|
|
|
Lightning
Glasgow
UK
|
Posts: 1042
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Sadly, it looks as though the Queen is in poor health and I fear we are now nearing the end of her long reign (thought I very much hope to be proved wrong).
Although I am a committed republican and wish for an elected head of state, the Queen has my respect as dutiful servant to her Kingdom and the Commonwealth. I will be saddened when her reign ends and wonder what will become of the monarchy. I feel the only way for it to be relevant and survive would be for William and Catherine to ascend immediately, with Charles stepping aside. I cannot see this happening and I do not believe there will be a monarchy within a generation or two.
What do others think?
Cheers,
Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George
Centre Hastings
ON Canada
|
Posts: 13378
Joined: 2009
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Good morning Colin,
The news of the Queen's poor health is distressing. She has been under the weather for a while now. She promised, as a young woman, that she would devote her life to the nation and she has done that. So, she will be missed.
As a foreigner but one who also shares this woman as our Queen and titular head of state, I cannot speculate about the longevity of the monarchy in the UK. I always assumed that the devotion to a constitutional monarchy as a form of government was strong in the UK and that the people would be willing to weather the reign of Charles. Perhaps Charles will prove to be more effective than is anticipated.
Has the kerfuffle over Brexit clouded the view of Scots toward the monarchy more than it has in England?
As for this Dominion, there are many who give little thought to the monarchy and the advantages to being part of a constitutional monarchy employing a Westminster style parliamentary system. There are many who favour abandoning the monarchy in favour of a republican system. I am not one of them.
Are there many supporters of a republican system of government in the UK?
Cheers,
George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Colin, George and others. If we could believe the releases from The Firm’s press bureau, the Queen is suffering a sprained back, after having recently suffered from a spate of overwork. I wish it were so, for neither is an illness. But in truth, she was born 95 years ago (1926) and has carried the weight of monarchy for close to 70 years (since 1953). Sadly, IMHO, that makes her back and her exhaustion symptoms of a body too worn to continue the numerous duties she refuses to step back from.
Colin, you aren’t alone in your republican thoughts, whether in GB or in many commonwealth and colonial nations. Didn’t Barbados move recently to a republican form of government, dropping the Queen as ceremonial Head of State? Unlike you, I don’t wish to see the end of the role of royalty; I see it as one of the few ties binding a diverse group of nations together. I’ll take that one step further. I think it might be the only symbol which can keep Great Britain together.
As I wrote that, I realized I’m assuming the continuation of GB is a good thing, which may not be the case for a host of reasons. Let’s put that on hold for a moment.
I am old enough to remember George VI, perhaps the most reluctant English/British king ever. He too perhaps saved the monarchy, by stepping into his brother’s shoes on Edward’s abdication. He faced not only a responsibility he did not wish, but a war he found repugnant, yet he did his duty. I think both the war and her father’s sense of duty molded Elizabeth sufficiently to bring her to make her holy pledge not to leave the throne except by death.
I remain unconvinced that Charles will make a good king, or even a good regent if it comes to that. Might it be possible, by the way, for Charles to accept regency during his mother’s last years with the understanding he will pass the throne on to William at her death. I get the idea that Charles feels he has played king-in-waiting too long not to play the main role for at least a few years. That’s why I doubt his capabilities. His ego is too normally large to allow him to submit himself to being a representative of nations. And no matter how impressed I am by the “Will and Kate Show”, I’m not entirely convinced they are steeled enough to accept such a burden.
