On 2014-07-06 1:43 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 7/6/2014 1:39 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2014-07-06 1:02 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> Seems to me Royal marriages way back when were primarily done for
>>> political reasons. And for the expansion of the kingdom. Again, I only
>>> know what I've read about or seen on television or in movies. Being an
>>> American, I tend to take those things with a grain of salt.
>>>
>>
>> What fascinates me is how Americans are so intrigued by British royalty.
>> While the Queen is technically our head of state, basically a
>> figurehead position with no real power, most Canadians don't give a damn
>> about her and her dysfunctional family. The current monarch is basically
>> harmless, but has managed to lead a scandal free life, or at least to
>> give them impression of being so. He kids and heirs to the throne have
>> not led exemplary lives.
>>
>>
> We're not really intrigued. We just can't help hearing about some things.
>

American media reports a lot more of the royal doings and royal
shenanigans than ours does. Most of us don't give a rat's patooey
about the inbred snots.