Please Bob don't say that! A lot of Americans do not know that the Brits ransacked Washington, burnt the White House and went on a raping spree. That is what Empires do and strangely enough it has taken us only 200 years to become like them if not worse!

The War of 1812, ah, the good ol' days... Anyone read Billy Budd? The English (and others) would "impress" men into service on their ships. Good times. Back when the French were our close and personal friends. Didn't they give us that big statue thingy that's in NY harbor?

It was during the War of 1812, but the White House and other public buildings were burned in 1814. And we didn't thrash the British. It was pretty much a draw. The only battle we actually won was the Battle of New Orleans which was fought after the peace treaty was signed which ended the war.

And the burning of the White House was in retaliation for American forces having earlier burned Parliament buildings in Canada.

We declared that war on Britiain not because of the Royal Navy Press Gangs taking our sailors, we declared the war because we wanted to sell products to Napoleonic Europe.......... Napoleon was such a nice guy you know, conquering all of Europe.

Americans have so little understanding of our own history.

Total nightmare of a war from the US perspective and the British put in very little effort. The only person to benefit from the war was Andrew Jackson who rode it all the way to the Presidency......and a fine job he did there.

Probably the worst President until Dubya.

@ JSaff:

You are SO right. The people posting anti-British and anti-royalty stuff on here are totally uneducated about history.

When I finally found a nice word about the Queen, it was from one of the right wing crazies in a tinfoil hat talking about the "big angry woman clumping around the White House.....hating America."

I want to move to England. I really do. The idiots posting this stuff here elect our presidents.

If you had "thrashed" the British, I would not be living in the independent country of Canada right now. As for burning the White House, I suppose you never learned that the American forces burned what is now the town of Niagara on the Lake in the middle of winter, causing great suffering?

@ canadiana:

Absolutely true. But if we could have pulled it off, it might have made sense to take Canada. If we didn't want a King for the states, he could then have been banished from all of North America. There are relatively few Canadians compared with Americans anyway, and they are all huddled shivering in a strip of land right on our Northern border. Extend the border 100 miles or so, and we'd have taken in almost all of them.

Canada is technically the second largest country in the world by area, but that really shouldn't count. It's almost all arctic wasteland.

America is such a new country, we have no historical reference. Good lord, someone in a nearby town had their barn deemed an historical landmark. It was 100 years old. The Brits would consider this new construction. And sadly, history, as it's taught in most high schools, is horribly boring. So sad that such a tremenously entertaining, instructive field (history) has such a bad rep in the US.

Kathy- that's why we repeat it so much.

Goddess calling RKapoor

You first!

Agreed. Americans have become like brute beasts with no leadership but ... well, brute beasts... to guide them, whereas the Royal Family has more than a thousand years of experience in ruling and guiding the relatively ignorant masses. The Royal Family was here long before America, and it will remain long after America withers beneath the poison of its own corruption. But try telling that to the average gun-toting, semi-literate, wannabe America cowboy and watch with amazement and disgust the sewage that will proceed out of the mouth thereof.

I beg to disagree. You look at the concept of nobility through rose colored glasses indeed. Not only do you have a fairy tale concept of the royals you have a thoroughly ignorant notion of Americans based on caricatures. If the masses are indeed ignorant it is because they don't enjoy even 1% of the advantages of those born into nobility and riches. Most families were here long before the U.S. and will be here long after, that in itself is not impressive.

Well, it does bother me that relatively uneducated trailer trash, who believe in creationism for example, will pick our next Head of State, with the same single vote that educated, intelligent, and cultured Americans have.

Tradition - like beheadings? Move on, the time of some stupid family being called royal is stupid. People wave and worship them and they sit around waving. The British have nothing else to do but cart some lazy people around by coach so people can wave at them in a time of economic need is just plain stupid.

I'd hardly call it unbroken. There has been more than one Royal family seated ont he throne. The present queen's family was imported from Germany (Hanover to be exact) after Queen Anne died without any heirs. Most of the ceremonies associated with them (state opening of parlaimant, trooping of the colour, the yearly broadcast) are relatively modern inventions.

I think you should only be allowed to vote *or post HERE* - if you've graduated high school, and passed a reading comprehension test.

@ TnDan24. Well, I said "essentially" an unbroken line. There was the Norman Conquest of course, but Duke William of Normandy had a solid claim to the throne after Edward the Confessor died childless. A better claim than Harold in fact.

