Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Royal Baby Born


keithisco
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

I like the name - George Alexander... That was one of the names I picked before we settled on Aaron Jensen.( which were picked by my daughter and husband at the time ) .. I was going for a more old fashioned traditional name list at the start...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BREAKING NEWS: Woman Gives Birth To Baby

A married woman of childbearing age has given birth to a baby boy.

The event followed nine months of pregnancy.

"Both mother and baby are doing well," a spokesman for the woman said.

It is now expected that the baby will grow up.

http://www.huffingto...<!--NoParse1-->

969220_630150873670166_1281045992_n.jpg

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/27/shakira-us-drone-attack_n_1171047.html

Edited by Bildr
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

he has a name George!

Damn, I was rooting for KEITH.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His monogram will be GAL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well basically it's all about what sells newspapers.

I think that was the point when it said "Cover Story" vs "Cover Up".

Pretty shallow though if that's all it's about, right?

Is the UK really going to even have another King George by the time this baby is grown up? Why? Let the magic chair and the silver spoon go already.

It reminds me of Lady Grantham squaring off with the "Queen of Sheba" on 'Downton Abbey' with this classic exchange:

Lady Grantham: "You Americans never understand the importance of tradition,"

Martha Levinson: "Yes we do. We just don't give it power over us. Maybe you should think about letting go of its hand."

And this was in the 1920s mind you! The house where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is still being occupied today. And has around 20 servants. As an American I can understand the value of tradition but damn y'all have gotten it down to an art form. ;)

Edited by Yamato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well, George VII it is then.I thought maybe they would have broke with tradition a little bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that was the point when it said "Cover Story" vs "Cover Up".

Pretty shallow though if that's all it's about, right?

Is the UK really going to even have another King George by the time this baby is grown up? Why? Let the magic chair and the silver spoon go already.

It reminds me of Lady Grantham squaring off with the "Queen of Sheba" on 'Downton Abbey' with this classic exchange:

Lady Grantham: "You Americans never understand the importance of tradition,"

Martha Levinson: "Yes we do. We just don't give it power over us. Maybe you should think about letting go of its hand."

And this was in the 1920s mind you! The house where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is still being occupied today. And has around 20 servants. As an American I can understand the value of tradition but damn y'all have gotten it down to an art form. ;)

You do know Downton is fiction right?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at least hoping for at least a John, after Diana's father. But on the other hand, that wouldn't be the best example of keeping up appearances with the living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know Downton is fiction right?

He didn't :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at least hoping for at least a John, after Diana's father. But on the other hand, that wouldn't be the best example of keeping up appearances with the living.

As I said, personally I was hoping for a KEITH or KEVIN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

George is a good name for a hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, james is a traditional kingly name, although, again, it doesn't have the best of reputations (James II was the only King to have been ousted in a coup at the request of parliament), but the rest of those would make some good names. traditional for Popes, and Tsars.

I was more worried about a King named Charles. Charles I was overthrown by Cromwell and beheaded. His son, Charles II, experienced 2 catastrophes in 2 years. A devastating outbreak of the plague in 1665 and the great fire of London in 1666. Doesn't sound like a good name for a future king. lol.

Edited by susieice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the UK really going to even have another King George by the time this baby is grown up? Why? Let the magic chair and the silver spoon go already.

Give it a rest already. 1776 was a long time ago, get over it. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope they call him Darren or Kevin. 'King Kevin' has a certain ring to it.

It's the only name suitable for the future king of Australia

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that was the point when it said "Cover Story" vs "Cover Up".

Pretty shallow though if that's all it's about, right?

Is the UK really going to even have another King George by the time this baby is grown up? Why? Let the magic chair and the silver spoon go already.

And what? Replace them with a President? Why would that be a step forward in any way?

