Poll: Queen Elizabeth II hospitalized. Is it time for her to abdicate?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

If you abolished the whole thing this wouldn't be an issue.

Sooooooooooo..... Amercian...

But on topic... I know people a QUARTER of her age who have been in hospital longer with gastro. Suggesting the SECOND hospital visit in more than a decade is reason for abdication is just unappreciative of how she views the role, nor understanding of her constitution.

She's already given Charles and the younger royals more official duties in her place, which reflect her understanding of needing to slow down. She doesn't believe in retirement, she doesn't believe it's a job to do, but something she must do and has a duty to do.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

No, I do not want the husband of the horse-looking marriage-wrecker becoming King and would like to delay that the most possible..

I really don't get why people STILL have issues over this. Even Diana was dealing with it with good-nature before her death... Plus, my rule is, if their kids are happy, sod what everybody else thinks.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

She was chosen by the divine to rule until death, so no.

You will have to excuse me, but I was under the impression that the Diving Right of Kings, or queens in this case, died out in the 16th century.

This discussion is really thought provoking.

From what I've heard about her, she takes the role and the process of annointing VERY seriously. She believes it's a life task, and she won't stop until she is physically and/or mentally incapable.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Lief seem to be doing a fine job of trollin' (better be).

It's time for her to abdicate be abolished.

You're disgusting and treasonous for suggesting the abolition of the best form of government known to man.

Uh, excuse me, but the best form of government known to man is not an anachronistic, elitist regime where the octogenarian relic of a bygone era clings by her finger nails to the vestiges of an oppressive past, where her ancestors caused untold hardship, misery and death to their own citizens, and where the heir apparent is a philandering degenerate.   

How is she clinging? She's the most popular and supported she's been in nearly 40 years and support for the Monarchy is the highest in 30 years.

As your increasingly dramatic Romney-posturing before the election showed, you enjoy the jollies you get from being melodramatic.

At best, you just don't get it. At worst, you're looking for attention.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'll humour you

a) the Queen's first consideration was for her Grandchildren, not her hysterical people
b) a flag has NEVER flown at half-mast over any palace... because that flag pole has a ceremonial purpose and has a tradition going back hundreds of years - that situation created a new tradition
c) plus as a FORMER member of the Royal family, she had no formal right to any kind of official mourning.

If it had been the Duchess of York, instead of Diana, think people would have their knickers in a twist more than 15 years later? I think not, Diana played as much as she was played.

The Queen was startled, and didnt know how to react to something that was so unexpected and in many way in explicable. Talk to many Brits old enough to have engaged in the orgy of grief , a big whack are deeply embarrassed.

You place an American sensibility where it doesn't belong, I don't blame you for not understanding

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I love that the first time the Queen publically put her family before her people - she got ripped apart because she wanted to protect two teenage boys who lost their mother.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Surrounding the death of Diana, the queen was about as warm as a dead fish.

And I say hang royal protocol.  It has no place in the world of the 21st century.

How the hell would you know?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Monarchy isn't going anywhere... for the first time in nearly 20 years, more people want Charles to succeed Elizabeth over William.

What is interesting is that outside of the 60+ bracket, support for the Monarchy is highest among those under 30.

In the US Charles is somewhat underestimated and not really understood. It was similar in the UK, but as time has worn on, his popularity is the highest it's been since he married Diana. Even Camilla's popularity is on the increase, with close to a majority supporting her becoming Queen, not just 'Princess Consort'.

It's funny, I'm not a Monarchist, nor am I a republican... but there's a lot of blinkeredness going on here.