At the age of 79 he could be forgiven for needing a crib sheet. President Joe Biden signed a book of condolence in memory of the late Queen on Sunday, declaring that “the world is better for her”.
To avoid that embarrassing, awful problem of writing down a misplaced word and having to cross it out, President Biden instead dutifully copied out his message from the aide memoire he had brought with him.
He pulled the note from his suit pocket, placed it next to the book of condolence and copied it out. The note, partially visible to the camera, was entitled “Proposed Message for Queen Elizabeth II, and highlighted her “enduring… devotion” to her subjects.
Charitable from the Twatograph, I’d say…
More like a kid writing a Christmas card to his granny. Cooying what his mum has written down.
Actually, bigots, Joe Biden has never forgotten to lunge for a child or collect his 10% for the big guy.
“Dearest Kamala, I honestly don’t know what I’ll do without you…”
“Dearest Kamala, I honestly don’t know what you’ll do without me…”
Is that ‘enduring devotion’ as distinct from ‘transient devotion’?
This just seems mean-spirited. It’s a waste of time for any president to memorise a note. If they’re going to have staff author the message, surely the true insanity is the charade of the President signing the book?
The US president, as Peter Hitchens pointed out a while back, is, in a very real sense, an elected monarch (totally fairly elected of course, 81 million votes, each and every one genuine and legitimately cast) with some distinctly monarchical powers.
Every day another graphic demonstration of his utter inability to perform even the most basic of cognitive tasks. If that note had had words from mein kampf he probably would have unthinkingly copied it!
It’s not so much that we don’t know who is pulling the strings. it’s the fact that whoever that is appears to be perfectly content to advertise to the world – I’d be tempted to say positively relish in – these constant demonstrations.
Fuck me how these people hate their own country!
And did he mention if he was enjoying his visit to the Ukrainian Kingdom?
“with some distinctly monarchical powers”: yeah, and monarchical powers from the first half of the 17th century rather than the late 18th century. All the gush about “the first lady” makes sense once you accept that the Prez is an elected monarch. (Whether he was elected by citizens or photocopiers is irrelevant. Photocopiers identify as people, you know.)
Anyway I prefer our system of a crowned republic to theirs of an elected monarch. Though I do wish that ignoramuses would stop saying that the late Queen ruled for seventy years – she reigned, you twerps, she didn’t rule.
Bit patronising. There are many people Biden’s age with all their faculties.
Are you thinking of some other country, dearieme? Belgium? The monarch in the UK does in fact rule. Everything is done in his/her name. Parliamentary bills require royal assent. That she never issued commands contrary to her governments’ wishes doesn’t change that. Of course if she had have done, that would have provoked a constitutional crisis might have ended the monarchical system in the UK. But she did have the power. And the means. The military & police primarily owe allegiance to the Crown not he government. It’s technical, but it is important.
It’s the safeguard to democracy in the UK. It can be over-ruled should it produce a sufficiently harmful result. Tempers government excesses.
Interesting to wonder what would have happened in the States had their constitution not produced what is in effect an elected temporary monarch. They probably wouldn’t have the Civil War. There would have been more compromises. The southern states wouldn’t have succeeded.
The military ceases to exist without the routine passing of an Act of Parliament – originally annually, now five-yearly. As WKPD says “the Bill of Rights of 1689 and Claim of Right Act 1689 require parliamentary consent for the Crown to maintain a peacetime standing army.” That ain’t a monarchruling, that’s a monarch reigning.
In our system, we – through Parliament – give permission to the Monarch to rule, on the condition that the Monarch agrees not to.
And what do you think would happen if the government of the day was contemplating not renewing? Because it would fairly obvious that it was contemplating assuming direct power over the military. The military doesn’t cease to exist if the Act lapses.
I will say this: You wogs know how to throw a funeral. That was genuinely impressive.
Dunno about the booze up afterwards. Did she leave any money behind the bar?
At least he realizes he needs a crib sheet. Perhaps he’s not as far gone as I assumed.
Thanks for your kind words, Dennis. Sorry we made you get up early to watch it.
bloke in spain,
“But she did have the power. And the means. The military & police primarily owe allegiance to the Crown not he government. It’s technical, but it is important.”
But that’s really a fiction. How long are the military going to be loyal to the crown if the government aren’t paying their wages? I suppose the monarch could also order HMRC around, but Charlie actually doing some stuff rather than our elected representatives would trigger a revolution.
The monarchy is really just feudal cosplay. It’s nice to look at. It’s a soap opera about fancy gowns, big old houses and various princesses bitching at each other that is catnip for middle aged women. All of their activities are rooted in a past where they were the CEO. Where doing foreign trips were about making sure that things were being done, where inspecting troops was about making sure they didn’t lose and end up executed by the Spanish, where the King’s speech was actually his speech. Does anyone think Charles is going to be discussing military priorities, or just turning up shaking hands, saying something inane and everyone smiling politely at him.
Latest News: Queen Elizabeth still dead. Film at 11.
Thanks for your kind words, Dennis. Sorry we made you get up early to watch it.
I’m up between 5:30 and 6:00 anyway, the only difference was that today there was reason to turn on the TV.
Dennis: I guess we’ve had hundreds of years of practice to get it right. Even now some bureaucrats will be slaving away to modify the existing plan for Prince Charles croaking to turn it into the plan for King Charles croaking. I wonder what code name it has – I doubt they’ll re-use London Bridge.
Still not as bad as the “YOU take YOUR seat” debacle:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-holds-notes-you-enter-roosevelt-room-you-take-your-seat
Forget the Queen, God save America.
I made a remark about the Pecking Order earlier before the weekend..
Seems POTUS is 14th row…..
Whereas tiny Clogland, for this occasion, was first row opposite the Family…
(incidentally both wearing the Garter distinctions, which they ordinarily never, ever do…..)
One can forgive the necessity for a Reminder. He was an Extra whichever way you look at it.
wonder what code name it has – I doubt they’ll re-use London Bridge.
Stamford Bridge ?
TG… I’d suggest “Too Late”, “Finally”, or “Ok…. If we must…”
Then again… He *might* be actually sensible and abdicate after a “reasonable” amount of time.
Hold on long enough to make his point, then make way, like….
One can dream, and I doubt His Majesty of the Ears of Flappage will ever take the bloody hint… But still…
Whereas tiny Clogland, for this occasion, was first row opposite the Family…
They’re relatives (as are most of the other crowned heads of Europe), Joe ain’t.