I awoke from my mid-day mid-winter's snooze to the dulcet tones of our very own HRH Elizabeth the eye-eye (illustrated privately wishing she were me) giving her annual Christmas message and, boy, was I surprised. What a total rip-off of her 1978 speech. All that talk about tolerance and fairplay being the cornerstone of the British nation. And didn't We get Ourselves very much into that whole "there is every reason to be hopeful about the future" thing back in 1964 and 1987???
Next year, I think there are some topics I would like to hear covered:
- funny things Philip said at the dinner table,
- countries I just found out I own,
- results from this year's tiara toss and smash, and
- why the French and Germans have it over us.
Merry Christmas to you all and don't forget to stop and snooze.
Comments
Arthur - December 25, 2004 3:47 pm
What a total rip-off of her 1978 speech.
After so many speeches, no doubt, all of them would look alike. Merry Christmas, Alan!
Kim - December 26, 2004 5:43 pm
I missed the Queen but managed to stop in to wish you a Merry Christmas!
Nils Ling - December 27, 2004 12:04 am
Personally, I found this and the 1987 speech stunningly similar, with the exception of the part in the 1987 speech where she called the Argentinians "... those swarthy sheep-molesters". Still, though, nothing can compare to 1977, where she apologized that Charles hadn't yet found a wife and suggested he was probably "... a little light in the polo boots."
Arthur - December 27, 2004 9:11 am
she apologized that Charles hadn't yet found a wife and suggested he was probably "... a little light in the polo boots."
[sigh]
Moms.
brian - December 28, 2004 7:05 pm
I meant get on here earlier and wish you a happy Boxing Day... well, happy Boxing Day! <b>I don't know what it is, but I know it's Canadian!</b> (That's a good quote to use somewhere, by the way.)
I've never in my life heard the queen make a speech. My official U.S. Ignorance notwithstanding, I guess I didn't realize she routinely made speeches. Nice of her to put so much emphasis on supporting the troops at war.
Alan - December 28, 2004 8:36 pm
It is nice and of course you are right, Brian. I would be much happier, however, if she were elected to the responsibility to do that...or someone perhaps Canadian might be. And I would like that that elected person not have amassed wealth passed from generations due solely to a legacy of undemocratic oppression and not of merit. But yes, it was a nice speech.
brian - December 29, 2004 4:06 am
You mean... <i>she didn't earn it</i>? How am I supposed to take her seriously then? Actually, I know monarchs don't have to go out and work for their goodies... and I'm still not going to take her words as seriously as I would Tony Blair's. After all, he's their Prime Minister (as opposed to, say, the holder of a ceremonial title).
::begin montypython::
I didn't know we had a king...
...well, I didn't vote for you!
::end montypython::
I suppose it's too much trouble at this point to have a rebellion like our ancestors did in 1776... Actually, around that time, my ancestors were probably sitting in Ireland drinking Guinness and eating the last of the potatoes.