steepholm: (Default)
[personal profile] steepholm
Next time Brutus is looking for someone to help out with a funeral oration, perhaps he should consider calling Mr Grieve (who deserves the gig on the strength of his name alone):

"Prince Charles's letters are so partisan, reactionary and frankly nutty that if you saw them you would probably consider him unfit to be king. So I'm stopping their publication, and that way you will never know just what an interfering, unconstitutional, right wing bigot he is."

Job done, Mr Attorney General. My mind's entirely at rest.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 08:37 am (UTC)
ext_12745: (Default)
From: [identity profile] lamentables.livejournal.com
That's a curious understanding of 'in the national interest'...

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 08:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
It is, isn't it? It's hard not to conclude that the way Grieve announced it was designed to undermine Charles, but it certainly insults the intelligence of the public along the way.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 08:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] karinmollberg.livejournal.com
Not mine, these news worry me. I now do want to read those letters. It´s only logical, as are Mr. Grieve´s action and explanation of said action. Also, I have been worrying alot http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.fr/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html, lately. Though not so much about the flaws of the swedish king, including his disturbing dyslexia, because that has never stopped him from being one and greeting say, the population of a town he is not visiting at visiting another town, while being there himself travelling the land on his King´s Road, if you know what I mean? But, now that we also know, how M. Malaise sadly passed away http://theboringclub.livejournal.com/74526.html while Messrs Grieve and Maladroite are still alive and kicking, all these pressing issues should finally come to a rest, maybe even before the end of the world takes place.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 09:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Fittingly, he attended Madgalen College...

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 02:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] karinmollberg.livejournal.com
The Viking King? I didn´t know that, but it´s most reassuring "Dyslexians of the world untie" or as Kurt Vonnegut put it: "telekinetics of the wor()d: raise my hand!

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 02:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Aha, I see what I did there... Mad Galen was a Greek doctor, I think. Or possibly an ape.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 08:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shewhomust.livejournal.com
So as long as the Prince of Wales only writes to Ministers, he is politically neutral; he only forfeits his neutrality if we find out what he said?

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 08:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Schrödinger's cat meows again.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 12:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cmcmck.livejournal.com
Grieve....that's a very Orcadian name indeed!

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 01:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] calimac.livejournal.com
This kind of "if you don't know what their opinions are, they're neutral" fallacy has a flourishing life in the US as well. Judges are required to recuse themselves if they have a known personal connection to the case, because that might lead to a perception of bias; but if they have no personal connection, they are free to have all kinds of bias, and frequently do. Some journalists believe their code of political neutrality requires them to refrain from voting. This is particularly odd, since the ballot is secret, and if you have an opinion, it's not going to go away if you don't express it in that manner.

I'm a lot less worried about Charles. He can have all the opinions he wants, but he would have no more opportunity to impose them as king than he does now. Surely the present Queen has many opinions, which she expresses in private meetings, but who knows what they are?

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 02:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Surely the present Queen has many opinions, which she expresses in private meetings, but who knows what they are?

Indeed - unless someone happens to give them away.

I tend to agree about Charles. That a man who employs a servant to put toothpaste on his toothbrush should hold bizarre opinions is no great surprise. Rather, it seems to me that the manner in which Grieve "protected" him (the complaint being levelled by some) was calculated to undermine him. If he really was trying to deflect constitutional worries, he did it in a singularly inept way. I see this as a shot across Charles's bows, against the time when he does become king.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 05:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dorianegray.livejournal.com
Not at all the point at hand, but still..."10-page summary"? 10 pages is not a fucking summary. 10 paragraphs is pushing it to constitute a summary.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-17 09:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
Couldn't agree more - but if the issues were written about at less length, we might begin to imagine they were comprehensible to someone other than a highly-paid lawyer, and that would never do.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-18 09:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lilliburlero.livejournal.com
When I saw "Grieve" I immediately thought "Hugh MacDiarmid"...

(no subject)

Date: 2012-10-18 09:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] steepholm.livejournal.com
As [livejournal.com profile] cmcmck points out above, it's a very Orcadian name, but this Grieve seems not to have any very immediate connection. (And Sir Geoffrey Howe is no relation to Maes.)

Profile

steepholm: (Default)
steepholm

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  12345
67891011 12
13141516171819
202122 23 242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags