chauffeur won't be drunk.
Probably.
Posted by: lasthussar
|
April 16, 2011 10:30 PM
@125 - Don't worry, that's just my more frustrated moments: I just wish there was a method that didn't rely so much on easily bribed idiots (both the electors and the elected!).
Becoming a Republic would solve nothing - all that would happen is the fluff would be dropped from government. The crooks would still hide their money in tax havens etc.
On that Friday I will be out wargaming - refighting the War of the Spanish Succession, a conflict caused partly due to the fact that where most people have 30 ancestors in 4 generations, an absolute monarch had 7. There will be a dozen other blokes, all escaping from their wives watching a complete stranger's wedding.
Posted by: kev_s
|
April 17, 2011 4:51 AM
I intend to be in the Scottish mountains with no TV and no cell-phone contact but most places are already fully booked ... too many others with the same idea got there first.
Posted by: tonysidaway
|
April 17, 2011 2:31 PM
RTL April 15, 2011 10:30 AM: 'I pity everyone in the United Kingdom who's going to have to suffer with the royal romanticism for a while. We're already suffering. Every time you turn on the TV you hear "Everyone loves a wedding" followed by interminable treacly gush about the "eagerly anticipated big day"'
I'm just not seeing this. Admittedly I don't watch the trashier parts of British television, and I don't buy tabloid newspapers, but this blog post is the only reminder of the wedding I've seen in days. You don't have to suffer if you don't want to.
Posted by: Nemo
|
April 17, 2011 9:49 PM
Nice piece by Lawrence O'Donnell about this:
http://thelastword.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/15/6480008-rewriting-royal-wedding-coverage
@lasthussar #136:
Here's what it would accomplish: A mighty blow to the idea of Divine Right, the only principle by which a monarchy can be sustained. Sure, they've been whittled down to figureheads, but as long as they're still there, you've got Divine Right in the background, nibbling away at your souls.
Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas
|
April 20, 2011 5:59 AM
Correct. In the United Kingdom, "commoner" means someone who is neither a Sovereign nor a peer. Thus, the children of peers are considered commoners, unless they have noble titles in their own right. (The eldest sons of some peers receive "courtesy titles" - for instance, the eldest son of the Duke of Norfolk is styled Earl of Arundel - but these titles exist only in social convention, not in law, and they are still legally considered commoners.)
In any case, Miss Middleton is not from a titled family. Thus, she is quite definitely a commoner. ("Commoner" is a legal term, and has nothing to do with wealth or status. There are plenty of super-rich people who are commoners. Conversely, there are some titled families who are quite poor - e.g. because of earlier generations having gambled away the family fortune.)
I'm not going to get involved in the argument here, since my support for the monarchy - and the reasons for it - are well-known in these parts, and I don't feel like repeating myself. However, I think the relevant facts should be made clear.
Posted by: Grumps
|
April 20, 2011 11:10 AM
Mitchell and Webb discover there is no god