Hey, it looks like Luxembourg now has a First Man...

[Guest Starbuck]

I was in college when LBJ was president. Yes, he was always jealous of JFK, to the point of needlessly escalating the war in Vietnam because he thought Kennedy would have done the same. According to Robert Caro, Johnson did ok with women, although he was not in Kennedy's league.

 

Well whaddaya know ... although Johnson had a Texas-sized "tallywhacker' (see below), Kennedy was the more successful Don Juan. Somebody tell Gman!

 

The Member from Johnson City

In his recent biography of Lyndon Johnson, Flawed Giant, Robert Dallek writes, “During a private conversation with some reporters who pressed him to explain why we were in Vietnam, Johnson lost his patience. According to Arthur Goldberg, LBJ unzipped his fly, drew out his substantial organ and declared, ‘This is why!’”

 

Way back then, President Johnson could be confident that the reporters would not share this moment of presidential bonding with the public. Quaint questions of taste aside, it might not have struck them as news anyway. The president’s fascination with his substantial organ was an old story to the White House press corps.

 

I first heard of it when I was working on a profile of White House press secretary George Reedy for The Saturday Evening Post. Everybody in the press room had a glancing acquaintance with the President’s privates, which he was forever prodding and redistributing through his pants. And ambassadors calling to present their credentials sometimes had a closer acquaintance than that. It was Mr. Johnson’s occasional practice to invite new envoys for a swim in the small indoor pool built for FDR. Skinny-dipping was the long-established tradition, which allowed the President to establish genital dominance at the start of a diplomatic relationship.

[+ WilliamM]

Well whaddaya know ... although Johnson had a Texas-sized "tallywhacker' (see below), Kennedy was the more successful Don Juan. Somebody tell Gman!

 

A more successful Don Juan is probably a relative term. From what I remember of Johnson and Robert Caro's still incomplete four or five volume, "The Years of Lyndon B. Johnson," LBJ tended to have more long-term extra-marital affairs with women than Kennedy. Also, LBJ's women tended to be as smart as Lady Bird Johnson, but far more attractive.

[wisconsinguy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/world/europe/luxembourg-premier-is-first-eu-leader-to-marry-same-sex-partner.html?WT.mc_id=2015-MAY-AOL-WORLD_AUD_DEV-0501-0531&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=MAYAUDDEV&_r=0

 

The Belgian to whom he's married looks pretty hot!

I think they both look hot! I do like them a bit older.

[Zman]

It shows how out of touch they are, more evidence that they are relics of the past.

 

My prediction is that, within 50 years, most of the remaining European states that have monarchs will realize that a monarch and a royal family is a piece of sentimentality that they can no longer afford. The British monarchy will be the last to go.

 

I agree with your opinion of monarchy (and titled aristocracy in general). But they're hard to get rid of unfortunately. It always seems to take some upheaval like a coup (Greece) or the defeat of fascism (Italy) to pry them out of their dens. Oddly, even with Scotland considering independence their doesn't seem to be a serious call to get rid of the queen.

[mike carey]

[O]r the defeat of fascism (Italy) to pry them out of their dens.

On the other hand the end of fascism saw the restoration of the monarchy in Spain.

[Rudynate]

On the other hand the end of fascism saw the restoration of the monarchy in Spain.

 

I thought I remembered reading that the Queen was no longer sovereign in Australia. I just looked at her web site and found that she is still.

[Rudynate]

On the other hand the end of fascism saw the restoration of the monarchy in Spain.

 

King Felipe could be the first one to tumble. Most of the Spanish population appears hostile to indifferent to the monarchy.

[Guest]

Oddly, even with Scotland considering independence their doesn't seem to be a serious call to get rid of the queen.

 

I talked with a Scotsman recently. He thought that if Scotland became independent, it would become a republic. I haven't seen specifically what those who want independence in Scotland want. Have any of you seen any polls? Do they prefer to remain a kingdom like Canada, or do they want to be a republic like Ireland?

