Barbara seems to be a bit on the jealous side ..
of a TRUE Lady .. a Queen ..
that has definitely embraced her years ..
and proudly (Still!) carries herself for the world to see ..
Quite a story of survival too written in her life ..
from her birth .. through WWII .. to now .. and such a large family!
Barbara Walters Disses Queen Elizabeth: Does She Have a 'Sour Face'?
SodaHead Celebs
2012/07/31 16:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
546 votes
|
|
56% | |||
|
426 votes
|
|
44% | |||
Did you catch the Olympic Opening Ceremonies last Friday? We found the whole thing kind of boring, but one highlight was the bit with Queen Elizabeth and James Bond (there's a good sport, we thought!). Well, Barbara Walters agrees with us ... but only to a point. The legendary celeb interviewer thinks the Queen's skit with Daniel Craig was funny ... but she has a problem with Her Majesty's "sour face."


"Let me tell you my thing with the Queen," Walters said on "The View." "I did agree that the whole thing with Daniel Craig was funny… [but] this is a woman who does not know how to smile. ...It’s such a sour face."
She also has an issue with the Queen's sense of style. "She is 86, but she dresses like something out of the 19th century, Walters said. “The pink dress with the pink plume, but then the black gloves and the black bag -- what does the Queen keep in that bag anyway? She never changes." Walters has a point about the Queen, but she was a good sport in that Bond skit. And she always looks pretty queenly to us. How about you?
She also has an issue with the Queen's sense of style. "She is 86, but she dresses like something out of the 19th century, Walters said. “The pink dress with the pink plume, but then the black gloves and the black bag -- what does the Queen keep in that bag anyway? She never changes." Walters has a point about the Queen, but she was a good sport in that Bond skit. And she always looks pretty queenly to us. How about you?
Top Opinion
-
sglmom 2012/07/31 16:22:06No, she looks ... queenly






















I cant imagine my grandparents sitting through such a long and loud event
With democracy, you have very little change insofar as the political class still resides in comparative opulence to those who are coerced to provide their easy lives. The lower classes may vote for a ruler but what they cannot ever choose is not to have a ruler and not to be compelled to hand over a significant portion of their earnings (i.e. they must work to feed the political class). The significant difference is that the ones voting believe they make a difference (a horrible lie) and those who are politicians must take more in order to attempt to bribe enough of those voting to vote for them rather than the other guy. The only differences between those who ...
With democracy, you have very little change insofar as the political class still resides in comparative opulence to those who are coerced to provide their easy lives. The lower classes may vote for a ruler but what they cannot ever choose is not to have a ruler and not to be compelled to hand over a significant portion of their earnings (i.e. they must work to feed the political class). The significant difference is that the ones voting believe they make a difference (a horrible lie) and those who are politicians must take more in order to attempt to bribe enough of those voting to vote for them rather than the other guy. The only differences between those who are being voted for is which people the particular politician feels obliged to pay off-and even then, they seem to share the same owners for the most part, with differing degrees of fealty.
As to your comments about Obama, he's no less a parasite than any other politician-past present and future-and he's only the worst until the next one comes along. My choice would be to see them shut the doors to DC, have all the politicians return to their homes, find productive employment and stop taking their living from the people who actually work. Politicians aren't just useless, they are a drain on the economy and a danger to the community over which they preside and to the rest of the world-as were the monarchs that preceded them. I'm against all socialism, not just Obama's. War is just as socialist as social security, corporate bailouts, personal and corporate welfare (subsidies), medicare/Obamacare, etc. Any time you take money by force from others to pay for public goods and services, you're adhering to socialism. You are enslaving your fellow to pay for the things you want. That is immoral.
If you wish to provide an easy living for politicians, be they Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, Constitutional Party, Green Party or Communist Party, I would only ask that you do so with your own money and stop believing that it's moral to compel your neighbors and those you do not know to surrender the fruits of their labor as well. Let the politicians and bureaucrats earn a living like the rest of us, not by force, but through voluntary trade, creating goods and rendering services people choose to purchase.