LAURA Perrins’s trenchant article yesterday, ‘Harry and Meghan: An utter disgrace’, prompted hundreds of comments, almost all agreeing with Laura’s verdict that ‘this is about narcissism, this is about self-obsession and this will ultimately be about them continuing to lecture us all about what we should do, what we eat and how many kids we should have’.
Here are extracts from a selection of comments:
Cincinnatus wrote:
I concur with every word Laura has written. Good riddance. Maybe they can earn a crust by co-hosting next year’s Golden Globes.
lyndsey wrote:
I would like to offer me and my family as a substitute. If her Maj will give me a listed house with a £3m taxpayer-funded renovation, pay me a whacking annual grant, my kids’ private education etc, I’ll visit hospitals and patronise charities and wear amazing clothes. And I wouldn’t feel the need to be all preachy about anything, either. I’m good at smiling and waving.
cambridgeelephant wrote:
Worst of all, the Queen doesn’t need this distraction. She has enough to contend with as is. And she doesn’t need a rising tide of quasi republican sentiment building up in her latter years, on the back of this nonsense.
The People’s Greyhound Q.C. wrote:
Andrew Neil asks whether the unappetizing Mrs Meghan Engelson will now be eligible to play Meghan in The Crown.
The answer is no. She’s not that good an actress.
PierrePendre wrote:
One thing The Crown showed was how constrained the queen and other members of the royal family are in what they can and cannot do. Most of us have more freedom in our lives than she has ever had despite the appearances of privilege and a power that is largely artificial.
In the early years of her reign, the queen’s wish to follow her instincts was frequently overruled by Lascelles [her private secretary] citing established tradition and protocol. Her dilemma was that she could have her way if she insisted versus what she would lose by abandoning the principles on which monarchy survives. Lascelles and duty always prevailed which is why she has been an admirable queen to us, perhaps unhappily for her.
Harry has not understood that he is subject to the same constraints by reason of his birth; Meghan, being a young American, is probably incapable of ever understanding their importance. She should never have been brought into ‘the Firm’ without committing totally to its values and responsibilities as Kate Middleton did. The evidence is that she couldn’t have done it.
alecto wrote:
I also think it’s particularly nasty to announce this on Kate’s birthday!
Box of Frogs JohnB wrote:
Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson MkII
Ed McA Turtlesnapper wrote:
What really annoyed me was/is their hypocrisy. Their do as I say and not as I do actions on global warming.
mmcg968 wrote:
Saying they are going to be financially independent is likely to be met with a snort of derision from most people, that’s how completely and utterly out of touch they are.
Prince Harry – a prime example of how someone can go from hero to zero in a flash.
DespiteBrexit wrote:
It is widely reported that this announcement had not been discussed in advance with anyone else in the Royal Family. Not a single one. Apart from the total lack of courtesy and consideration, did it not occur to anyone to check that what they were proposing would be both practical and permitted? What kind of advisers do they employ?
LordOfMisrule wrote:
Unfortunately, Ms Markle is typical of a lot of young women. It always has to be about her. Me. Me, Me, Me, Look at Me. She cannot handle being an unimportant figure playing third fiddle to HMQ and the Duchess of Cambridge (whom she probably despises).
Did anyone think it was going to end differently? Who seriously watched the wedding and thought it was a fairytale romance? I thought Harry looked miserable in the church and even more miserable since. He would run a mile from her if he has any sense but I guess she has him on a tight leash.
39 Pontiac Dream wrote:
Their announcement reads as such:
‘We would like to step away from the duty of Royal life so we can say what we think, do what we like and promote what we can. What that does not mean, however, is we will be giving up our lavish lifestyle which you, the proles, will continue to pay for. Financially independent means the independents keep us financially. That is all.
Alice Williams wrote:
When Megan married Harry she thought the Great British Public would fall at her feet and worship her. It didn’t happen because The Great British Public saw straight through her. She didn’t like that she wasn’t allowed to voice her leftie wokeness in public although she found other ways to express it – by avoiding meeting Trump for instance. She is an entitled fake but unfortunately she has dragged poor dimwit Harry down with her. Let them go and live in Canada or wherever and good riddance but not a penny more of money from the royal family or the British taxpayer should they receive. Ever. Rent Frogmore Cottage and make them repay the costs of that ridiculous wedding, perhaps that would wipe the smug looks off their faces.
Greenlander wrote:
The more I read about people like Megan and H the more I realize just how much a hero my wife and other real women of her generation are, (insert long list of the duties of a wife, mother and employee) and they got rewarded by having their retirement age upped, while she is feted as if she is special.