And this was in the 1920s mind you! The house where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is still being occupied today. And has around 20 servants. As an American I can understand the value of tradition but damn y'all have gotten it down to an art form. ;)

This really is the idea that people in the US of A have of what life in Britain really is like, is it? It does amuse me when the same people say how Foreigners have no right commenting on American affairs because they don't understand American Ways and Rights and that kind of thing. People do seem to be under the impression that it's like it was at the time of the revolution, under that tyrant George III*, if not like it was during Elizabethan times as in Blackadder the Second.

(* irony)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was more worried about a King named Charles. Charles I was overthrown by Cromwell and beheaded. His son, Charles II, experienced 2 catastrophes in 2 years. A devastating outbreak of the plague in 1665 and the great fire of London in 1666. Doesn't sound like a good name for a future king. lol.

Indeed; perhaps the choice of Charles for the first in line to the Throne was a bit of a gamble, although on the other hand Charles II was very popular with his people (perhaps because he slept with quite a few of them).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what? Replace them with a President? Why would that be a step forward in any way?

This really is the idea that people in the US of A have of what life in Britain really is like, is it? It does amuse me when the same people say how Foreigners have no right commenting on American affairs because they don't understand American Ways and Rights and that kind of thing. People do seem to be under the impression that it's like it was at the time of the revolution, under that tyrant George III*, if not like it was during Elizabethan times as in Blackadder the Second.

(* irony)

Replace the King with a President? How about replacing him with Nothing?

I saw what the building where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is being used for and that's all I mentioned. It's a royal family with silver spoons in their mouths employing a line of servants to primp, puff, powder and feed them.

Beyond that, if you don't agree that British people value tradition, then what is all this royal bloodline and pomp and splendor for? Other than the media marketing scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replace the King with a President? How about replacing him with Nothing?

I saw what the building where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is being used for and that's all I mentioned. It's a royal family with silver spoons in their mouths employing a line of servants to primp, puff, powder and feed them.

Beyond that, if you don't agree that British people value tradition, then what is all this royal bloodline and pomp and splendor for? Other than the media marketing scheme.

You see, while that would be in keeping with your anti-Statist philosophy, it wouldn't actually make an practical difference at all, since, and I appreciate it may be difficult to grasp that things may have changed since 1776, the monarchy does not actually have any political power. Therefore deposing the Monarchy would not actually put an end to feudalism, because that actually ended about 200 years ago. Servants, such as you alluded to earlier, were actually employees, not slaves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replace the King with a President? How about replacing him with Nothing?

I saw what the building where 'Downton Abbey' is filmed is being used for and that's all I mentioned. It's a royal family with silver spoons in their mouths employing a line of servants to primp, puff, powder and feed them.

Beyond that, if you don't agree that British people value tradition, then what is all this royal bloodline and pomp and splendor for? Other than the media marketing scheme.

Pretty much like presidents do then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in related news:

How news networks were duped

As far as bemused American news anchors were concerned, it was just another piece of barmy British Royal pageantry.

But it turns out that Tony Appleton, the town crier who announced the birth of the Prince of Cambridge outside St Mary's Hospital in London was simply a great British eccentric - acting all by himself.

Despite playing his part for the millions tuned in around the world, East London resident Appleton has admitted his bizarre cameo had absolutely no royal seal of approval.

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Did not want to start a new thread for this but I am just proud to anounce that princ Georg Alexander Louis just became a member of the Bosnian Soccer Club Zeljeznicar Sarajevo. The membership card was handed in to the British ambasador who accepted it.

Of course, all is symbolic but it shows that sport unites all people regardless of their status, religion, race and political affirmation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Did not want to start a new thread for this but I am just proud to anounce that princ Georg Alexander Louis just became a member of the Bosnian Soccer Club Zeljeznicar Sarajevo. The membership card was handed in to the British ambasador who accepted it.

Of course, all is symbolic but it shows that sport unites all people regardless of their status, religion, race and political affirmation.

You mean he's signed to play for them? well, Roy Hodgson will be disappointed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.