Corbyn declines to meet the Queen.

rosesarered you did not say who you were replying to but as your posts followed mine there is a chance that you were commenting on that. I did not, at any point say Corbyn would change anything; I was careful to say what I meant - that "the palace" often appreciates when changes are needed.

Jane10 I think you may need Specsavers. What you refer to as a "Tory bashing thread" has a lie for a heading "Corbyn declines to meet the Queen" as Jeremy Corbyn has only postponed the meeting because of a prior appointment. It has then been used to throughout to repeat miss-quotes and to aim suppositions at him. It is about as far from Tory bashing as you could get but of course you don't want to acknowledge that do you.

Nope, my reply was to Elegran, should have put it on( name) but forgot.

You actually said ' in my view one of the things the Queen has been best at is knowing when changes are needed' Gracesgran, not 'the palace'.

I doubt whether Jeremy Corbyn will have any power to drive anything in that respect, even if he were by some unlikely chance ever to become PM.

Ana you are splitting hairs. I this context, as far as I am concerned, they are the same thing. In any case I certainly didn't say Jeremy Corbyn had any power to change anything although any one or any situation may prove to be a catalyst.

rosesarered does feel Elegran said JC does have power to make changes. I would disagree but the conversation was, apparently, between roses and Elegran although at the time it wasn't clear.

Maybe the queen will appreciate having the chance to give up some of the silly things she is forced to do because of protocol.
At this moment she might be thinking, "Thank heavens for Jeremy Corbyn."

I bet Charles isn't!

That's exactly what I was thinking rosequartz if this bloody HRT doesn't kick in soon I will need something to send me to sleep zzzzzzzzz

Time will tell if anyone, ever thinks "thank heavens for Jeremy corbyn" and I would hazard a guess that "her maj" would be last in line.

As stated very clearly by Gracesgran this whole thread is based on a (deliberate?) misapprehension - I won't use the word 'lie' - as are most of the reporting, disinformation and downright smears about Jeremy Corbyn. Could we all agree that the thread heading is misleading (whether by accident or design) and leave it at that...?

Personally I would pay good money to see Corbyn "goblin the Lords", as mentioned by Anniebach yesterday at 21.12.

I didn't like to mention it yesterday.

I immediately thought of The Goblin King...

I wasn't hitting the bottle honestly, how did abolish turn into goblin ? I can't even plead the a is next to the g, I do tend to get a and s mixed up,

I doubt he will goblin the Lords

I think you might have meant "go in the Lords", but could be wrong, often am.......

Corbyn had arranged to attend a fund raising event in Scotland and kept his promise, I would do the same. The queen doesn't cancel arrangements , why should she and why should anyone else ?

Oh yes it was suppose to be go in the lords not goblin or abolish the lords, going to make a cuppa.

Something very unpleasant about this "Corbyn" business ...putting him in his place cf. "Mr. " or "David" Cameron, who didn't turn up till the third session of privy council after he could have.

Don't remember Mr. Murdoch making such a fuss about that! Always best to look a little closer at anything in the (hate)Mail!

Never read the Mail and rarely buy a paper these days, Corbyn is acceptable I think, or JC anything else takes too long , so Corbyn or Cameron is fine.
It was on the news that Corbyn declined to meet the Queen, and we already know he doesn't want to , but perhaps he will do the full oath and meet her regards becoming a member of the Privy Council,who knows? It will be difficult for a committed Rebuplican to do.
I didn't want to mention the goblin thing Annie ( I know about the curse of the iPad!) but it made me smile I have to say.

Of course Corbyn is acceptable pollyb as is Cameron or Blair for that matter. What would be the point of saying David said or Tony said, no one would have the foggiest who you were talking about.

Anniebach

I think we had a thread about the curse of the typo.

Well done for not getting defensive it is laughing with not laughing at, if you understand my meaning.

I can't say JC because this is someone else for me. Spelling Jeremy is difficult so I use Corbyn, I also say Cameron . I have been well behaved here because I type the queen but always call her queenie off here .

It isn't difficult to swear an oath to the queen if you are a republican, I had to do it often when a cub mistress , the words just don't mean anything, I don't feel any loyalty to the queen , I certainly wouldn't jump between her and a bullet because she is a queen , I respect her as I respect anyone else.

I did defend her ferociously when she was almost crucified by the press and many of her loyal! subjects when her ex daughter in law bitched her and when her ex daughter in law died '"

I imagine her Majesty (and Prince Philip !!) are mightily relieved not to have to meet this person !!

It wouldn't bother the queen if she met him or not , people equals duty to her.

Thatcher on becoming PM sent a message to the queen suggesting she be informed what colour the queen would be wearing when on joint duties so they wouldn't clash, the reply from buck house was - the queen doesn't notice what people are wearing.

The queen has no problem with meeting politicians who are republicans , she is the same with an Australian republican PM as any other politician , they are just people she has to meet as queen , sensible woman

POGS, I am never bother by being laughed at or with , I thought the posts on my goblin clanger were great . Big difference in laughing and mocking and I know I was not being mocked