Other than that, there is Great Britain itself to consider. Understand, I was raised with the concept of my nation being an extension of “the old country”. A song I often sang as a child, “The Maple Leaf Forever”, contained the line “the thistle, shamrock, rose entwined/the maple leaf forever.” Yet on my last visit to GB – which I admit is some 8 or 9 years ago now! – I spent time in Orkney, Scotland, Wales and England. I felt I met four distinct peoples with four distinctive visions of the future. That was quite scary in itself, because it occurred in a short space of time. I guess what I’m wondering is whether there is a place for monarchy over the basic four-culture that defines Great Britain. If the Union collapses – if Scotland leaves, or if the bitching over Brexit leads the two Irelands to form even an economic union outside Westminster, then the concept of Great Britain will disappear. What then of the stature or status of the current royal family? Increasingly, it seem to me that (for certain) Scotland reflects and even parades issues which separate it from England. The Welsh don’t appear to be so aggressive, but their self-consciousness as a separate people/culture is stronger than I’ve ever noted before. Ireland, I can’t speak to.
I would be happier had GB a less self-centred, less arrogant, “old-boyish” PM. Boris, sadly, has neither any concept of the 4-culture complexity that has existed for more than 300 years, but has been born, raised, educated and active in sufficient isolation to pride himself on misunderstanding national concerns. He is either too vacuous or to out of touch to lead a nation that, as a result, traditional inequities are leaping to the fore. With an arse like Johnson, the loss of Elizabeth and ascent of Charles would probably blow your long-standing kingdom apart. I hope it isn’t Boris who is at the helm of parliament when the Queen dies
In the mean time, Colin, you’ve raised a huge issue, at least IMHO, and not one just concerned about succession. I hope I haven’t stepped outside the issues you raised in your post.
I’m hoping the Queen outlasts me, though who knows. She has been my monarch all of my teen and adult life. One one side, she has genes that suggest at least some years ahead for her.
Cheers. And stay safe.
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
The Remembrance Day event at Whitehall was very diminished by the absence of The Queen, and the expression on the face of Charles - and, indeed, on that of his older daughter in law, Kate - suggested real sadness and anxiety. Something’s amiss, and I suspect that they know that the Queen’s condition might be deteriorating faster and more seriously than we’ve been led to believe.
I hope not. I was born thirty three days before her coronation, so she’s literally been “ My Queen”. She actually assumed the role in early 1952.
There’s a lot of the brown and sticky stuff hitting the fan : the conduct of her favourite child, Andrew ; there’s a reckoning coming for him. The controversy emanating from Harry and Megan ; the death of her husband. Perhaps she’s just had enough.
Brian, you allude to the burden assumed by George VI, a man who was dreading the role thrust upon him by the abdication of his brother. Did I mention one of my favourite podcasts, THE REST IS HISTORY ? I recoiled in amusement and shock when I thought that I heard one of the two narrators, Dominic Sandbrook, refer to Edward the abdicator as that narcissistic little shit ! Perhaps I misheard.
There’s a tremendous amount of disdain and anger about the Monarchy emanating from many British people , but I honestly believe that the Queen herself is held in very high regard, both as a person and as a role model, by the vast majority of the population of the United Kingdom.
I wonder which is in greater jeopardy : the life of the Queen or the existence of the UK.
Edit : As for Charles, I’m not looking forward to licking his stamps !
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
|
Colin, you say in your initial post on this thread: Quote: I cannot see this [Charles rejecting the crown in favour of Will and Kate] happening and I do not believe there will be a monarchy within a generation or two.
What about a different form of monarchy, or a different approach to monarchy?
One of my concerns is the unique nature of Britain’s monarchy. Part of that is the pomp and ceremony inherent to any royal event or attendance. Part are the layers of conduct and behaviour surrounding their status. Part, too, is the confusion surrounding the link between Church, Monarchy and State (not sure those need Caps!) which I think may be unique in the at least the Christian world.
Could Britain follow the way of most Scandinavian monarchies and retain the title and ceremonial status without any of the attendant weight of tradition? Could you see such a monarchy existing in England? I think it would take a few generations of training before the current royal culture would accept such a reduction in status. While I admit it seems Will and Kate are attempting to bring their lives more in line with more common aristocracy, I don’t think they can make a complete jump to a life without outrageous privilege.
