I mean he’s almost 58 for God’s sake. Give him a few years of Kingship before he’s a senior citizen.
I’d say that she feels that she has a duty to continue reigning while she is still healthy enough to do so. She’s very good at the job, after all.
No doubt there’s also the memory of the trauma/upheaval that Edward VIII’s abdication inflicted on the country and the royal family.
Also, from what I understand, she’s trying to break Queen Victoria’s record for longest reign by a British monarch. Victoria lasted 63 years, Lizzy is at 54, so Charles will be otherwise employed for at least another 9 years. Kind of ironic that he’ll start his real job right around the time most people are ready to retire.
Charles is an embarassment. Tampon Boy. I don’t want his ugly-ass face on my money.
I want Liz to hang on, break the record, and hand it straight to King William V.
Ads at the bottom:
Original King James 1611
Local Elizabeth Florist
Elizabeth Finest Florist
Obviously I don’t know whether this is true or not, but I’ve heard in documentaries in the past that both Elizabeth and the Queen Mother harboured particularly strong sentiment against Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson (the Duke and Duchess of Windsor) not only because of the suspected sympathizing with the Nazis but also because they blamed them for George VI having to accede to the throne the pressures of which shortened his life.
In any event, and for good or bad, Queen Elizabeth’s commitment to duty seems to have been a constant theme through her life. On her 21st birthday she gave a radio broadcast to the Commonwealth which contained the following:
I can make my solemn act of dedication with a whole Empire listening. I should like to make that dedication now. It is very simple.
I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.
I think there’s every indication that she meant, and still means it.
Elizabeth II will never abdicate. She believes it’s her god anointed duty to be queen. She’s always placed her “duty” before everything else. She’ll gradually give Charles more and more power and responsibilities until she is no longer pysically or mentally capable of exercising the functions of the sovereign; at which time Charles will be appointed Prince Regent (ala George IV). Given her familiy history and the fact that she gets the best medical care on the planet it’s entirely possible that she’ll live to be over 100. Charles will be in his 70s (or even 80s) when he ascends the throne. Personally I think the monarchy would be better of if he tripped over one of his mom’s corgis and broke his neck allowing a 40-something William to ascend.
Seconded and moreover I don’t want that horsefaced ugly Camilla Parker Bowels as queen.
Charlie boy can’t be a full shilling fancying that old boot, face like a blind blacksmiths thumb she has.
She doesn’t have to worry too much about Charles asasinating her for the throne. Modern forensics and the current life saving equipment, mean he would see jail if he had the inkling. England won’t be without leadership, if she becomes infebled, so the people don’t fret about her destroying England. She has a huge base of population that adore and respect her, so why abdicate her position?
I think that if monarchy means anything at all (which is debatable), it ought not be abdicated except in extreme circumstances. It isn’t what you do, it’s who you are.
She wouldn’t be queen automatically, just like Phillip is not king.
Yes, but that’s slightly different.
The title “King” is greater in rank than the title “Queen”, so if Philip was referred to as King Philip, then the assumption would be that Philip is the sovereign and not the Queen.
Amazingly, this appears not to be the case. The wife of a King is always Queen (Consort). But the husband of a Queen (Regnant) is not a King but a Prince. Oh, and Phil The Bubble spells it with only one l.
When a King croaks, his surviving wife is still called Queen as a courtesy title, as with “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother”, George VI’s widow. So the country can have two or more Queens at once. 
Tho I have no dog in this fight, I feel she’s being somewhat of a greedy bitch, and should give her boy a shot.
Interesting. I thought it had to be granted the way Philip’s title would have to be. I wonder if Philip ever asked…
Per Wikipedia, (the ever-reliable source) Cammie will be known as HRH the Princess Consort upon Charles’ ascension.
The queen had a great bod when she was young; very nice to see in old footage. Other than that, I couldn’t care less about her.
However, aside from the fact that Charles is pretty old (and always was, as far as I can tell) this thread is disturbingly similar to the whiny ones about how the boomers are in the young people’s way.
All of you piss off. As long as I’m breathing, I’m can do what I damn well please. Same goes for HRH.
hey, Queen Elizabeth actually has something that very few leaders have: genuine integrety.
She is totally dedicated to doing her job as well as possible. And doing it for the benefit of her country. She’s never done anything scandalous, because, well…she has principles, and lives up to them.
She probably knows that after her reign, the whole institution of the monarchy will collapse. England’s next kings and queens will be treated like Hollywood stars,–good for gossipping about ,but not taken seriously as national leaders.
But then, there’s not much need for a monarchy in the 21st century anyway.
A woman who is queen by virtue of being married to a king is a queen-consort. A man can be king-consort, but this is rare in modern times. When Mary I married the future Phillip II of Spain he was styled “King of England”, but Mary I remained the sovereign and he lost his position after she died.
If it’s any consolation, I understand he’ll probably be titled “George VII” instead. I bet the Archbishop of Canterbury is practicing the name even now, over and over, to make sure he doesn’t flub it on Coronation Day.
Oh sure, a few “Tampon Boy I” bills are bound to be printed by accident, but they’ll quickly be grabbed up by collectors and leave circulation.
Besides which, don’t you people put loons on your coinage anyway? So what’s the fuss?
Yes, but the loon has a melodious call which floats across the water!