Comment from Filip
Time: October 31, 2005, 10:33 am

She’s got a weblog indeed:

http://leonordeborbon.blogspot.com/

Comment from Pol
Time: November 2, 2005, 11:20 pm

Well, I think the English law also favours the male over the female in the line of succesion to the throne. Doesn’t Queen Elisabeth rule because she has no brothers?. As Prince Phillip from Spain said, ‘the logic of the times’ say that newborn Leonor will be reigning as no sexist discrimination can be arguable these days.
Anyway, isn´t choosing the first born another kind of discriminating the younger brothers or sisters???

Comment from Sin
Time: November 2, 2005, 11:49 pm

Isn’t choosing from one particular family discrimination against all other families? After all, we don’t believe in blue blood anymore, do we. Do we?

Comment from Ben
Time: November 3, 2005, 9:04 am

I certainly don’t. I feel the republican in me coming out more every day! Yes Pol, it is discrimination to choose the first born too…. maybe let the populace decide which one of the siblings gets to rule when the time comes!

Comment from Pol
Time: November 3, 2005, 9:43 pm

Certainly, from a rational, and 21st century point of view there is no possible justification for having a perennial family inheriting rights to be head of state. But anyway, monarchies now (at least the ones we know in Europe) are far from being the absolutist institution that they used to be in the far past, and (as things are now) I don´t know if that privilege would be more of a God-given present or a punishment that cannot be waived. I’d say that I much prefer a monarch who exactly the content of his job, that a manipulable (is this word correct???) president of a Republic who be have to vote in an insidious electoral campaing against a no-better opponet every four years. Don´t get me wrong, I’m a democracy-lover, as much as you are, but, isn´t voting for a PM just enough to vote about??? I don´t think I could handle any more of that little-politian-crap. Please, Leonor, help us forget about politicians.

Comment from Pol
Time: November 3, 2005, 9:46 pm

CORRECTIONS TO THE ABOVE POST :
I’d say that I much prefer a monarch who “KNOWS” exactly the content of his job, that a manipulable (is this word correct???) president of a Republic who “WE” have to vote in an insidious electoral campaing …

Comment from Sin
Time: November 4, 2005, 9:25 pm

Either ‘manipulable’ or ‘manipulatable’ is correct, Pol - both meaning ‘capable of being manipulated’.

Comment from Sin
Time: November 4, 2005, 9:46 pm

One has to say, given Juan Carlos actions after the death of Franco, that perhaps there is something there - maybe not blue blood, but certainly aristocratic behaviour. How might things have been if Franco’s heir apparent had been someone less bred to high principle?

Comment from Sin
Time: November 4, 2005, 9:54 pm

Sorry - one more.
Since I deemed myself wise enough to advise Pol on a point of English, I should correct my post above. “Juan Carlos actions” should be “Juan Carlos’ actions”.

Comment from Pol
Time: November 4, 2005, 10:59 pm

Sin, that kind of political-fiction prediction we could never figure out. But what we know now is that we all (not only Spaniards) have to be very thankful for how he managed his position as head of state appointed by dictator Franco towards the consolidated democracy that Spain is today. He worked hard to remove all the Francoist layer that covered all the administration of all institutions in Spain, and he worked, as well, to reduce his own judisdictional power in order to put his figure under the designs of a democratic parliament. Some Royal families back their legitimacy with obscure legends that are fogotten in the night of times. King Juan Carlos’ legitimacy was overwhelmingly backed with the voting of the Spanish Constitution some 28 years ago. That makes a difference, either you believe in blue bood or not.

Comment from Sin
Time: November 5, 2005, 1:47 pm

It could be that King Juan Carlos’ heritage, his pride in his position, his awareness of the responsibilities bestowed on him by his forebears, added to his education and personal wisdom, encouraged him to behave righteously where others might not have. And that his background would go towards making him (or anyone?) less manipulable.

I’m no monarchist, but I well take your point, Pol, that voting for a President is a fraught excercise.

Comment from JH, Businessman
Time: November 25, 2005, 2:28 pm

sin, really it shoudl be carlos’s, as that is how it is pronounced, but it is flexible.

Comment from Sin
Time: November 25, 2005, 5:35 pm

You’re right, JH. I know it, but I didn’t think of it. All that Banks’s beer I’ve drunk, too.