Sorry, I suddenly need to go further with this. I don’t want to direct this into sleaze, but I’m thinking about Phil’s reference to Prince Andrew as a burden over the past few years. It appears he may face no trial at law for whatever his relationship or involvement with Epstein and his alleged doxy. But from the time Andrew started wearing long pants, the nickname “Randy Andy” has been attached to him. While I’m in no way accusing him of criminal conduct, I would sure as hell like to face trial if there are even hints of culpability. What would he face: trial in the House of Lords? Does that concept of Lords Temporal and Divine being those who might be deemed peers still stand?
Enuf of Andrew!
Does anybody remember the days after the death of Diana? I think the existence of the British monarchy was on the edge in those few days. And I think had that royal walkabout outside the palace not taken place we might not be having this discussion. A simple walkabout may have saved the House of Windsor: WOW! And the fact that it took days and days to stage that walkabout suggests how utterly the Royal Family was out of touch with how simple gestures of sorrow and humanity were enough to appease those thousands of Diana supporters.
Cheers. And stay safe.
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
|
Phil, this is too much! Quote: Did I mention one of my favourite podcasts, THE REST IS HISTORY ? I recoiled in amusement and shock when I thought that I heard one of the two narrators, Dominic Sandbrook, refer to Edward the abdicator as that narcissistic little shit ! Perhaps I misheard.
I’ve spend hours trying to figure out what Sandbrook might have said that you might have misheard. Although I’ll keep working on it, the best I can do so far is to replace “narcissistic” with “naziistic”. Heaven forfend!  The ”little shit’ is more challenging, particularly if “naziistic” is correct, because “little shit” is considered appropriate by some. But – if this was from BBC – I decided “fiddlist”. is what must have been said, a (possibly) challengeable comment about Nero. Probably you heard “Naziistic fiddlist”. rerun your tape, Phil! See if I’m correct!
At any rate, David, Prince of Wales, became Edward VIII. Wasn’t George VI known as Albert, Duke of York, before he came to the throne?
One issue concerning Edward VIII’s coronation was Wallace Simpson’s previous marriages. C of E doctrine stated this as unacceptable, and since a monarch is head of C of E they should not indulge in heresy (or, at least, sacrilege). Some years later, the same issue would confound Princess Margaret’s proposed marriage to (IIRC) Peter Townsend, a BofB RAF ace who was a divorcee. But I sense there were at least two other reasons for the pressure on Edward: his proposed bride was twice divorced, but very American; and his growing familiarity with Germany.
Let’s also keep in mind that Charles could face an issue as Head of the Church of England, since if he becomes king he will have to deal with his marriage to Camilla, a divorcee.
What the hell. I’m going to have some food!
Cheers. And stay safe.
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Brian,
Anxious to check the podcast and make an apology if I’d misheard, I now must make a correction.
He described George VI’s older brother as a narcissistic shit , so I embellished the phrase by inserting the word little !
Editing : anxious about this awful weather that’s hitting Vancouver region. Hope you’re safe, Brian.
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
scoucer
Berlin
Germany
|
Posts: 3224
Joined: 2010
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
|
Quote:
Let’s also keep in mind that Charles could face an issue as Head of the Church of England, since if he becomes king he will have to deal with his marriage to Camilla, a divorcee.Brian G
And it could get even trickier with the Church of Scotland.
Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie
Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Quote:Quote:
Let’s also keep in mind that Charles could face an issue as Head of the Church of England, since if he becomes king he will have to deal with his marriage to Camilla, a divorcee.Brian G
And it could get even trickier with the Church of Scotland. Trevor
Trevor,
Never having been a big admirer of Charles, I have to confess that, since he’s been wedded to Camilla, I’ve found he’s gone up significantly in my esteem. Something of his personal warmth has come across, and it’s as if he’s been a man released from Purgatory.
As for the Church of England, that’s pretty well fucked by now, or, more reverently , it’s becoming an irrelevance.
What stance do you think the Church of Scotland might take ?