[mike carey]

I thought I remembered reading that the Queen was no longer sovereign in Australia. I just looked at her web site and found that she is still.

She certainly is, we had a referendum in 1999 and it lost convincingly, in substantial part because a lot of people who favoured a republic didn't like the way the president would be appointed and voted no to the whole idea. There is less support for a republic now than there was then.

[marylander1940]

I thought I remembered reading that the Queen was no longer sovereign in Australia. I just looked at her web site and found that she is still.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_republic_referendum,_1999

[marylander1940]

King Felipe could be the first one to tumble. Most of the Spanish population appears hostile to indifferent to the monarchy.

 

Indifferent, it's a chief of state without powers who gives speeches written by the government and visits countries while the chief of government governs, it should be indifferent and for almost 40 years it was drama free.

 

HOSTILE....?

 

Mr. Grammar: Hostile is such a strong word... maybe 35% would rather have a Republic and are opposed to a monarchy... but a few of them are hostile.

 

This polls were taken in 2013 when the King had to apologized after shooting an elephant in Botswana, even Obama would campaign in it and NOT apologized for doing that. Also his son in law got caught cheating on taxes, here he would have lobbied to get a tax exemption like farmers Jon Bon Jovi and Michael Dell among other welfare queens.

 

http://www.programapublicidad.com/wp-content/uploads/barometro-monarquia-Lasexta-grande.jpg

 

Even in the most Socialist and poorest autonomic community of Spain Andalucia (Andalusia) the Republic only wins among voters between 18 and 29 years old yet the majority will still support the monarchy in a referendum. Let's note that in Spain poor areas are socialist while here with the exception of inner city ghettos and barrios, poor states are conservative yet they love socialist policies like: food stamps, welfare, Medicaid, social security, etc... We've talked about this before, don't make me upload a map again of the poorest counties.

 

http://www.andalucesdiario.es/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/GR%C3%81FICO-MONARQUIA-REPUBLICA.jpg

[mike carey]

Indifferent, it's a chief of state without powers who gives speeches written by the government and visits countries while the chief of government governs, it should be indifferent and for almost 40 years it was drama free.

It's the same in Australia, most people don't care, the monarchy doesn't affect people's daily life, and there is a view that if it isn't broken don't fix it. Most people think it isn't broken. Part of it is the celebrity factor with the young royals, what's not to like about Wills and Kate and young Prince George?

 

Last time the Queen visited Australia, one of the big talking points was that at the arrival ceremony, we had a female monarch, governor-general (the de facto head of state who is officially the Queen's representative here), prime minister and chief minister of the Australian Capital Territory. Even the Navy officer who was aide-de-camp to the GG was a woman.

[marylander1940]

It's the same in Australia, most people don't care, the monarchy doesn't affect people's daily life, and there is a view that if it isn't broken don't fix it. Most people think it isn't broken. Part of it is the celebrity factor with the young royals, what's not to like about Wills and Kate and young Prince George?

 

Last time the Queen visited Australia, one of the big talking points was that at the arrival ceremony, we had a female monarch, governor-general (the de facto head of state who is officially the Queen's representative here), prime minister and chief minister of the Australian Capital Territory. Even the Navy officer who was aide-de-camp to the GG was a woman.

 

Exactly, besides one thing is the government and other thing is the state.

 

I'm still shocked the British got rid of the Lascelles Principles that gave their country such great way to guarantee stability in a parliamentary democracy while giving a people a real choice between saying yes or no to the government.

 

1950-2011:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascelles_Principles

 

2011 on:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011

[Rudynate]

Part of it is the celebrity factor with the young royals, what's not to like about Wills and Kate and young Prince George?

 

 

But the Windsors are singularly tedious.