Of course there was the execution of Charles I and the Protectorate under Cromwell. But then Charles' son assumed the throne and reestablished the monarchy as Charles II, in the continuing royal line.

And when Ann died, George, Prince-Elector of Hanover, was her closest living Protestant relative, and thus the one who could inherit the throne as George I. So the royal family line continued in the German branch. George I was family, even if he never really learned to speak English. Several different "royal houses" of an extended family have ruled Britain within the essentially unbroken succession, going back to the time of Alfred the Great and the House of Wessex in the ninth century.

What you say about many familiar royal traditions being relatively modern is true, but this in no way denigrates the glorious history of the British Crown, with many other long "traditions", in these days less familiar, but going back over 1,000 years.

You mean "Charles", not Philip. Prince Philip is the 90+ year old husband of the Queen.

But Charles did indeed do what you say. On the other hand, Diana committed adultery too. And when you look at them, it's clear that William and Harry had different fathers. They don't even look remotely related. William is balding and has already lost his looks. Harry is handsome and has a full head of red hair. There is no other red hair anywhere in the royal family. William, the first born, is the one fathered by Charles.

This is a scandal in England, but is talked about in hushed tones.

Henry VIII and his daughter Elizabeth the 1st had red hair. Could be a throwback to them. Or the hunky stable hand....

Diana's brother has red hair - his face resembles his uncle's, too. He obviously inherited his looks from the Spencer side of the family.

It was reported that the other children were at the hospital with Prince Phillip where the Queen was going after she left the balcony.

I've not visited, but would love to. But I'd always heard that London is a mess, and can't hold a candle to Paris.

I lived in London but visited Paris many times, and I'm here to tell you it's actually the other way around. Don't get me wrong... Paris is a very beautiful city as well (in it's own way). But it's a lot more dangerous, dirty and disorganized. London (in general) is far safer, cleaner, and the worst part about the city is that the tube/buses don't run on schedule.

Queen Elizabeth (wife of King George and later Queen Mother Elizabeth) was always smiling. Before George became King she was called the "smiling Duchess."

Her daughter as Queen, didn't inherit her mother's wonderful smile. Elizabeth II sometimes has a sour look in public. But her Jubilee pictures did indeed look wonderful.

Beheading was one form of execution for criminals in England.....a LONG time ago.....talking Middle Ages here. The British no longer have capital punishment at all, but we do. No more beheadings, hangings, or anything else in Britain, but we still kill our convicted criminals.

And the British did away with slavery before we did.

And their Head of State is someone to be proud of. We elect Texas and Illinois politicians as our Heads of State for example.

I wish we could reestablish the Monarchy as our form of government in the US.

We could go into the many sins of the U.S. too but that doesn't stop me from enjoying the fourth of july. I enjoyed the ceremonies from London. No body does this better than the Brits but it doesn't follow that I would like a monarchy here. The countries in the U.K. are down with it and that's up to them. Lets not forget about the British soldier who was just killed in Afghanistan. Clearly our relationship has changed a lot since the American Revolution.

The royal family gave their wealth to the British people, not the other way around. In 1760, George III turned over the hereditary royal revenues of the entire "Crown Estate" to Parliament in return for a yearly payment, the "Civil List," from Parliament to defray expenses of the royal household.

Today, the revenues from the Crown Estate that go to Parliament are enormous, compared with the much smaller Civil List payments to the Crown.

The people posting critical comments on here about the royals obviously have no knowledge of British history at all. They are the people who elect presidents too.

You don't know what you are talking about. She's works everyday of the year on government business except Christmas. She's given her whole life to completely unselfish, dedicated public service. I'm proud of my head of state. God bless her. If she wasn't respected for 60 years of successful public service, there wouldn't be the incredible outpouring of love for her right now. She earned it.

The "Brits" lost the revolutionary war, because (A: They could not be bothered fighting it. There were much bigger conflicts going on within Europe at the time, and the British Government sent very few troops to the colonies. (B: If the French had not interfered, you would have remained a British colony for a much longer time. Perhaps even being absorbed into Greater Canada. You won the war because at the time you were pretty much irrelevant.

JohnSands- That's a new one. It used to be we won because we didn't fight fair. Lol.

Fantastic comment, JSaff. You are so right. You've done justice to the invaluable public service that the royal family contributes to people of all walks of life in many countries around the world. If anyone wants to look for a feudal ruling class that has turned people into peasants, they only need look at what Wall Street has been able to do to average people not just in America, but around the world. Talk about an unelected ruling class...