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lightning
Glasgow
UK
|
Posts: 1042
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Hi all,
Sorry for my delay in replying, but thank you to everyone for chipping in. So many good points and questions - where to begin?
Brian asks if a different form of monarchy could work - I think is probably where William and Catherine would want it to go. A more grounded, in-touch, lean monarchy/aristocracy has a better chance of surviving well into the 21st century than the army of dukes, princes, earls etc that we suffer and pay for now. The Queen is held affectionately by most, and a grudging respect offered by those who don't, largely due to her devotion to public service her whole life. Charles is not popular to many - he is prone to spouting opinions (he is often correct in these though, IMO), interfering in political matters and has put the establishment Church(es) in a heck of a bind through his second marriage. He is, however, seemingly determined to have his go at being King. A politically active monarch will not be well-received.
I think George asked about Scotland and how we see it. Well, opinion is divided, from what I can gather. The respect for the Queen is there from the majority, but not for the insitution itself. I think if Scotland were to go independent, we would probably jettison the monarchy fairly quickly, and maybe even quicker if other Commonwealth realms were to follow suit (my guess is Australia would be the first). The situation with Prince Andrew is potentially a fatal blow in any case; a conviction or caution of any sort there will be lethal to them all, as the belief will be (rightly or wrongly) that the establishment conspired to protect him.
Phil is bang on the money when he says the Church of England is becoming an irrelevance. So too is the Church of Scotland - the Scottish Protestant community is largely secular except for weddings, funerals and Christenings and the remaining regular worshipping congregation mainly of the older generation. The Catholic faith remains strong at all age groups - how peculiar it would be if it was the previously suppressed demonination that survived the fall of the religious establishment.
Cheers,
Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
HM returned for duty, she’s on parade again.
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lightning
Glasgow
UK
|
Posts: 1042
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
I’m sorry to have to resurrect this post. HM the Queen has died aged 96. I am grateful for her tireless service to her realm. May she rest in peace.
Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
I just heard the news. A phrase not heard in 120 years will be used: “The Queen is dead. Long live the king.”
She will be missed. Can’t say much more right now.
B
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kaii
Oslo
|
Posts: 3140
Joined: 2010
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
|
Quote: I’m sorry to have to resurrect this post. HM the Queen has died aged 96. I am grateful for her tireless service to her realm. May she rest in peace.
Colin
May she rest in peace.
The Queen is dead. Long live the King.
Interesting days ahead to see what happens now. Will Charles step down, perhaps after a symbolic period as King, or will he cling to the throne - as is his right.
And will he take the name King Charles, or choose a different one? Is there a name that is "due" now?
We will face this transition in Norway in not very long too, but are then set for a fairly young and popular King to come. Will he be the last in line? I suppose a lot will depend on how the monarchy in the UK fares now.
K
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lightning
Glasgow
UK
|
Posts: 1042
Joined: 2005
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Hi Kai,
The Palace announced he will be known as King Charles III. There was speculation he would be King George VII but it was not to be.
I don’t see Charles stepping down or aside any time soon, tbh. Whether the monarchy survives will, IMO, depend on whether Charles can be a truly neutral monarch like his mother was before him.
Best wishes,
Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
However much this was expected, it’s still a shock.
A profound grief grips us over here.
We were so lucky to have her.
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michigan Dave
Muskegon
MI USA
|
Posts: 8091
Joined: 2006
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
I'm kind of a hat person, myself, mostly baseball hats.
But nobody wore a hat like the Queen did!
RIP,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
|
George, on the issue of Charles’ choice of regnal name, the last king bearing that name died 341 years ago. The Telegraph offered the following description of the reigns of the first two Charles: Quote: Britain’s new King has officially chosen the regnal name of Charles III. It means he takes on a name that carries with it difficult historical baggage.
Indeed, the King is believed to have strongly considered choosing the name George VII, after his grandfather, in part because of the contentious legacies of Charles I and II.