 

Here's a young royal who's worth becoming a royal-watcher for, Prince Carl Philip of Sweden:

 

http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Prince+Carl+Philip+Swedish+Royals+Visit+Ion+g6w9bOpD51Ul.jpg

[Zman]

I think Carl Philip was his father's heir until Sweden did away with preference for male children. So sister Vicky will get to be queen. It's such a weird thing. Monarchy IS ridiculous. Does doing away with male primogeniture make it any less so? I guess there's a little value in the symbolism.

[Rudynate]

In the UK, there is discussion of changing the law of succession to allow for the eventuality of same-sex marriage. It's a bit silly - trying to modify a medieval institution to fit 21st century mores. Maybe it will work.

[Rudynate]

I guess there's a little value in the symbolism.

 

 

But is the value proportionate to the cost? All these royals running around doing nothing but ribbon-cutting, vacationing, playing polo, vacationing, putting in an appearance at a garden party, vacationing, etc.

[Zman]

But is the value proportionate to the cost? All these royals running around doing nothing but ribbon-cutting, vacationing, playing polo, vacationing, putting in an appearance at a garden party, vacationing, etc.

 

Also, I can't decide if "Commonwealth Realms" like Australia and Canada are less or more ridiculous than European monarchies. It seems like Rent-A-Queen. You spend a few tens-of-millions to fly her in, show her off, and ship her back out. And you get a real live queen for a few weeks. Well, that's just my opinion. As has been pointed out most people in those countries don't really care. And there's a lot about life and government in Australia and Canada I think the US would do well to adopt. But I don't think a monarchy is one of them.

[Rudynate]

Also, I can't decide if "Commonwealth Realms" like Australia and Canada are less or more ridiculous than European monarchies. It seems like Rent-A-Queen. You spend a few tens-of-millions to fly her in, show her off, and ship her back out. And you get a real live queen for a few weeks. Well, that's just my opinion. As has been pointed out most people in those countries don't really care. And there's a lot about life and government in Australia and Canada I think the US would do well to adopt. But I don't think a monarchy is one of them.

 

Every time I visit Canada, I ask myself, "Why don't I live here?"

[mike carey]

But the Windsors are singularly tedious.

They certainly can be. 'What's not to like...' was about the general view of the Australian public, not necessarily my view of the young royals. And as Zman says, it is a bit like rent-a-queen! As to the ribbon-cutting and garden parties, if we had become a republic in 1999, the president would have been ceremonial (like Germany or Ireland) not executive (like the US).

[Rudynate]

I used to watch german news quite a bit. It seemed like Joachim Gauck earned his keep.

[Rudynate]

Also, I can't decide if "Commonwealth Realms" like Australia and Canada are less or more ridiculous than European monarchies. It seems like Rent-A-Queen. You spend a few tens-of-millions to fly her in, show her off, and ship her back out. And you get a real live queen for a few weeks. Well, that's just my opinion. As has been pointed out most people in those countries don't really care. And there's a lot about life and government in Australia and Canada I think the US would do well to adopt. But I don't think a monarchy is one of them.

 

That's just Britain trying to pretend that they still have an empire.

[Guest]

Every time I visit Canada, I ask myself, "Why don't I live here?"

 

Because it's very, very, very cold. Maybe you've only visited there in the summer, the only season when it's pleasant?

[Rudynate]

Because it's very, very, very cold. Maybe you've only visited there in the summer, the only season when it's pleasant?

 

 

Vancouver's winter weather is similar to the Bay Area's - lots of rain and temps in the 40s - 50s. I have been to Toronto in mid-winter. It was frigid. I've never dared try Montreal.

[Guest]

I recently took a bus trip in southern Europe. One couple was from Toronto. They said that there were many days this winter when Toronto was colder than the North Pole (like -50)!! Better to live in the middle of the Arctic Ocean than Ontario? But I do agree that Vancouver, at least, is a wonderful, albeit rainy city. It's actually one of the world's great cities in my view. I will never, ever understand why every Canadian doesn't live in Vancouver.