Charles I, who reigned from 1625 to 1649, is one of Britain’s most notorious monarchs. Recent revisionist histories have sought to soften his image as an authoritarian leader intent on undermining Parliament. Yet there is little escaping the fact that his reign triggered the English Civil War and ended in his trial for treason and his beheading.
During his rule, the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland were riven with religious strife, while Charles himself insisted on his divine right to rule regardless of Parliament. That, combined with Charles’s marriage to a French Catholic and his suspected Catholic leanings, upset his parliamentarians who would eventually rebel and sign his death warrant.
Charles II was invited to restore the monarchy in 1660 after 11 years of the Commonwealth and pursued political and religious tolerance. Nevertheless, like his father before him, he had Catholic leanings which sat ill with his deeply Protestant subjects. He fell out with Parliament, dissolving it in 1681 and ruled without it until his death four years later.
His son, James II, would be overthrown in 1688 due in large part to his Catholicism. It was then that the ultimate sovereignty of Parliament was assured once and for all.
Much of the tone of this is typical Telegraph, I must admit. But it irks me (as a number of small things have irked me today) that they couldn’t even get their history straight. James II was emphatically not the son of Charles II, but his brother, younger by only 3 years. To get such a thing wrong, particularly when explaining what Charles faced in making his regnal choice, appears to me – in my somewhat emotional state – totally unacceptable.
I heard that, shortly after Her Majesty’s death, Speaker Pelosi requested/ruled/ordered (I don’t the protocol) that flags fly at half staff over I believe only certain Federal Buildings in DC. This gesture in recognition of a woman who has served her country and commonwealth for 70 years was both gracious and fitting. Thank you, Speaker Pelosi.
Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Andrade
London
UK
|
Posts: 6386
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Thanks Brian.
What an appalling mistake by the Daily Telegraph !
The news struck like a thunderbolt.
British people are feeling vulnerable and frightened at the moment, and someone uniquely reassuring and stabilising has been ripped away from us.
We were driving down to our coastal bivy when the news was announced, and as Lynn’s tears flowed a beautiful rainbow spanned the sky overhead.
Sometimes I’ve felt a bit insouciant about the Monarchy, but I’m almost embarrassed to admit the intensity of the emotional impact on me.
Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vpatrick
MA
MA USA
|
Posts: 2474
Joined: 2020
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
My Condolences Phil and to all of the folks in Britain and the Commonwealth that post here. She was an incredible person who lived an incredible life, lived it with dignity and was devoted to her country. She was loved and respected in the US as well and around the world. If King Charles is half the Monarch she was everything will be ok for the Monarchy and Britain.
vpatrick
----------------------------------
nuts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
morris crumley
Dunwoody
GA USA
|
Posts: 3293
Joined: 2007
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
To those who post here, and who are grieving in your own ways today....I am not an anglophile ....we fought two wars to avoid having Kings and Queens. But my respect for this extraordinary woman transcends all that. We suffer from an absence of leadership in the world today, this Queen was a true leader, steeped in her sense of duty and her enormous work ethic. She worked right up to the end. The last surviving WW2 uniformed world leader. We all will not see her like again, I fear, and may she rest in peace. Well done!
Sincere respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Grafton
Victoria
BC Canada
|
Posts: 4720
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
HM the Queen
|
Morris, thank you for your thoughts and kindness.
Many of us are in some pain today, and it won’t end soon. I’m one of a very small minority who remembers life before Elizabeth as Queen; I was 10 when she came to the throne. There was a cartoon today by Clay Bennett (Chattanooga Times Free Press) which captured my sense of loss pretty well:
[Read More]
The ritual will carry us through. Charles is now our King; he has delivered a eulogy and offered his promises. Whether he deserves, whether he has earned, whether he is capable, whether he will be wanted to continue a monarchy his mother made so much her own, are questions beyond today.
Our challenges. But your statement – honest and thoughtful – is kind and gentle. Again, thank you.
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.
"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
